The federal appeals court’s ruling arrives too late to affect the impeachment process, which was resolved with Trump’s acquittal by the Senate earlier this month. But it could have an impact on other congressional probes -- a judge overseeing the House’s efforts to obtain Trump’s taxes scheduled a hearing for next week after having put that matter on hold awaiting a ruling on the McGahn case.
The appeals court in Washington Friday said it lacked jurisdiction to decide a dispute between the executive and legislative branches. “The Constitution does not vest federal courts with some ‘amorphous general supervision of the operations of government,’” Circuit Judge
In her dissent, Circuit Judge
Andy Grewal, a tax and administrative law professor at the University of Iowa, said the ruling will have implications for the Trump tax return case, as it also involves “a deeply debated and uncertain question” about Congress’ ability to sue the executive branch.
“In McGahn, the case is treated as the House suing the executive branch, even though McGahn is now a private person,” Grewal said. “And in the tax returns case, you have a lawsuit directly between the House and the Treasury.”
The tax records chase is one of the main threads for Democrats as they consider whether to pursue additional investigations of Trump after the GOP-controlled Senate acquitted him on two articles of impeachment stemming from his attempt to get Ukraine to seek damaging information on a political rival. Trump broke with four decades of tradition by refusing to release his tax returns as a nominee.
U.S. District Judge
McGahn, who stepped down as White House counsel in October 2018, figured prominently in Special Counsel
The House subpoenaed McGahn to testify in April as part of its impeachment inquiry, but Trump ordered him to spurn their demand. The legislators voted to hold McGahn in contempt on June 11 and
Washington U.S. District Judge
Friday’s decision overrules Jackson, who was a 2013 appointee of President
The decision was along party lines. Griffith, who was appointed by
The Judiciary Committee’s press office didn’t immediately return a call seeking comment. Democrats could try to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court.
“Today’s McGahn ruling confirms what Republicans have said all along,” said Representative
She added that the House would pursue a so-called en banc rehearing of the ruling before the full court.
In one June 2017 instance cited in the Mueller report, the president called McGahn at home and ordered him to fire Mueller for alleged conflicts of interest, according to the report. The lawyer ignored the directive, deciding he’d rather resign, according to the report. About six months later, Trump pressured McGahn to deny press reports of the incident.
Trump also directed McGahn to dissuade then-U.S. Attorney General
Responding to the House suit to compel McGahn’s congressional testimony, Justice Department attorneys argued the committee can’t sue the executive branch and, more significantly, that the former White House counsel was “absolutely immune from compelled testimony before Congress” as an immediate adviser to the president.
The lawmakers countered that the administration’s immunity assertion, if upheld, would cripple Congress’s ability to fulfill its oversight functions and to obtain information that may be relevant to an impeachment effort.
The appeals court panel heard arguments on Jan. 3.
(Updates with Pelosi comment, starting in 16th paragraph)
--With assistance from
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
© 2020 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.