The Department of Justice moved Monday to reverse a federal court's decision that blocked two subpoenas targeting Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro, who leads the District of Columbia office, filed the request to vacate the subpoena rulings, claiming the matter has become moot following the DOJ's closure of its criminal investigation into Powell.
The subpoenas had been quashed by a judge earlier in the dispute over Powell's records. Pirro's request essentially asks the court to erase the previous decision that protected Powell from complying with the investigative demands.
The reversal announcement came weeks after the DOJ announced it was shutting down the probe entirely. The timing raises questions about prosecutorial strategy. By seeking to vacate rather than appeal the original decision, the DOJ attempts to eliminate the court ruling without winning on the merits. A vacated decision carries less precedential weight than a decision overturned on appeal.
Powell, who has served as Federal Reserve chair since 2018, faced the criminal investigation under circumstances the DOJ has not fully detailed publicly. The nature of the alleged conduct and why federal prosecutors in the nation's capital opened such an investigation remain unclear from available reporting.
The Federal Reserve chair plays a central role in U.S. monetary policy and financial stability. Any criminal investigation into Powell would carry significant political weight, particularly given ongoing debates over inflation, interest rates, and the Fed's independence from political pressure.
Pirro's move to vacate rather than litigate the subpoena issue suggests the DOJ may have decided the investigation lacked sufficient merit to pursue further. The mootness argument indicates the government no longer needs Powell's testimony or records because the underlying criminal probe has ended.
The Federal Reserve declined to comment on the DOJ's filing. Powell's office has not responded publicly.
WHY IT MATTERS: The resolution