Judge Criticizes Government Over Subpoenas for New York Times Reporters
The U.S. government has withdrawn subpoenas for three New York Times reporters following criticism from a federal judge. The move comes after the government sought to compel the reporters to reveal their sources for articles about President Donald Trump’s Qatari-gifted Air Force One jet. Judge Arun Subramanian expressed frustration with the government’s legal approach in a hearing at the U.S. District Court.
This decision comes at a time when the Trump administration is targeting news organizations it disagrees with and trying to control leaks within the government. The withdrawal marks another instance where the Justice Department has retracted efforts to force journalists to disclose their sources in grand jury proceedings. Similar subpoenas involving The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal were recently retracted in Virginia.
“Subpoenas are the last step, not the first step,” Judge Subramanian stated, emphasizing legal safeguards for journalists and the importance of the First Amendment.
He criticized the Justice Department for turning the law on its head, saying legal protections for journalists must be respected, and that subpoenas are to be used only when no other sources can provide necessary information.
The Justice Department’s statement accused the judge of overriding long-standing principles and attempting to prevent the grand jury from obtaining vital evidence in a national security investigation. Despite the setback, the department affirmed its intent to continue pursuing those responsible for leaking classified information.
During the hearing, Justice Department lawyer Sean Buckley described their errors as unintentional and apologized for mistakenly seeking phone records of a reporter’s mother and the spouses of two journalists. Buckley acknowledged the mistakes as consequences of a hurried process.
The hearing shed light on the inner workings of the Justice Department’s subpoenas, initially kept confidential by the Trump administration. New York Times lawyers argued against the subpoenas, which included phone record demands dating back to January, well before the articles in question were published in July. They claimed the government acted in bad faith, bypassing internal procedures by not notifying the journalists in advance.
The Justice Department contended that its actions targeted leakers of classified information, not the journalists themselves. Officials maintained they followed regulations when issuing subpoenas and decided to inform the journalists’ attorneys about the records to allow for a legal challenge.
Post-hearing, David McCraw, the Times’ chief newsroom lawyer, remarked on the governmental concession and stressed the commitment to press freedom, stating the subpoenas should never have been issued.
The legal clash revolves around a new Air Force One jet, a $400 million project stemming from a Qatari gift recently put into service. Criticism arose after Trump used an older plane for a NATO summit, allegedly at the Secret Service’s suggestion due to security concerns, a claim Trump refuted on social media.
Concluding the hearing with a final reprimand, Judge Subramanian humorously referenced an FBI agent delivering a subpoena to a journalist watching the movie “The Sheep Detectives.” The courtroom burst into laughter at the absurdity of such an interruption.