Economy March 16, 2026

Administration Seeks Reconsideration of Ruling That Blocked Subpoenas Targeting Fed Chair Powell

Justice Department asks judge to rethink decision that curtailed a probe into cost overruns at the Federal Reserve's Washington headquarters

By Leila Farooq
Administration Seeks Reconsideration of Ruling That Blocked Subpoenas Targeting Fed Chair Powell

The Justice Department has asked U.S. District Judge James Boasberg to revisit his recent order that effectively halted a criminal inquiry into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. The subpoenas, issued in January, sought records on renovation cost overruns at the Fed's headquarters and Powell's testimony to Congress. The judge had concluded prosecutors acted improperly, saying a "mountain of evidence" indicates the investigation was designed to pressure Powell to lower rates quickly or resign. The DOJ contends the judge used an incorrect legal standard and misapplied facts.

Key Points

  • The DOJ has asked Judge James Boasberg to revisit his ruling that blocked subpoenas tied to a probe of Fed Chair Jerome Powell.
  • Subpoenas issued in January sought records about cost overruns on renovations at the Federal Reserve's headquarters and Powell's congressional testimony about the project.
  • The judge concluded prosecutors improperly issued the subpoenas, saying a "mountain of evidence" suggests the investigation aimed to pressure Powell to lower rates quickly or to resign; this raises concerns about central bank independence and could affect the Fed nomination process.

WASHINGTON, March 16 - The Justice Department has filed a request asking U.S. District Judge James Boasberg to reconsider his decision that impeded a criminal investigation involving Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, according to court records made public on Monday.

In a ruling unsealed last Friday, Judge Boasberg blocked subpoenas that federal prosecutors issued in January. Those subpoenas sought documents tied to alleged cost overruns on renovations at the Federal Reserve's headquarters, as well as Powell's testimony to Congress last year about the renovation project.

Boasberg determined that prosecutors had improperly issued the subpoenas. He wrote that a "mountain of evidence" supports Powell's contention that the inquiry was meant to exert pressure on him to quickly reduce interest rates or to prompt his resignation as Fed chair.

In its new filing, the Justice Department urged the judge to reconsider that ruling. Prosecutors working with Jeanine Pirro - the Trump-appointed U.S. Attorney in Washington who is leading the investigation - argued the court "applied an incorrect legal standard" and "erred with respect to certain significant facts," according to the filing.

The motion was filed under seal on Thursday and was made public on Monday following a request from Pirro's office. Pirro said on Friday that she planned to file both a motion for reconsideration and an appeal to a higher court.


Legal stakes and political implications

The investigation touches on questions of central bank independence and overlaps with President Trump's effort to install a Fed chair more aligned with his policy preferences when Powell's term ends in mid-May. Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina has said he will not vote to confirm any Fed nominee while the investigation remains active.

Powell has publicly defended the Fed's spending on the renovation project as necessary, and he hosted lawmakers and the President for a tour of the ongoing work. In his ruling, Judge Boasberg also observed: "The Government has offered no evidence whatsoever that Powell committed any crime other than displeasing the President."


Next steps

With the Justice Department asking for reconsideration and Pirro indicating plans to both seek reconsideration and appeal, the dispute over the subpoenas is likely to continue through further filings and possibly into higher courts. The outcome will affect not only the immediate investigation but could also shape the environment around any future Fed confirmation process while the inquiry is unresolved.

Risks

  • Uncertainty around the investigation and confirmation process may complicate the Federal Reserve's leadership transition and influence financial markets - particularly interest-rate sensitive sectors such as banking and bonds.
  • Ongoing legal proceedings and potential appeals create procedural risk, prolonging ambiguity about the scope of the probe and its effect on policymaking at the central bank.

More from Economy

India’s Services Expansion Slows to 14-Month Low as Middle East Conflict Weakens Demand Apr 6, 2026 RBI Poised to Hold Rates as Iran Conflict Spurs Market Stress and Currency Weakness Apr 6, 2026 Mediators Weigh 45-Day Ceasefire to Open Path Toward Ending War Apr 5, 2026 Dollar Holds Firm as Markets Wrestle with Escalating Iran Conflict and Hormuz Deadline Apr 5, 2026 A Dongguan Factory’s Strategy for Living with Tariffs, Trade Shocks and Supply-Chain Friction Apr 5, 2026