Manhattan DA's office slams House GOP inquiry, says it was motivated by Trump
Last edited Thu Mar 23, 2023, 02:29 PM - Edit history (3)
Source: CNN Politics
CNN — The office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg accused House Republicans of launching an “an unprecedent inquiry into a pending local prosecution,” while defending the investigation into former President Donald Trump’s alleged hush money payments to an adult film actress during the 2016 campaign.
In a new letter to Republican lawmakers who earlier this week had sought information about the probe, Leslie Dubeck, the general counsel for the district attorney’s office, told the GOP House committee leaders that they lacked a “legitimate basis for congressional inquiry” and she noted that their requests for information “only came after Donald Trump created a false expectation that he would be arrested the next day and his lawyers reportedly urged you to intervene.”
Dubeck called the Republicans’ claims that the probe was politically motivated “unfounded.” She added that, “regardless, the proper forum for such a challenge is the Courts of New York, which are equipped to consider and review such objections.” She requested that the committees meet and confer with Bragg’s office to discuss whether the House has a “legitimate legislative” purpose for what it is seeking and whether those records could be turned over without infringing on New York’s sovereign interests.
The previous letter demanding information about Bragg’s investigation was sent Monday by House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, House Oversight Chairman James Comer and House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil, who criticized the hush money probe into Trump as an “unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial authority.” Jordan told CNN “we’re reviewing the letter” when asked for his response to the letter from the general counsel of the Manhattan DA. Jordan repeated his answer when asked if he would subpoena Bragg.
Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/23/politics/manhattan-da-house-gop-inquiry
Full headline: Manhattan DA's office slams House GOP inquiry, says it was motivated by Trump creating 'false expectation' of imminent arrest
Link to the letter (PDF) is here.
Article updated.
Previous article -
In a new letter to Republican lawmakers who earlier this week had sought information about the probe, Leslie Dubeck, the general counsel for the district attorney's office, told the GOP House committee leaders that they lacked a "legitimate basis for congressional inquiry" and she noted that their requests for information "only came after Donald Trump created a false expectation that he would be arrested the next day and his lawyers reportedly urged you to intervene." Dubeck called the Republicans' claims that the probe was politically motivated "unfounded."
She added that, "regardless, the proper forum for such a challenge is the Courts of New York, which are equipped to consider and review such objections." She requested that the committees meet and confer with Bragg's office to discuss whether the House has a "legitimate legislative" purpose for what it is seeking and whether those records could be turned over without infringing on New York's sovereign interests. The previous letter demanding information about Bragg's investigation was sent Monday by House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, House Oversight Chairman James Comer and House Administration Chairman Bryan Steil, who criticized the hush money probe into Trump as an "unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial authority."
Dubeck's five-page response to the Republicans' demands - which included testimony from Bragg as well as documents and communications related to the investigation - cited case law and legal arguments for why the GOP requests amounted to an "unlawful incursion into New York's sovereignty." She said that the Constitution's 10th Amendment limited the federal government's authority over local law enforcement and argued that Congress specially is not an executive branch entity with law enforcement powers.
Original article -
In a letter to the GOP chairmen who requested information on the probe, the Manhattan DA's general counsel called for a meeting to "confer with committee staff to better understand what information the DA's Office can provide that relates to a legitimate legislative interest."
This story is breaking and will be updated.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Link to tweet
@jordainc
·
Follow
New: Bragg’s response to House GOP
Image
Image
9:51 AM · Mar 23, 2023
Link to tweet
@kyledcheney
·
Follow
BRAGG bottom line: There’s no legitimate legislative reason to probe his ongoing investigation. The claim that it’s purely political is “unfounded” and can only be legitimately alleged during NY court proceedings.
Image
9:59 AM · Mar 23, 2023
(both combined appear to have the "whole letter" )
I love this part I bolded, they're basically saying prove that this has anything to do with the legislative process and why it's any of their business.
The DA's office is giving Gym the finger, figuratively speaking.
and in it, he schools non-bar certified Gymsuit in the concept of the GOP's beloved "states rights" (that apparently only apply to red states) -
Sovereignty
The Letter's requests are an unlawful incursion into New York's sovereignty. Congress's
investigative jurisdiction is derived from and limited by its power to legislate concerning
federal matters. See , e.g., Eastland v. U.S. Servicemen's Fund, 421 U.S. 491, 503-05 (197 5);
Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109, 111-12 (1959); Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S. 168, 195-
96 (1880).
The Constitution limits Congress's powers to those specifically enumerated; and the Tenth
Amendment ensures that any unenumerated powers are reserved to the States. New York v.
United States, 505 U.S. 144, 155-56 (1992). It is therefore generally understood that a
Congressional committee may not "inquire into matters which are . . . reserved to the States."
Charles XI. Johnson, et al., House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents, and Procedures
of the House at 254 (GPO 2017) 8; see also Watkins, 354 U.S. at 187 ( "The power of the
Congress to conduct investigations ... comprehends probes into departments of the Federa l
Go v ernment .... " ) (emphasis added).9
Among the powers reserved to the states, "[p]erhaps the clearest example of traditional state
authority is the punishment of local criminal activity." Bon d v. United States, 572 U.S. 844, 858
(2014). Thus , federal interference with state law enforcement "is peculiarly inconsistent with
our federal framework." Cameron v. Johnson , 390 U.S. 611, 618 (1968); see also Printz v. United
__________________________________________________
The Honorable Jim Jordan, et al.
March 23, 2023
Page 4 of 5
States, 521 U.S. 898, 931 n.15 (1997) (Tenth Amendment limits federal power over local law
enforcement). Invoking these principles of comity, eguity, and federalism, the Supreme Court
held, in Younger v. Harris, that federal courts may not interfere in pending state criminal
prosecutions absent extraordinary circumstances. 401 U.S. 37 (1971). This holding reflects a
"continuance of the belief that the National Government will fare best if the States and their
institutions are left free to perform their separate functions in their separate ways." Id. at 44.
Against this history, it is clear that Congress cannot have any legitimate legislative task relating
to the oversight of local prosecutors enforcing state law. To preserve the Constitution's
federalist principles, the District Attorney is duty bound by his constitutional oath to New
York's sovereign interest in the exercise of police powers reserved to the States under the
Tenth Amendment.
