Attorney General Pam Bondi rescinds Garland-era policy protecting journalists from DOJ subpoenas
On April 25, 2025, Attorney General Pam Bondi signed a Department of Justice memorandum rescinding the 2021 Garland-era policy that had barred federal prosecutors from using subpoenas, court orders, and search warrants to obtain journalists' records or compel their testimony in leak investigations. The new policy restored the DOJ's authority to deploy compulsory process against members of the news media.
Date: April 25, 2025. Individuals and organizations: Attorney General Pam Bondi; U.S. Department of Justice; all U.S. news media organizations affected prospectively. What happened: AG Bondi issued a department-wide memorandum titled 'Updated Policy Regarding Obtaining Information From, or Records of, Members of the News Media.' The memo rescinded the October 2021 policy issued by AG Merrick Garland (codified at 28 C.F.R. § 50.10) that had prohibited compulsory legal process against journalists for newsgathering activities. The Bondi memo stated that 'Federal government employees intentionally leaking sensitive information to the media undermines the ability of the Department of Justice to uphold the rule of law' and re-authorized subpoenas, court orders, and search warrants against journalists in leak investigations. The memo retained language about balancing press freedom interests but removed many of the prior-approval and advance-notice protections built into the Garland framework. Legal authority used: Internal DOJ policy change; no court action. Outcome: Policy in effect. Became the legal foundation for subsequent federal actions against journalists during 2025-2026, including the FBI search of Washington Post reporter Hannah Natanson's home and the grand jury subpoenas to WSJ and Washington Post reporters in the Iran leak probe. Why it matters: The rescission removed the strongest executive-branch protection for journalists in U.S. history and reopened the door to the secret records seizures and reporter subpoenas that had characterized prior administrations. Confidential sources were not directly at issue in this policy action, but the policy framework directly governs whether and how the federal government can pursue confidential sources through journalists in future investigations. Press freedom organizations including the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, Freedom of the Press Foundation, and CPJ condemned the rescission; DOJ characterized it as necessary to deter leaks of classified information.