U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro said Sunday she may reopen a criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, barely a week after she publicly suspended the probe and handed it off to the Fed's own inspector general.
The announcement, made during a CNN "State of the Union" interview with Jake Tapper, keeps alive a Justice Department inquiry that has roiled Washington since January and complicated the confirmation of Powell's likely successor, Kevin Warsh.
Pirro framed the move as conditional. She said the outcome depends on what the Office of the Inspector General of the Federal Reserve turns up in its own review of building renovations at the central bank, the same subject matter that launched the DOJ probe months ago.
"I want to see what's there. If there's something there, great. And if there isn't, I'll go home."
That wait-and-see posture might sound measured. But it also means the top federal prosecutor in Washington is publicly reserving the right to restart a criminal case against the sitting Fed chair, even after a federal judge found essentially no evidence to support the investigation's subpoenas.
The Justice Department first opened its investigation into Powell in January, focusing on the Federal Reserve's headquarters renovation. The project carries a price tag of $2.5 billion, AP News reported, and the probe sought to determine whether any criminal conduct was involved.
It did not go well for prosecutors. Judge James Boasberg quashed Pirro's subpoenas after concluding the government had produced what he called "essentially zero evidence" to suspect Powell of a crime. A prosecutor reportedly acknowledged in court that the government had not found evidence of criminal conduct.
Rather than accept that result, Pirro said Sunday her office plans to appeal Boasberg's ruling. She cast the fight in procedural terms, arguing the precedent matters more than the specific case.
"It's extremely important for us as prosecutors, the precedent that it sets to prevent us from going into a grand jury."
So the investigation is suspended but not closed. The subpoenas were quashed but will be appealed. The inspector general will conduct a parallel review. And Pirro's own social media post, made on her official account, stated she "will not hesitate to restart a criminal investigation should the facts warrant doing so."
That is a lot of open doors for a case a federal judge said rests on no evidence.
The investigation has already had real consequences on Capitol Hill. North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis, who sits on the Senate Banking Committee, held up the committee vote to advance Warsh's nomination for months specifically because of the probe into Powell. His concern was not about defending Powell personally but about protecting the institutional independence of the Federal Reserve from prosecutorial pressure.
Tillis told CNN on Sunday that he still believes no crime was committed. He said prosecutors he spoke with agreed.
"At the end of the day, no crime was committed, and the prosecutors I spoke with all agree. That's what I was fighting against, not any single prosecution, but a process that would undermine the independence of the Fed."
When asked whether he supports Warsh, Tillis replied simply: "I think so." The Senate Banking Committee has now approved Warsh's nomination, though he still needs confirmation by the full Senate. The earlier court ruling that quashed the DOJ subpoenas had already begun to clear the path for that vote.
Warsh, for his part, testified before the Senate that President Trump never asked him to commit to any particular interest rate decision.
The criminal probe did not emerge in a vacuum. President Trump has intensified his verbal criticism of Powell since beginning his second term, targeting the Fed chair and the Board of Governors over monetary policy, specifically, the pace of interest rate cuts.
On April 29, Trump posted on Truth Social: "Jerome 'Too Late' Powell wants to stay at the Fed because he can't get a job anywhere else, Nobody wants him."
Powell's term as chair is set to end on May 15. But he has said he will remain at the Fed as a governor until the criminal investigation concludes, a decision that effectively ties his departure to Pirro's timeline. The longer the probe lingers in any form, the longer Powell stays.
Powell has maintained that the Fed makes its decisions without political interference. During a hearing last year, he told senators plainly: "We don't take into consideration political factors" when setting rates.
The broader pattern of DOJ activity has drawn scrutiny from critics who see the department repeatedly using its authority to pursue individuals who have clashed with the president or his administration. The investigation into Powell sits alongside other high-profile targets, including former FBI Director James Comey and six members of Congress who appeared in a video urging service members to refuse unlawful orders. The department's aggressive posture on federal criminal matters has become a defining feature of the current term.
Pirro's suspension announcement said the Office of the Inspector General of the Federal Reserve will conduct its own investigation into Powell and the renovation matter. That shift moves the inquiry from a criminal footing to an internal oversight review, at least for now.
But Pirro's Sunday comments make clear the IG probe is not a replacement. It is a placeholder. If the inspector general finds anything of interest, Pirro has publicly committed to bringing the criminal investigation back.
The earlier DOJ pledge to appeal the subpoena ruling already signaled that prosecutors were not ready to walk away. Sunday's interview confirmed it. The appeal, the IG review, and the public statements all point in the same direction: this case is parked, not closed.
Several questions remain unanswered. What specific conduct formed the basis of the original investigation? What, if anything, has the inspector general already found about the Fed's renovation spending? And what standard will Pirro apply when deciding whether to reopen?
The judge who reviewed the evidence said there was essentially none. The senator who blocked a nomination over the probe says no crime was committed. The prosecutors involved reportedly agreed.
Meanwhile, institutional clashes between the administration and independent federal bodies continue to multiply across Washington, raising the stakes every time the Justice Department leans on an agency that was designed to operate at arm's length from the White House.
Whether or not Pirro ever files a charge, the investigation itself has already reshaped the landscape. It delayed Warsh's confirmation. It kept Powell in place past his expected departure. It forced the Senate Banking Committee into a months-long standoff. And it sent a message, intended or not, that the nation's central bank operates under prosecutorial watch.
Tillis understood the stakes. He did not argue that Powell was a hero or that the Fed is beyond reproach. He argued that the process itself was the problem, that launching a criminal investigation without evidence, then refusing to close it cleanly, corrodes the independence that makes the Federal Reserve function.
That argument should resonate with anyone who believes institutions work best when they answer to the law, not to political convenience.
A prosecutor who finds evidence of a crime should pursue it without hesitation. A prosecutor who finds nothing should say so and move on. What Pirro described on Sunday is neither, and the longer it continues, the harder it becomes to call it anything but leverage.