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
 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
Fri Aug 7, 2020, 12:46 PM Aug 2020

Appeals court rules against Trump, says House can sue to enforce McGahn subpoena

Source: The Hill

A federal appeals court on Friday upheld the House's subpoena of former White House counsel Don McGahn, ruling that Congress has the right to enforce its subpoenas in court.

The 7-2 decision from the full D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reverses an earlier ruling from a divided three-judge panel that declared that congressional subpoenas were essentially unenforceable.

"The Constitution charges Congress with certain responsibilities, including to legislate, to conduct oversight of the federal government, and, when necessary, to impeach and remove a President or other Executive Branch official from office," Judge Judith Rogers wrote in the majority opinion. "Possession of relevant information is an essential precondition to the effective discharge of all of those duties."

Although the ruling is a clear victory for congressional Democrats, it does not mean that McGahn will be sitting for testimony anytime soon. The majority decision did not address the Trump administration's claim that White House officials are immune to congressional subpoena, so even if McGahn does not appeal the ruling, the two sides will still have more to litigate before the D.C. Circuit.

Read more: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/511027-appeals-court-revives-houses-mcgahn-subpoena

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Appeals court rules against Trump, says House can sue to enforce McGahn subpoena (Original Post) ehrnst Aug 2020 OP
So, on to the Supremes (again)? maxsolomon Aug 2020 #1
2 judges voted against this? bucolic_frolic Aug 2020 #2
Did some checking and the "2" were also the 2 that formed the majority in the original decision BumRushDaShow Aug 2020 #4
Two words . John. Dean. McCamy Taylor Aug 2020 #3
This is a nice bit of good news. Karma13612 Aug 2020 #5

bucolic_frolic

(43,058 posts)
2. 2 judges voted against this?
Fri Aug 7, 2020, 12:59 PM
Aug 2020

If you can't enforce a subpoena, you can just escape liability and responsibility for everything by outsourcing everyone and everything. It would mean the end of accountability. It's so good corporations would adopt it, hell they'd lobby for it.

BumRushDaShow

(128,490 posts)
4. Did some checking and the "2" were also the 2 that formed the majority in the original decision
Fri Aug 7, 2020, 01:26 PM
Aug 2020

before the grant of an en banc decision by the entire court.

Full appeals court to rehear Donald McGahn subpoena and Trump border wall cases

By Spencer S. Hsu
March 13, 2020 at 6:45 p.m. EDT

/snip

In McGahn’s case, a split three-judge panel agreed with the Justice Department argument that courts should stay out of political disputes between the two elected branches of government.

Writing for the majority, Judge Thomas B. Griffith wrote that courts “cannot decide this case without declaring the actions of one or the other unconstitutional, and ‘occasions for constitutional confrontation … should be avoided whenever possible.’?”

/snip

The third judge on the panel, Karen LeCraft Henderson, agreed with Griffith’s overall judgment but rejected a Trump administration claim that top White House aides enjoy “absolute immunity” from compelled testimony.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/full-appeals-court-to-rehear-donald-mcgahn-subpoena-and-trump-border-wall-cases/2020/03/13/3ac324d4-656c-11ea-acca-80c22bbee96f_story.html


Appeals Court Revives House Lawsuit for McGahn's Testimony

By The Associated Press

Aug. 7, 2020
Updated 12:12 p.m. ET

/snip

The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit voted 7-2 in ruling that the House Judiciary Committee can make its claims in court, reversing the judgment of a three-judge panel that would have ended the court fight.

The matter now returns to the panel for consideration of other legal issues. The current House of Representatives session ends on Jan. 3. That time crunch means “the chances that the Committee hears McGahn’s testimony anytime soon are vanishingly slim," dissenting Judge Thomas Griffith wrote. Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson also dissented.

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2020/08/07/us/politics/ap-us-trump-mcgahn-subpoena.html

Karma13612

(4,541 posts)
5. This is a nice bit of good news.
Fri Aug 7, 2020, 05:30 PM
Aug 2020

I’m going to wait until tomorrow to swallow the full truth that involves more litigation before McGahn will be able to speak.

Sigh, it never ends.

The entire “enlightened” population in the US is in a constant state of unrequited justice.
I was happy about the NRA news yesterday, but we know the whole thing will just fade away and has zero impact on the election. Unless money is frozen that was meant to flow to Republican campaigns?

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Appeals court rules again...