DOJ Subpoenas New York Times Freelancer Over North Korea Military Report

The U.S. Department of Justice has subpoenaed records belonging to freelance journalist Matthew Cole as part of an investigation into the sources behind a 2025 New York Times report detailing a failed U.S. military operation in North Korea, according to the newspaper.

The subpoena, reportedly issued by federal prosecutors in Virginia in February, seeks more than two years of Cole’s reporting notes along with his testimony. Reuters said it could not independently verify the details. A spokesperson for The New York Times confirmed that Cole has decided to publicly disclose the subpoena after it had remained under seal.

The investigation centers on a report co-authored by Cole that alleged U.S. Navy SEALs killed several unarmed North Koreans during a covert 2019 mission to install a listening device near North Korea’s coastline. The article cited approximately two dozen unnamed sources familiar with the operation.

A Justice Department spokesperson did not comment directly on Cole’s case but said the department will continue using all available legal tools to identify individuals who unlawfully disclose classified national defense information.

The New York Times strongly criticized the subpoena, describing it as an unlawful attempt by the administration to discourage investigative journalism and restrict public access to information on matters of significant national interest.

“We support Matthew Cole’s decision to make public a subpoena that the government has attempted to keep secret,” New York Times spokesperson Charlie Stadtlander said, adding that the legal action represents “another brazen and illegal attack” on press freedom.

The newspaper also confirmed it is covering Cole’s legal expenses. His attorney, David A. O’Neil, defended the journalist’s work, saying Cole’s reporting helps the public better understand government actions carried out in its name. O’Neil added that his client would not be intimidated by efforts to suppress reporting that the administration finds unfavorable.

The case is likely to intensify the ongoing debate over press freedom, confidential sources, national security leaks, and the government’s authority to compel journalists to disclose reporting materials.