Reading mode Exit reading mode

DOJ Subpoenas New York Times Reporters and Their Relatives' Phone Records Over Air Force One Reporting (July 2026)

The Justice Department tried to force New York Times reporters to testify to a grand jury about their sources for stories on security problems with Air Force One. It also subpoenaed phone records of the reporters' spouses and one reporter's mother. A federal judge rebuked the department, which withdrew the subpoenas and admitted errors. It was the latest attempt under rules rewritten in April 2025 that allow subpoenas to journalists, after earlier subpoenas to Wall Street Journal and Washington Post reporters were also dropped.

Record summary

Grade

Grade 2 of 5: Major Abuse of Power

Executive actions that exceed constitutional authority, circumvent statutory constraints, or weaponize government institutions for political ends. Scale and definitions

Status
Ongoing
Incident date
Record updated
Location
New York, NY
Category
Press Freedom
Legal posture
Judicial finding
War-crime classification
Enabling conduct
ICC relevance
No
Sources
6 cited
Stable ID
doj-subpoenas-nyt-reporters-air-force-one
Legal basis
First Amendment; 28 C.F.R. § 50.10 (DOJ regulations on obtaining information from members of the news media, which treat compulsory process as a last resort); ICCPR Article 19
Posture note
The subpoenas were withdrawn on July 24, 2026 after the presiding judge said he would otherwise quash them. The department said it may seek new subpoenas. The underlying leak investigation has no publicly reported charges.
Victims
New York Times journalists Julian E. Barnes, Eric Lipton, Tyler Pager and Eric Schmitt, whose subpoenas were reported July 11; family members whose phone records were sought; confidential sources
Alleged responsible parties
U.S. Department of Justice; FBI

Key points

  • The subpoenas followed Times reporting on security concerns involving the new Qatari-gifted Air Force One, including missing antimissile capabilities.
  • Federal agents delivered some subpoenas at the reporters' homes. Times lawyer David McCraw said such visits 'should shock the conscience of any American who believes in the Constitution and the press freedom it protects.'
  • Unsealed filings showed phone-record subpoenas issued July 10, 14 and 16 covering the reporters, one reporter's mother and two reporters' spouses, with records requested back to January 1, 2026, before the articles were published.
  • In court the department called the subpoenas to relatives 'errors' and 'mistakes,' and called the omission of the fact that journalists were involved from its non-disclosure applications an 'oversight.'
  • Weeks earlier the department had dropped grand jury subpoenas to three Wall Street Journal reporters and Washington Post reporter Ellen Nakashima in a separate leak probe after the outlets objected.

What Happened

In July 2026 the Justice Department served subpoenas on New York Times reporters Julian E. Barnes, Eric Lipton, Tyler Pager and Eric Schmitt, ordering them to testify before a federal grand jury in Manhattan. The subpoenas followed Times reporting on security concerns about the new Air Force One, a jet given by Qatar, including missing antimissile capabilities. Federal agents delivered some of the subpoenas at the reporters' homes. The AP reported that FBI Director Kash Patel and other Justice Department officials met at the White House on July 10 to discuss the matter.

The department said: "Reporters are not the targets, those leaking classified information are." Times lawyer David McCraw said: "The appearance of federal law enforcement agents on the doorstep of news reporters should shock the conscience of any American who believes in the Constitution and the press freedom it protects." Bruce D. Brown of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press said Trump's "war on the press is looking for another victim."

On July 16 the Times moved to quash in the Southern District of New York. Its lawyer David McCraw said the subpoenas were brought in "bad faith to punish The Times for its coverage." When the filing was unsealed on July 20, it showed that the department had also subpoenaed phone records of several Times journalists and their relatives: one reporter's mother and two reporters' spouses. Those subpoenas were issued July 10, 14 and 16 and sought records back to January 1, 2026, before the articles in question appeared. The Times' lawyers said the government was trying to "forage for information about the Journalists' source relationships more broadly." Judge Arun Subramanian froze enforcement of the phone-record subpoenas.

The Withdrawal

On July 24, after Judge Subramanian criticized the department's legal work and said he would quash the subpoenas if they were not withdrawn, the government withdrew them. According to CBS News, the department told the court that the subpoenas for family members' records were "errors" and "mistakes," and that leaving the involvement of journalists and the Times out of its non-disclosure applications was an "oversight." The judge declared the subpoenas "null and void" and warned the department against similar conduct in the future. The department said it would "return to the court if new subpoenas are needed."

Pattern

The episode followed the April 2025 decision by then-Attorney General Pam Bondi to rescind Biden-era protections that had shielded journalists from secret seizure of their phone records in leak investigations. Weeks earlier, NBC News reported, the department had tried to compel three Wall Street Journal reporters and Washington Post reporter Ellen Nakashima to testify before a grand jury in a separate leak investigation, and withdrew those subpoenas after the outlets objected. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said then: "We're not going to stop investigating people who work in this administration who think it's OK to leak classified information." In January 2026 the FBI had searched the home of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson.

DOJ's own news-media regulations (28 C.F.R. § 50.10) treat compelled process against journalists as an extraordinary, last-resort measure. In court the department conceded that it had erred in reaching reporters' relatives and in omitting from its non-disclosure application that the investigation involved journalists, and the judge said the government's "inadvertent errors" were "piling up." The subpoenas were withdrawn, but serving them still did harm. A subpoena delivered at a reporter's home, and a request for a reporter's mother's phone records, signals to every confidential source in the federal government that contact with the press may be traced. The underlying reporting concerned the security of a foreign-government gift to the president (see trump-emoluments-foreign-payments), which is the kind of accountability journalism source protection exists to enable.

