A U.S. federal judge has refused to reopen the door to subpoenas targeting Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, reinforcing an earlier decision that effectively stalls a criminal probe and sets the stage for a likely appellate battle.
The ruling keeps intact a prior order that blocked prosecutors from demanding records linked to renovations at the central bank’s headquarters and Powell’s statements to lawmakers. The court found that the effort lacked a credible legal foundation, pointing to an absence of evidence suggesting fraud or any other criminal conduct. In sharp terms, the judge observed that the government had not demonstrated a good-faith basis to suspect wrongdoing.
Prosecutors had sought reconsideration, arguing that the court applied an overly demanding threshold at an early stage of investigation and misunderstood the timeline. Those arguments failed to persuade. The decision emphasized that no new evidence had surfaced and no clear legal error had been shown — the two key grounds required to overturn the earlier order.
The dispute has evolved into a broader institutional clash. Powell has characterized the investigation as an attempt to pressure him on monetary policy, particularly amid calls for rapid interest-rate cuts. The blocked subpoenas were viewed by the court as potentially serving that pressure rather than a legitimate investigative aim.
The prosecuting office signaled it would challenge the ruling, calling it judicial interference with access to a grand jury. An appeal would move the fight to a higher court, prolonging the standoff.
The timing carries political consequences. Any appellate proceedings could slow efforts to confirm a successor to Powell as head of the central bank. A key senator has already indicated he will hold up the nominee’s confirmation while litigation remains unresolved, effectively tying the leadership transition to the outcome of the legal fight.
Powell, for his part, has indicated he will remain in his role until the matter is settled. With appeals looming and confirmation politics entangled, the courtroom dispute now threatens to shape both the future of the Federal Reserve’s leadership and the balance between prosecutorial power and central bank independence. 🏛️📊
