DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro ripped a federal judge Friday for blocking grand jury subpoenas related to Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell’s management of renovations at the central bank.
The “outrageous” ruling by “activist judge” James Boasberg ran afoul of legal precedent and has left Powell “bathed in immunity, ” Pirro charged in blistering remarks after the chief judge of the US District Court for the nation’s capital quashed the subpoenas.
Follow The Post’s live coverage of President Trump and national politics for the latest news and analysis
Boasberg, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, determined that a “mountain of evidence” suggested the Justice Department’s probe into Powell was to pressure the Fed chairman to cut interest rates or resign.
“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,” Boasberg wrote in a 27-page opinion. “The Government has offered no evidence whatsoever that Powell committed any crime other than displeasing the President.”
The investigation into Powell centered on alleged false statements he made to the Senate Banking Committee in June 2025 about the $2.5 billion renovation of the Federal Reserve’s Washington, DC, headquarters, Pirro insisted.
The DC US Attorney’s Office opened an inquiry into the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors in November, and reached out to the central bank twice in December “to discuss our concerns” – only to be ignored – before two grand jury subpoenas were served, she went on.
According to Pirro, the subpoenas did not specifically target Powell and she decried what she called his Jan. 11 “woe is me video,” asserting that the Fed chief falsely claimed he was being threatened with criminal indictments.
Pirro then accused Powell of calling up “his political friends in DC and around the world to gin up support for himself, all the while refusing to produce simple documents.”
Boasberg’s ruling “makes clear his antipathy toward President Trump,” the prosecutor seethed.
“One of the age old tools that all prosecutors have to investigate any crime, including cost overruns, is a grand jury subpoena,” Pirro said. “Today, however, in Washington, an activist judge has taken that tool away from us by inserting himself and preventing the grand jury from even obtaining, let alone hearing, evidence.
“He has neutered the grand jury’s ability to investigate crime. As a result, Jerome Powell today is now bathed in immunity, preventing my office from investigating the Federal Reserve. This is wrong. And it is without legal authority.”
The Supreme Court has long held that probable cause does not need to be established for prosecutors to obtain a grand jury subpoena.
However, Boasberg ruled that Pirro’s subpoenas amounted to a “rare case” where “evidence of improper purpose is overwhelming,” thus requiring “the Government to show something akin to probable cause.”
Pirro said she would appeal the “outrageous” ruling, arguing Boasberg’s order was was “untethered to the law.”
“It creates chaos,” she seethed, “where any defendant who wishes to evade an investigation, guilty or not, can allege ‘I’m a victim. I’m being targeted. And therefore, you cannot investigate me.’”
“This is the antithesis of American justice,” Pirro continued. “Exonerating anyone without any records, without an investigation or question is not how our criminal justice system works.
“This judge has put himself at the entrance door to the grand jury, slamming that door shut, irrespective of the legal process, and thus preventing the grand jury from doing the work that it does.”
