General Discussion

...in other recent cases in which subpoena targets have moved to quash, the Government has submitted ex parte the evidence that led it to suspect wrongdoing. In re Grand Jury Subpoena , No. 26-mc-2,ECF No. 14 (Gov. ex parte Suppl.) (D.D.C. Feb. 11, 2026); In re Grand Jury Subpoena, No. 26-mc-7, ECF No. 13 (Gov. ex parte Suppl.) (D.D.C. Feb. 12, 2026).In our case, however, the Government at the hearing declined to offer any other evidence. SeeMar. Hearing Tr. at 19:6–14. Nor has it supplied any written ex parte submission. The Court is thus left with no credible reason to think that the Government is investigating suspicious facts as opposed to targeting a disfavored official.When the evidence of improper motive is so strong and the justifications for these subpoenas are so tenuous, it is hard to see the renovations and testimony as anything other than a convenient pretext for launching a criminal investigation that the Government launched for another, unstated purpose: pressuring Powell to knuckle under. In light of all the evidence, the only reasonable inference is that the Government targeted Powell “out of malice or an intent toharass” and has launched a “fishing expedition” to either find something to pin on him or to pressure him to fold. R. Enters., 498 U.S. at 299. That harassment seems aimed at bulldozing the Fed’s statutory independence. Cf. Vance, 591 U.S. at 806, 809 (prosecutors cannot use subpoenas in “attempt to influence the performance of . . . official duties” that law bars them from controlling). The Court will therefore grant the Motion to Quash. . . .

A mountain of evidence suggests that the Government served these subpoenas on theBoard to pressure its Chair into voting for lower interest rates or resigning. On the other side of the scale, the Government has produced essentially zero evidence to suspect Chair Powell of a crime; indeed, its justifications are so thin and unsubstantiated that the Court can only conclude that they are pretextual. The Court therefore finds that the subpoenas were issued for an improper purpose and will quash them. It will also unseal redacted versions of the Motion toQuash, related briefing, and this Opinion.