Filed Date: Jan. 29, 2026
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This case concerns a motion to quash a series of subpoenas on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors.
On March 12, 2026, the United States Attorney's Office filed a motion for reconsideration, requesting that the court reconsider its March 11, 2026 order which quashed two grant jury subpoenas directed to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. These subpoenas sought records about recent renovations of the Board’s buildings, as well as testimony that Jerome Powell delivered to Congress regarding those renovations. Movants alleged that these subpoenas were improperly issued as part of a broader scheme to pressure the Reserve into lowering interest rates. In response, the USAO rejected the court's conclusion that the investigation was a bad-faith effort to harass the Federal Reserve or influence interest rates. By providing a detailed timeline of events, the USAO attempted to prove that the probe was based on legitimate suspicion rather than political motivations.
On March 13, 2026, Chief Judge James E. Boasberg of the District of Columbia issued an opinion finding that the subpoenas were issued for an improper purpose and ordered them quashed. The court’s opinion highlighted a pervasive campaign by President Trump to exert political pressure on the Federal reserve to lower interest rates through social media attacks and threats. Evidence suggested the criminal investigation was a pretextual attempt to harass Powell into resigning or subverting the central bank’s statutory independence. Consequently, the court granted the request to nullify the subpoenas and partially unseal related legal documents for public viewing. 2026 WL 710202.
On April 3, 2026, the court denied the government’s motion for reconsideration. The court clarified that while the government generally possesses broad investigative powers, it cannot use subpoenas to apply political pressure or pursue illegitimate targets. As evidence that the government's subpoenas were an effort to apply political pressure, the court directly quoted a Truth Social post by President Trump calling Jerome Powell "a loser." The court rejected the government’s prior arguments, noting that the prosecutors provided no credible evidence of criminal wrongdoing to justify requiring the subpoenas. Ultimately, the court maintained that the timing of the subpoenas suggests they were a result of presidential influence rather than a good-faith investigation.
This case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Sofia Yoder (4/19/2026)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72490330/parties/in-re-grand-jury-subpoenas/
Boasberg, James Emanuel (District of Columbia)
Bucholtz, Jeffrey S. (District of Columbia)
Grossi, Leah B. (District of Columbia)
Hur, Robert K (District of Columbia)
Massucco-LaTaif, George A. (District of Columbia)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/72490330/in-re-grand-jury-subpoenas/
Last updated April 20, 2026, 3:11 a.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Presidential/Gubernatorial Authority
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government
Trump Administration 2.0: Litigation and Investigations By the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: Jan. 29, 2026
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Plaintiff Type(s):
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Federal
The United States of America
Case Details
Other Dockets:
District of District of Columbia 1:26-mc-00012
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
General/Misc.:
Case Summary of In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/47899/ (last updated 4/19/2026).