Classification

This entry is classified as an enabling condition. It concerns ICCPR Article 19, which, as interpreted by the UN Human Rights Committee, protects journalists' ability to keep their sources confidential. It is not an international crime.

International law engaged

InstrumentProvisionWhat it protects or prohibits
International Covenant on Civil and Political RightsArticle 19Freedom to seek, receive and impart information; the UN Human Rights Committee's General Comment 34 recognizes the protection of journalists' confidential sources as part of this right

Sequence of events

  1. WSJ and Post subpoenas revealed as withdrawn

    NBC News reports that the department tried to compel four journalists (three from the Wall Street Journal, one from the Washington Post) to testify before a grand jury in a leak probe, then dropped the subpoenas after the outlets objected.

  2. Grand jury and phone-record subpoenas issued

    The department issues subpoenas to New York Times reporters to testify before a Manhattan grand jury. Agents deliver some at reporters' homes. Phone-record subpoenas are issued July 10, 14 and 16.

  3. Filings unsealed; relatives' records revealed

    The Times' sealed motion to quash is unsealed, showing the department sought phone records of a reporter's mother and two reporters' spouses. Judge Subramanian freezes enforcement of the phone-record subpoenas.

  4. Government withdraws subpoenas

    After the judge criticizes the department and says he would quash the subpoenas, the government withdraws them, admitting errors, and says it would return to court if new subpoenas were needed.

Sources

  1. New York Times reporters are subpoenaed after Air Force One stories, raising press freedom concerns — PBS NewsHour (Associated Press)
  2. Trump administration subpoenas New York Times reporters after new Air Force One reporting, NYT says — ABC7
  3. New York Times files motion to quash subpoenas served on journalists over Air Force One coverage — PBS NewsHour (Associated Press)
  4. DOJ sought phone records of NYT journalists in effort to unmask sources of Air Force One security report — PBS NewsHour (Associated Press)
  5. Government withdraws subpoenas for New York Times reporters in Air Force One leak probe, after judge reprimands DOJ — CBS News
  6. Trump administration tried to force journalists to testify before federal grand jury in leak probe — NBC News

How this record was published

Manually curated This entry was added directly and does not carry an automated audit trail.

About our editorial methodology →

Related records

Linked by the editors.

  • Grade 4 of 5: Critical Rights and Rule-of-Law Concern

    Second-Term Press Attacks: AP Banned, Journalists Arrested, Press Pool Restricted

    The AP's exclusion from the White House briefing room — a credentialed, nonpartisan wire service that had covered every presidency since 1865 — was triggered by the AP's editorial decision to continue using 'Gulf of Mexico' rather than 'Gulf of America,' the name Trump had issued an executive order to adopt. AP's position was that it followed geographic naming standards and could not adopt a contested renaming while it was politically motivated. The exclusion was condemned by press freedom organizations as the most direct government intervention in editorial content by excluding a news organization from access on the basis of its editorial decisions.

  • Grade 2 of 5: Major Abuse of Power

    Trump Emoluments: Foreign Government Payments Through Business Deals, Gifts, and Cryptocurrency

    An unprecedented pattern of foreign government payments flowing to the president's personal businesses and financial ventures, including real estate deals in Vietnam, Serbia, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf states, the LIV Golf partnership, a $400 million Qatari jet, and cryptocurrency schemes — prompting multiple Senate resolutions condemning the arrangements as Emoluments Clause violations.

Similar by category, grade and tags.

  • Grade 2 of 5: Major Abuse of Power

    FCC Broadcast License Threats and Government Coercion of Media

    A campaign of government coercion against media through broadcast license threats from the president and FCC chair, forced cancellation of a television show, pressure to remove apps, and demands that platforms suppress immigration-related content.

  • Grade 3 of 5: Serious Rights Violation

    USAGM and Voice of America Broadcasting Dismantlement

    A coordinated attack on US government-funded international broadcasting placed 1,300 journalists on leave, terminated Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty's grant, and attempted to gut Voice of America — until a federal judge ruled the actions illegal and ordered staff reinstated.

  • Grade 4 of 5: Critical Rights and Rule-of-Law Concern

    Press Freedom: 'Enemy of the People' and Systematic Media Attacks

    Trump's attacks on the press were systematic and escalating: he labeled specific organizations (CNN, NBC, the New York Times, Washington Post) 'fake news,' called reporters 'enemies of the people,' suggested revoking NBC's broadcast license, threatened to revoke press credentials, and cheered when supporters physically confronted journalists at rallies. Body-slammed a reporter (Greg Gianforte in Montana) and Trump endorsed him. Reporters covering Trump rallies documented being surrounded by hostile crowds. The Annenberg Foundation documented 2,000+ attacks on press freedom during the Trump presidency. Authoritarian governments around the world cited Trump's 'fake news' rhetoric when expelling journalists or restricting press access.

  • Grade 4 of 5: Critical Rights and Rule-of-Law Concern

    Islamabad Memorandum Ceasefire Collapses Within Ten Days: Hormuz Strikes, US-Iran Exchange, Trump Threatens Iran 'Will No Longer Exist' (June 2026)

    A 60-day ceasefire signed June 17 collapsed within eight days: Iran struck a cargo ship near Hormuz, the US launched its third round of strikes in three weeks, Iranian missiles hit US bases in Kuwait and Bahrain, a Qatari civilian died in the crossfire with attribution still unconfirmed, and Trump threatened that Iran 'will no longer exist.' No new congressional authorization exists for any of it.