Skip to content
Tech News
← Back to articles

Judge rebuffs Trump admin demand for phone records from NYT reporters

read original more articles
Why This Matters

This case highlights the ongoing tension between government efforts to investigate and the protection of press freedom. The federal judge's rejection of the DOJ's attempt to access journalists' phone records underscores the importance of safeguarding confidential sources and the constitutional rights of the press, which are vital for a free and transparent media landscape.

Key Takeaways

After criticism from a federal judge, the Department of Justice yesterday withdrew demands for phone records and grand jury testimony from New York Times reporters who wrote about security concerns related to the Air Force One jet donated to Trump by Qatar.

It was a setback in the Trump administration’s attempts to unmask journalists’ confidential sources. US District Judge Arun Subramanian “grilled Justice Department lawyers for nearly an hour over their handling of the subpoenas” during a hearing on Thursday, The New York Times wrote.

“Either we can quash the subpoenas, or you could withdraw the subpoenas,” Subramanian reportedly told Sean Buckley, chief counsel for the US attorney in New York’s southern district.

Subramanian reportedly said during the hearing that subpoenas to reporters “are not the first thing you do—they are the last thing you do,” and that “it’s a matter of basic compliance with the law.” Government lawyers agreed to withdraw the subpoenas during the hearing.

“As stated on the record during the July 23, 2026, hearing, the Government has voluntarily withdrawn the challenged subpoenas, including the subpoenas issued to the journalists as well as the third-party subpoenas. Those subpoenas are null and void. As a result, the motions to quash are moot,” Subramanian wrote in an order yesterday.

NYT: “Brazen effort to intimidate the press”

The NYT reported on Monday that the US government sought phone and text messaging records of NYT journalists and their relatives, including one reporter’s mother and two reporters’ spouses. This was in addition to subpoenas demanding that reporters testify before a federal grand jury.

On July 15, the NYT filed a motion to quash the subpoenas seeking grand jury testimony. The motion called the demands “a brazen effort to intimidate the press into abandoning its critical, constitutionally protected role.” The motion said armed federal agents served the subpoenas at the journalists’ homes, ordering them to appear before a grand jury within three business days.