Pirro Drops Appeal Plan in Criminal Probe of Fed Chair Powell
CNBC reported Sunday that U.S. Attorney for Washington, D.C., Jeanine Pirro has apparently abandoned her long-telegraphed plan to appeal a court ruling that blocked her criminal investigation of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.
Pirro faced a Monday deadline to file the appeal. Instead, she announced on CNN’s “State of the Union” that her office would pursue a motion to vacate the ruling. That shift appears to signal she is dropping her underlying legal demand.
A Strategy Change at the Deadline
The original appeal would have challenged rulings by D.C. Chief Judge James Boasberg, who quashed subpoenas Pirro’s office served on the Federal Reserve. The subpoenas sought evidence linked to cost overruns in Fed building renovations.
By moving to a motion to vacate rather than an appeal, Pirro is effectively asking the court to set aside Boasberg’s order. However, legal experts say the maneuver faces serious hurdles.
Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Sean P. Murphy told CNBC that a motion to vacate asks the judge to treat a decision as though it never occurred. He said Pirro likely lacks standing to erase what amounts to a government legal loss in the Fed probe.
Background: Why Boasberg Ruled Against Pirro
Boasberg ruled against Pirro’s office on the grounds that prosecutors presented no concrete evidence of wrongdoing by the Fed. He found substantial indications that the subpoenas were instead designed to pressure Powell into cutting interest rates at the behest of President Donald Trump.
The judge wrote that evidence strongly suggested the subpoenas were a tool of intimidation rather than a legitimate criminal inquiry. Appeals of this kind also typically require sign-off from a senior Justice Department official. It remains unclear whether Pirro secured that approval before announcing the original appeal plan.
Powell’s Position and What Comes Next
Powell said last Wednesday that he intends to remain on the Fed’s board beyond his term as chair. He stated he would not leave until he was confident the legal threat to the institution had been fully resolved.
Pirro, for her part, has not closed the door on reviving the investigation. She is awaiting a separate inquiry by Fed Inspector General Michael Horowitz and declined to commit to ending the probe even if Horowitz finds no criminal wrongdoing. The Fed declined to comment on the latest legal developments.
The episode continues to underscore mounting tension between the Trump administration and the Federal Reserve over monetary policy independence.
Read Next: Trump’s Fed Pressure Campaign and What It Means for Rate Policy
