Jeanine Pirro will be sworn in as the new interim U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia at a ceremony hosted by U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House in Washington, DC, on May 28, 2025.
Leah Millis | Reuters
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro appeared to abandon plans Sunday to appeal an unfavorable ruling in her attempted criminal investigation of Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell.
Mr. Pirro has previously said he would ask the high court to reconsider the recent decision by Chief Justice James Boasberg of the District of Columbia to quash the Fed’s subpoenas. She argued that the judge’s decision complicates the overall grand jury investigation. Her appeal deadline was Monday.
Pirro appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union” and appeared to have changed his mind.
“We will be filing a motion to vacate Judge Boasberg’s order because we, as prosecutors, believe it is very important that this order sets a precedent that prevents grand jury participation,” Pirro said.
The appeal would have sought to reinstate Mr. Pirro’s legal request to provide the Fed with evidence of building renovation cost overruns. By moving to a different legal strategy, Pirro appears to be dropping that demand.
Pirro’s office did not respond to requests for comment.
It was not immediately clear what exactly Pirro was asking the court to surrender or on what grounds.
“A motion to quash is essentially asking the judge to pretend nothing happened,” said Sean P. Murphy, a former assistant U.S. attorney.
Pirro recently filed a motion to vacate the convictions of Proud Boys and Oath Keepers members in cases related to the January 6, 2020 incident. The motion would expunge the convictions of those involved.
“The critical difference is that I don’t think she’s in a position to simply erase the Justice Department’s record of those kinds of losses,” Murphy said in a Fed investigation.
The Fed declined to comment.
Mr. Boasberg ruled against Mr. Pirro on the grounds that while Mr. Pirro’s office did not present concrete evidence of wrongdoing, there were substantial signs that the investigation was intended to harass Mr. Powell over President Donald Trump’s calls for rapid interest rate cuts.
“There is mounting evidence to suggest that the government served these subpoenas on the board in order to pressure the chair to lower rates or vote to resign,” Boasberg wrote.
Appeals typically require approval from a senior Justice Department official because they could set a precedent unfavorable to the Justice Department. It is unclear whether Pirro received that approval.
The possibility of an appeal is a contentious issue for the Fed because it contradicts Pirro’s claims that he has dropped the case. Chairman Powell said Wednesday that he will remain on the Fed’s board after his term ends until he is confident that the legal threats against the central bank have been resolved.
Pirro said he would reopen the investigation if he believed it was warranted and said he was awaiting a report from Fed Inspector General Michael Horowitz. She rejected Mr. Horowitz’s promise to end the investigation unless he found criminal activity.
Mr. Pirro said Mr. Boasberg obstructed Mr. Horowitz’s investigation and wanted Mr. Horowitz to come forward. “You have the ability to talk to witnesses,” she said of Horowitz. “I have been restrained from doing so and am continuing to litigate this issue.”
