Leak Investigations Expand as DOJ Shreds Biden-Era Journalist Protections

Department of Justice emblem on the American flag.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has rescinded Biden-era protections for journalists, allowing the Department of Justice to use subpoenas and search warrants against reporters in leak investigations, marking a significant shift in how the government balances national security concerns with press freedoms.

Key Insights

The Justice Department has eliminated restrictions that prevented prosecutors from seizing reporters’ records during leak investigations.
Attorney General Bondi cited recent classified information leaks to The New York Times as justification for the policy change.
The new directive requires Attorney General approval and advance notice to journalists before taking action.
This policy returns to a more aggressive approach previously used during both the Trump and Obama administrations.
Press freedom advocates warn the change could undermine investigative reporting and confidential source relationships.

DOJ Reverses Course on Press Protections

In a decisive move reflecting the Trump administration’s priorities, Attorney General Pam Bondi has officially rescinded protections for journalists that were established during President Biden’s term. The policy change enables federal prosecutors to obtain reporters’ records through subpoenas, court orders, and search warrants when investigating unauthorized information leaks. This reversal represents a fundamental shift in how the Department of Justice approaches the balance between pursuing leaks of classified information and protecting journalistic freedoms that have been in place since 2022.

The new guidelines maintain that such investigative techniques should be narrowly focused and deployed only as a last resort. However, they significantly expand the government’s authority to pursue journalists in leak investigations. While the directive includes procedural protections requiring approval from DOJ leadership and advance notice to affected media organizations, the elimination of previous restrictions signals a more aggressive approach to address unauthorized disclosures of sensitive government information.

National Security Concerns Drive Policy Change

Bondi explicitly pointed to recent alleged leaks of classified information to The New York Times as a driving factor behind the policy shift. The Attorney General has opened a criminal investigation into these leaks, which highlights the administration’s commitment to pursuing those who disclose sensitive information. Additionally, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and the FBI are actively pursuing charges against officials suspected of leaking details about deportation operations, demonstrating a broader government-wide crackdown on unauthorized disclosures.

“Federal government employees intentionally leaking sensitive information to the media undermines the ability of the Department of Justice to uphold the rule of law, protect civil rights, and keep America safe. This conduct is illegal and wrong, and it must stop,” Bondi said.

Critics of the policy change worry that it could have a chilling effect on investigative journalism by making it more difficult for reporters to protect their sources. However, supporters argue that national security interests must take precedence when classified information is improperly disclosed to the media. The tension between these competing values lies at the heart of the administration’s approach to media relations and information security.

The Justice Department has rescinded a policy implemented during the Biden administration that restricted prosecutors from seizing reporters' records in criminal investigations, according to an internal memo obtained by ABC News. https://t.co/wVSJfDc6zi

— ABC News (@ABC) April 28, 2025

Procedural Safeguards and Implementation

While rolling back protections, the DOJ has directed its Office of Legal Policy to publish new guidelines that include procedural protections for obtaining information from the media. These measures require the Attorney General’s personal approval for questioning or arresting journalists and mandate that any investigative actions be as narrow as possible to avoid unnecessary interference with legitimate news gathering activities. The actions should also provide advance notice to affected journalists when feasible.

“These procedural protections recognize that investigative techniques relating to newsgathering are an extraordinary measure to be deployed as a last resort when essential to a successful investigation or prosecution,” said Pam Bondi.

In her directive, Bondi acknowledged the importance of press independence while simultaneously expressing skepticism about “certain members of the legacy news media.” This qualification suggests a more targeted approach that distinguishes between different types of media organizations in the application of these new rules. The policy represents a return to practices employed during previous administrations, particularly during the Obama and first Trump terms, when aggressive leak investigations sometimes involved surveillance of journalists.

Implications for Press Freedom

Press freedom advocates have expressed concern about the long-term implications of this policy shift. Bruce Brown of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press emphasized that some of the most significant reporting in American history relied on journalists’ ability to protect confidential sources. The ability to shield sources has been crucial for reporting on matters from Watergate to post-9/11 surveillance programs, stories that resonated with Americans across the political spectrum.

“Some of the most consequential reporting in U.S. history — from Watergate to warrantless wiretapping after 9/11 — was and continues to be made possible because reporters have been able to protect the identities of confidential sources and uncover and report stories that matter to people across the political spectrum,” Brown said.

As the Department of Justice implements this new approach, the coming months will reveal how aggressively prosecutors will use these expanded powers and what impact they will have on investigative journalism. The policy shift underscores President Trump’s administration’s focus on containing leaks and controlling the flow of government information to the public. For journalists covering national security and other sensitive topics, the new reality means operating in an environment where their communications, sources, and work products may face greater legal scrutiny.