A federal judge has rejected an effort by U.S.Attorney Jeanine Pirro to erase a previous court ruling that sharply criticized her criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.Pirro, a former Fox News host appointed by President Donald Trump to serve as the top federal prosecutor in Washington, D.C., had asked Chief Judge James Boasberg to vacate his March opinion after the underlying case became moot.She argued that because the investigation had been closed, the ruling should no longer remain on the record.Judge Boasberg disagreed.

In his latest decision, he stated that the government itself created the circumstances that made the case moot by voluntarily ending the investigation.As a result, he found there was no justification for removing the earlier opinion.The judge wrote that the factors considered by courts in such situations weighed overwhelmingly against granting the request.The original March ruling was highly critical of the investigation into Powell.

Boasberg concluded that prosecutors lacked a good-faith basis to believe Powell had committed a crime and suggested that the investigation appeared motivated by Powell's disagreement with or displeasure of President Trump rather than by evidence of criminal conduct.According to the article, Pirro initially indicated she would appeal the March decision but never followed through.Instead, the investigation was formally closed on April 24.

Legal observers noted that the attempt to erase the ruling ended up drawing renewed attention to the judge's criticism, comparing the outcome to the so-called 'Streisand effect,' where efforts to suppress information result in greater public attention.The decision leaves Boasberg's original opinion intact and preserves the court's criticism of how the investigation was conducted.