The United States Justice Department withdrew grand jury subpoenas on Thursday that had sought testimony and phone records from four New York Times reporters and their family members, backing down after a federal judge repeatedly challenged the legality of the demands. The subpoenas, issued by the Manhattan US Attorney’s office, were linked to a criminal investigation into the leaking of classified information following the newspaper’s reports about security deficiencies on a new Air Force One aircraft donated by Qatar. Judge Arun Subramanian, presiding at a hearing in Manhattan, pressed prosecutors on why subpoenas—which he said must be a “last step” under First Amendment protections—had been pursued before exhausting alternative avenues. Facing the possibility of sanctions for what he termed “incorrect and incomplete” court submissions, government counsel agreed to withdraw the subpoenas while leaving open the option to refile them properly.

Viewed from Washington, the episode is the latest flashpoint in an escalating tension between the Trump administration and mainstream US media outlets. The Justice Department defended its initial actions by asserting that the investigation targets the leakers of classified information, not the journalists themselves, and accused the judge of blocking the grand jury from receiving “core evidence in a national security investigation.” The New York Times, however, condemned the subpoenas as “abusive and improper,” arguing that they were designed to harass reporters and violated internal department guidelines requiring such measures to be rare and approved at senior levels. Press freedom organisations in the United States described the withdrawal as a courtroom check on what they view as a broader pattern of using subpoenas and search warrants to pressure independent journalism, noting that similar demands recently served on the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal were also withdrawn.

The underlying dispute centres on two articles published on 8 and 9 July, in which the Times, citing anonymous sources, reported that President Trump flew home from a NATO summit in Turkey on an older presidential aircraft after the Secret Service advised against using the new Qatari-donated Boeing 747-8. According to the reporters, the newer plane lacked advanced antimissile capabilities and other defensive features, raising concerns amid a resumption of hostilities between the United States and Iran. Trump publicly dismissed any security issue, while the Justice Department argued the articles represented a “substantial national security concern” and that the probe was necessary to deter unauthorised disclosures.

The dossier remains active: the Justice Department has indicated the criminal investigation will continue, and prosecutors have said they are prepared to offer immunity to compel testimony if needed. Judge Subramanian made clear that the government may pursue new subpoenas provided it follows proper procedures and exhausts other leads first. The court did not rule on whether the withdrawn subpoenas violated the law, and the question of sanctions for what government attorneys called “inadvertent” misstatements remains open. For the New York Times, the withdrawal was an “important affirmation of our country’s commitment to a free press,” but the paper’s legal counsel insisted the subpoenas should never have been issued. The next steps in the leak investigation are yet to be determined, with no new filings immediately scheduled.