Justice Department withdraws subpoenas targeting New York Times reporters after judge's ruling
A federal judge ordered the Justice Department to cancel subpoenas demanding testimony and phone records from New York Times journalists, citing violations of First Amendment protections.
The Justice Department announced it will drop the subpoenas it issued on July 10 that sought grand-jury testimony and telephone records from reporters at the New York Times. The decision follows a hearing before U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, who said the subpoenas likely violated established legal protections for journalists and warned of possible sanctions against the agency’s attorneys if the orders were not withdrawn.
The subpoenas were issued shortly after the Times published stories about concerns that led the Secret Service to intervene in President Trump’s travel plans from Turkey. In court, the department’s deputy U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, Sean Buckley, argued the subpoenas were authorized by the acting attorney general and were a last-resort measure. Judge Subramanian rejected that justification, noting the timing and the department’s own policies required exhausting other investigative avenues before targeting reporters.
New York Times newsroom lawyer David McGraw called the ruling “a great day for the First Amendment and the rule of law.” A Justice Department spokesperson criticized the judge’s conduct, asserting that the investigation into leaks of classified information remains ongoing.
During the hearing, the judge highlighted procedural errors, including the mistaken inclusion of phone numbers belonging to a reporter’s family members, and described the overall approach as “slipshod.” Buckley later apologized for the errors, describing them as inadvertent. The case underscores ongoing tensions between national-security investigations and press freedoms.