Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Calista241

(5,586 posts)
Mon Aug 31, 2020, 02:10 PM Aug 2020

In 'Stunning' 2-1 Decision, Appeals Court Says Congress Can't Enforce Subpoena Against Ex-WH Counsel [View all]

Source: Law & Crime

A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. on Monday ruled that the U.S. House of Representatives does not have any legal authority to enforce a subpoena against former White House counsel Don McGahn. In a 2-1 decision penned by Judge Thomas B. Griffith, a George W. Bush appointee, the court reasoned that the Constitution does not grant a congressional committee the power to enforce its own subpoenas, dismissing the case in favor of McGahn.

“Congress has no implied constitutional power to seek civil enforcement of its subpoenas. The Committee thus cannot identify an underlying judicial remedy that could authorize it to invoke the Declaratory Judgment Act,” Griffith wrote. “Because the Committee lacks a cause of action to enforce its subpoena, this lawsuit must be dismissed.”

Judge Griffith stated, however, that while the committee does not currently have such enforcement power, that could be rectified if Congress passed a law granting such authority.

“We note that this decision does not preclude Congress (or one of its chambers) from ever enforcing a subpoena in federal court; it simply precludes it from doing so without first enacting a statute authorizing such a suit,” he wrote. “If Congress (rather than a single committee in a single chamber thereof) determines that its current mechanisms leave it unable to adequately enforce its subpoenas, it remains free to enact a statute that makes the House’s requests for information judicially enforceable. Indeed, Congress has passed similar statutes before, authorizing criminal enforcement in 1857 and civil enforcement for the Senate in 1978.”


Read more: https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/in-stunning-2-1-decision-appeals-court-says-congress-cant-enforce-subpoena-against-ex-wh-counsel-don-mcgahn/

42 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Isn't this the same three judge panel Miguelito Loveless Aug 2020 #1
i think it is CatWoman Aug 2020 #2
It took a while to return to the full court ArizonaLib Aug 2020 #6
Unless they take 2/3 they'd have to overcome the Filibuster. maxsolomon Aug 2020 #9
If the Dems also have the white house, McConnell may be more tempted to allow it ArizonaLib Aug 2020 #14
filibuster will be dead liberalgunwilltravel Aug 2020 #16
And I strongly believe killing the filibuster will be a watershed moment for Democrats groundloop Aug 2020 #20
Not if MAJORITY Leader Schumer bans ALL filibusters for 1772 days. JohnQFunk Aug 2020 #24
I think it can only be in 2-year stints but OK. maxsolomon Aug 2020 #28
Dems are the only ones hurt by the filibuster DeminPennswoods Aug 2020 #38
it would have been a disaster in 2017-2018. maxsolomon Sep 2020 #41
well, that full court just kicked Flynn in the nuts CatWoman Aug 2020 #17
Yes! I am thinking it will do the same with this ArizonaLib Aug 2020 #18
The courts are an independent branch of government. former9thward Aug 2020 #26
Congress regulates the judicial branch and can pass laws that limit the scope of SCOTUS ArizonaLib Aug 2020 #27
None of which applies to the subject at hand. former9thward Aug 2020 #34
I am not sure what you mean by that ArizonaLib Aug 2020 #40
No. One judge in common out of three onenote Aug 2020 #37
I wonder how much of this is those 2 conservative judges auditioning for SCOTUS ArizonaLib Aug 2020 #15
Oh, but the Senate can't vote on Supreme Court nominees in an election year..... groundloop Aug 2020 #21
Not these two. Both are nearing retirement. onenote Aug 2020 #39
No, this case was before Judges Henderson, Rogers, and Griffith. sl8 Aug 2020 #23
While The Same Court DallasNE Aug 2020 #33
Thanks. Miguelito Loveless Aug 2020 #36
hmmm, so, there is a statute that says House and Senate have subpoena power? Thomas Hurt Aug 2020 #3
Nail meet head. scipan Sep 2020 #42
Translation: A Congressional Subpoena is utterly toothless and can be ignored with impunity. maxsolomon Aug 2020 #4
They still wield the power of money. C_U_L8R Aug 2020 #5
Damn right. I wish they would do something - anything! Firestorm49 Aug 2020 #13
So get on it immediately! LiberalLovinLug Aug 2020 #7
Passed by the Senate and signed by the President. maxsolomon Aug 2020 #8
Well, that kind of speaks volumes. theaocp Aug 2020 #10
This 'Constitution' of ours is looking weaker every day ... GeorgeGist Aug 2020 #11
That Is Stunning DallasNE Aug 2020 #12
+1. yonder Aug 2020 #31
Did you read the opinion? former9thward Aug 2020 #35
*COUGH* En Banc *COUGH* hatrack Aug 2020 #19
Seriously? ananda Aug 2020 #22
I need to check the Constitution. Is the judiciary branch granted sinkingfeeling Aug 2020 #25
Excellent point Yeehah Aug 2020 #32
A major jurisdictional blunder that will lead 2 the judiciary's erosion if the WH occupant survives ancianita Aug 2020 #29
kick nt Grasswire2 Aug 2020 #30
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»In 'Stunning' 2-1 Decisio...