Federal Judge Quashes Subpoenas Against Fed Chair Jerome Powell

On March 13, 2026, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg issued a ruling that quashed subpoenas issued by the Justice Department against Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. The subpoenas were part of a criminal investigation concerning Powell's testimony regarding cost overruns in a $2.5 billion renovation project at the Federal Reserve's headquarters. Judge Boasberg concluded that the subpoenas were primarily intended to pressure Powell into lowering interest rates or resigning, aligning with President Donald Trump's long-standing demands for more aggressive monetary policy.

Judge blocks DOJ subpoenas in probe of Fed Chair PowellCBS NewsThe HillTRT WorldDW NewsWashington ExaminerJudge Blocks Justice Department Subpoenas in Probe of Fed Chair PowellAl Jazeera (website)

Boasberg's ruling stated, "There is abundant evidence that the subpoenas’ dominant (if not sole) purpose is to harass and pressure Powell either to yield to the President or to resign and make way for a Fed Chair who will." He further noted that the government had produced "essentially zero evidence" to suspect Powell of any crime, deeming the justifications for the subpoenas "thin and unsubstantiated."

Judge tosses out 'unsubstantiated' subpoenas into PowellWashington ExaminerAl Jazeera (website)CBS NewsTrump probe of Fed Chair Powell meant to harass, judge says while denying subpoenasDemocracy DocketJudge blocks subpoenas in Fed Chair Jerome Powell probe citing 'essentially zero evidence'DW NewsThe Hill

The investigation was initiated by U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, who has been a vocal supporter of Trump. It focused on whether Powell made false statements to Congress during his testimony about the renovation project. The inquiry has drawn significant criticism from lawmakers, particularly from Republicans who emphasize the importance of the Federal Reserve's independence from political influence.

Judge blocks subpoenas in Fed Chair Jerome Powell probe citing 'essentially zero evidence'

Powell publicly revealed the investigation in a video statement on January 11, 2026, asserting that it was a politically motivated attempt to undermine the Fed's autonomy. He stated, "This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions—or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation."

France 24

The ruling has significant implications for the future of the Federal Reserve and its leadership. Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina and a member of the Senate Banking Committee, has vowed to block any efforts to confirm Trump's nominee to replace Powell, former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh, until the investigation is resolved. Tillis described the investigation as "weak and frivolous," asserting that it represents a failed attack on Fed independence.

The HillNBC NewsFrance 24Trump probe of Fed Chair Powell meant to harass, judge says while denying subpoenasCNNWashington ExaminerReutersPoliticoThe Guardian

In response to the ruling, Pirro announced plans to appeal, labeling Boasberg an "activist judge" and claiming that the decision undermines the grand jury's ability to investigate. She stated, "This judge has put himself at the entrance door to the grand jury, slamming that door shut, irrespective of the legal process."

New York Post

The case highlights ongoing tensions between the Trump administration and the Federal Reserve, particularly regarding monetary policy. Trump has repeatedly criticized Powell for not lowering interest rates quickly enough, often using derogatory language to describe him. The investigation into Powell is seen as part of a broader effort by Trump to exert control over the Federal Reserve, which has traditionally operated independently from political pressures.

The Guardian

As the legal battle continues, the future of the Federal Reserve's leadership remains uncertain, with Powell's term set to expire in May 2026. The outcome of the appeal and the ongoing political dynamics will likely shape the central bank's direction in the coming months.

Politico

• “There is abundant evidence that the subpoenas' dominant (if not sole) purpose is to harass and pressure Powell either to yield to the President or to resign and make way for a Fed Chair who will.” — Judge James Boasberg

NPR

• “This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions — or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.” — Jerome Powell

DW News

• “This ruling confirms just how weak and frivolous the criminal investigation of Chairman Powell is and it is nothing more than a failed attack on Fed independence.” — Senator Thom Tillis

NBC News

• “This judge has put himself at the entrance door to the grand jury, slamming that door shut.” — Jeanine Pirro

CNN

While Judge Boasberg's ruling emphasizes the lack of evidence against Powell, the Justice Department maintains that the investigation is legitimate and necessary to ensure accountability regarding public funds. The ongoing appeal process may further complicate the situation, delaying any resolution and impacting the Federal Reserve's leadership transition.

NPR