Federal agents seized a reporter’s devices, and now the Washington Post is warning of a dangerous legal precedent

A US judge has temporarily blocked federal prosecutors from reviewing data seized from a Washington Post reporter. This halts any examination of the materials until a hearing in early February.

The incident came to light through The Guardian, which reported that US Magistrate Judge William Porter issued the order on Wednesday, January 21, 2026. Porter said the ruling preserves the status quo while the Department of Justice prepares its response to the Post’s legal request.

The Washington Post filed motions hours earlier seeking the immediate return of electronics belonging to reporter Hannah Natanson. Prosecutors were also directed to keep their hands off the information in the meantime.

The ruling temporarily freezes the government’s access to the seized data

Federal agents searched Natanson’s home last week and seized two laptops, two phones, a Garmin watch, and other devices. The Post says the devices contain years of confidential source information and unpublished newsgathering materials, and it argues most of the seized data is unrelated to the specific warrant at issue.

The FBI says the action relates to an investigation into government contractor Aurelio Perez-Lugones, who is in federal custody in Maryland after being charged with unlawfully retaining national defense information. Attorney General Pam Bondi defended the raid last week, saying the government has a clear justification and that the matter involves classified material that could jeopardize lives, as courts are also weighing liability in other sensitive disputes involving medical clinic lawsuits.

The Post has challenged the seizure in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, filing two motions seeking the immediate return of the materials. The paper also asked for an order requiring the government to keep any copies under seal until the case is resolved.

In its filings, the Post called the move an “outrageous seizure” and warned it sets a dangerous legal precedent. The newspaper argued the devices include sensitive reporting materials and that allowing the government to review them would chill speech, cripple reporting, and cause ongoing harm.

The Post’s lawyers also argued that withholding the data would harm them irreparably, violate constitutional rights, and amount to unlawful prior restraint. The paper said the seizure has already crippled Natanson’s ability to work, noting she has not published new stories since the raid and cannot communicate with sources while the government retains her devices.

Press freedom groups have also raised concerns about the precedent the case could set for journalism and newsgathering. Bruce D Brown, president of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said it was the first time in US history the government has searched a reporter’s home in a national security media leak investigation, drawing comparisons to other recent enforcement actions, such as the ICE home raid incident, and urged the court to block any review of the materials.