The Justice Department has withdrawn subpoenas demanding grand jury testimony and phone records from New York Times journalists following intense scrutiny from a federal judge.
The retreat came after a roughly 90-minute hearing in which U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian challenged almost every facet of the government’s approach to the case.
“It’s a great day for the First Amendment and a great day for the rule of law,” New York Times attorney David McCraw said after the government agreed to withdraw the subpoenas.
The Justice Department had originally filed the subpoenas on July 10, just two days after the Times published the first of two stories about security concerns surrounding President Trump.
Those stories concerned the U.S. Secret Service interceding to prevent President Trump from flying home from Turkey on the new Air Force One jet, donated by the royal family of Qatar.
The DOJ had been seeking to identify confidential sources who spoke to Times journalists about the security concerns surrounding the aircraft, framing its actions as a matter of national security.
Judge Subramanian, a Joe Biden appointee, chided the government for hastily issuing subpoenas that even the DOJ’s own attorneys acknowledged were rife with “inadvertent errors.”
“Subpoenas are the last step, not the first step, but the last step,” Subramanian said during the hearing, pressing the government on its apparent neglect of regulations protecting First Amendment rights.
The judge also questioned why Sean Buckley, chief counsel to the U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York, was unaware of specific legal precedent protecting journalists prior to issuing the subpoenas.
That precedent was established two decades ago in another case involving the New York Times within the same appeals circuit that covers New York.
Buckley argued the subpoenas were properly authorised by the attorney general, a reference to Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche, and that such approval could supersede First Amendment protections under certain conditions.
The department also admitted that its subpoena targeting one journalist’s mother and two of their spouses was unintentional, calling it “an error that we own,” according to Buckley.
A DOJ spokesperson pushed back following the hearing, saying Subramanian “threatened our attorneys with sanctions unless subpoenas were withdrawn, and blocked us from presenting the meticulous process of this investigation.”
The spokesperson added that the investigation “remains ongoing, and we will pursue justice against those threatening national security by leaking classified information, a serious federal crime.”
Legal observers note the withdrawal does not permanently close the door, as the department could potentially issue fresh subpoenas if it fails to obtain the information it seeks through other means.