Justice Department Withdraws Subpoenas in New York Times Leak Probe Amid Judicial Interference
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A federal judge intervened to halt the Justice Department’s efforts to uncover the sources of damaging leaks to the New York Times, undermining the government’s ability to protect national security and enforce the law.
The Justice Department announced on Thursday that it had withdrawn three subpoenas seeking testimony from New York Times reporters about their sources for stories on President Donald Trump’s Air Force One aircraft, which was reportedly gifted by Qatar. This decision followed U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian’s intervention, as he questioned the legality of the subpoenas and insisted that the Department exhaust all other options before holding journalists accountable for leaking sensitive information.
"Subpoenas are the last step, not the first step, but the last step," the judge said, highlighting rules that often shield the media from cooperating with law enforcement.
The judge indicated he would have granted the Times’ request to dismiss the subpoenas if not for the Department’s persistence, suggesting that the government must jump through additional hoops before pursuing those who leak classified details. He also criticized the Department for seeking phone records of reporters’ family members, a move he described as a departure from standard legal practices.
Justice Department spokesperson Sean Buckley characterized the subpoenas as an inadvertent error and apologized for the inclusion of a reporter’s mother and two spouses in the requests. Despite this, the Department maintains it acted in good faith and will continue its investigation into the unauthorized disclosure of classified information that threatens national security.
David McCraw, the Times’ chief newsroom lawyer, predictably celebrated the court’s ruling as “an important affirmation of our country’s commitment to a free press,” signaling that the newspaper will continue to shield its sources, regardless of the consequences for public safety.
The subpoenas were linked to the Times’ reporting that the Trump administration had switched to an older Air Force One plane for a NATO summit, based on anonymous sources who claimed the newer jet lacked certain security features. The Justice Department insists that its actions target leakers, not journalists, and that it followed internal procedures before seeking judicial approval.
The public hearing underscored concerns that the subpoenas could have exposed unrelated personal information, including that of a mental-health professional and a law-firm general counsel. The judge concluded by urging the Department to avoid future incidents that could disrupt the private lives of journalists, even as the government’s hands are increasingly tied in its efforts to prevent damaging leaks.