All articles tagged with #grand jury subpoenas
A growing cadre of federal judges are bluntly accusing Trump and the DOJ of bad faith and manipulating the judicial process, with rulings criticizing funding settlements, sanctioning attorneys, and curbing subpoenas—an emerging trend that signals greater court skepticism and could undermine public trust in the judiciary.
The U.S. Justice Department subpoenaed several New York Times reporters to testify before a Manhattan grand jury about the paper’s reporting on security concerns with the Trump administration’s new Air Force One, a move condemned by press groups as a threat to a free press. The DOJ said reporters aren’t the targets and cited ongoing investigations into national-security leaks, while the Times noted some subpoenas were served at reporters’ homes and that similar actions had affected other outlets earlier this year. The reporting followed questions about the Qatar-provided plane’s security features and related disclosures, highlighting tensions between national security interests and press freedom.
A Minnesota federal judge threw out DOJ grand jury subpoenas seeking records from Gov. Tim Walz, Atty. Gen. Keith Ellison, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and other state and local leaders over how they handled the winter immigration surge, ruling the subpoenas baseless, unethical and possibly illegal. He ordered that information obtained for the grand jury be made public, though that portion is paused pending DOJ appeal. The decision is a rare rebuke of a federal probe and a setback for the Trump administration’s effort to scrutinize Minnesota officials’ immigration actions; Walz, Ellison and Frey praised the ruling as protecting the rule of law and free speech, while the DOJ vowed to proceed within the law.
Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney in Washington, signaled that prosecutors could resurrect their inquiry into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell after dropping it when a federal judge blocked subpoenas; she said the probe could resume if an internal audit finds misconduct, even as Powell resists President Trump’s push to cut interest rates.
Reuters reports that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team obtained two grand jury subpoenas and nondisclosure orders related to Kash Patel (now FBI director) that extended beyond phone records to include mailing and email addresses, billing and IP data, and banking information, covering 2020–2023 in a probe tied to Trump’s 2020 election interference and the Mar-a-Lago classified-documents matter; the exact scope and allegations remain unclear, with Democrats defending Smith and the FBI noting past leadership’s actions were criticized.
Lawfare argues the DOJ’s grand jury subpoenas to Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell are a pretextual, politically motivated move to intimidate him, not a legitimate criminal inquiry. It outlines the renovation-cost backdrop of Powell’s June 2025 testimony, notes inspector general scrutiny, and contends there’s no credible predicate for charges like perjury or false statements, warning the episode signals prosecutorial overreach that could backfire on Trump allies.