On Friday the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, found that the House Judiciary Committee has standing to bring a lawsuit to enforce their subpoena against former White House counsel Don McGahn.
Latest in Donald McGahn
Oral Arguments in the D.C. Circuit En Banc Consideration of Committee on the Judiciary v. McGahn and U.S. House of Representatives v. Mnuchin
Judges were skeptical of the Department of Justice’s sweeping arguments but searched for limiting principles on court cases brought by Congress.
On April 28, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, will hear oral arguments for Committee on the Judiciary v. McGahn, the case concerning whether the House of Representatives can go to court to enforce subpoenas compelling testimony from Trump administration officials.
The House Judiciary Committee has filed its brief before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit regarding the en banc rehearing of Committee on the Judiciary v. McGahn, concerning the committee's effort to compel the testimony of former White House counsel Donald McGahn regarding events described in the Mueller report. In the brief, the committee argues that the D.C.
The U.S. House of Representatives petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to grant en banc rehearing in their case seeking to compel the testimony of former White House counsel Donald McGahn. Last week, a three-judge panel held that federal judges do not have the authority to resolve disputes between the White House and Congress. The House petition argues that the ruling impermissibly overruled D.C.
On Feb. 28, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dismissed the House Judiciary Committee's lawsuit to compel the testimony of former White House Counsel Don McGahn. Writing on behalf of the court, Judge Thomas B. Griffith wrote, "The Department of Justice (DOJ), on behalf of McGahn, responds that Article III of the Constitution forbids federal courts from resolving this kind of interbranch information dispute. We agree and dismiss this case." The opinion is available here and below.
Though the circuit court granted an administrative stay, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has denied a motion by the Department of Justice to stay a Nov. 25 ruling that held that McGahn does not have absolute testimonial immunity and must comply with a congressional subpoena for his testimony. The denial of the stay can be found here and below.
A judge in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the President's former White House Counsel Don McGahn must testify before impeachment investigators pursuant to a subpoena issued by the House Judiciary Committee. McGahn served as Trump's White House counsel from inauguration until October 2018. McGahn can appeal the ruling and request a stay pending appeal. The ruling can be found here and below.
Rules and Norms in the Trump Presidency: The Risks and Rewards of ‘Playing It Straight’ on the Inside
James Comey famously does things his own way, and the Department of Justice inspector general has not approved. Having criticized the former FBI director’s handling of the Clinton email investigation, the inspector general most recently upbraided him for his use of “sensitive investigative information” in sounding an alarm about Donald Trump.
On Aug. 7, the House Judiciary Committee filed a lawsuit asking a federal court in D.C. to force Don McGahn, former White House counsel, to comply with the committee’s subpoena for his testimony.