Judge: White House Aides Can Be Subpoenaed

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Judge: White House Aides Can Be Subpoenaed stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 07-31-08 11:08 AM   |   Updated: 08- 8-08 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Miers

WASHINGTON — President Bush's top advisers are not immune from congressional subpoenas, a federal judge ruled Thursday in a long-running dispute between the two political branches.

Congressional Democrats called the ruling a ringing endorsement of the principle that nobody is above the law. They swiftly announced that the Bush officials who have defied their subpoenas, including Bush's former top adviser Karl Rove, must appear as part of a probe of whether the White House directed the firings of nine federal prosecutors. Democrats announced plans to open hearings at the height of election season.

The Bush administration was expected to appeal.

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge John Bates said there's no legal basis for Bush's argument and that his former legal counsel, Harriet Miers, must appear before Congress. If she wants to refuse to testify, he said, she must do so in person. The committee also has sought to force testimony from White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten.

"Harriet Miers is not immune from compelled congressional process; she is legally required to testify pursuant to a duly issued congressional subpoena," Bates wrote. He said that both Bolten and Miers must give Congress all nonprivileged documents related to the firings.

Bates, who was appointed to the bench by Bush, issued a 93-page opinion that strongly rejected the administration's legal arguments. He noted that the executive branch could not point to a single case in which courts held that White House aides were immune from congressional subpoenas.

"That simple yet critical fact bears repeating: the asserted absolute immunity claim here is entirely unsupported by existing case law," Bates wrote.

The ruling is a blow to the Bush administration's efforts to bolster the power of the executive branch at the expense of the legislative branch. Disputes over congressional subpoenas are normally resolved through political compromise, not through the court system. Had Bush prevailed, it would have dramatically weakened congressional authority in oversight investigations.

Story continues below
advertisement

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., left open the prospect of a full House vote on a contempt citation against Rove, who defied his subpoena to appear before the Judiciary Committee on July 10.

"It certainly strengthens our hand," she said of Bates' ruling. "This decision should send a clear signal to the Bush administration that it must cooperate fully with Congress and that former administration officials Harriet Miers and Karl Rove must testify before Congress."

That wasn't clear at all to the White House or Rove's attorney.

Bush administration lawyers were still considering whether to appeal, but there was no doubt what they thought of the ruling.

"We disagree with the district court's decision," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.

With only a few months left in Bush's presidency, there appeared to be no sense of urgency to come to a decision.

"I have not yet talked with anyone at the White House ... and don't expect that this matter will be finally resolved in the very near future," Rove attorney Robert Luskin said in an e-mail.

The House Judiciary Committee's senior Republican, Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, said he was pleased the court ruled in Congress' favor, but he cautioned that an ongoing showdown in federal court could ultimately curtail Congress' powers, and he urged Democrats and the White House to strike an agreement.

"Unfortunately, today's victory may be short-lived," Smith said in a statement. "If the administration appeals the ruling, our congressional prerogatives will once again be put at risk."

The chairmen of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees quickly demanded that the White House officials subpoenaed appear before their panels.

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, signaled that hearings would commence in September on the controversy that scandalized the Justice Department and led to the resignation of a longtime presidential confidant, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

"We look forward to the White House complying with this ruling and to scheduling future hearings with Ms. Miers and other witnesses who have relied on such claims," Conyers said in a statement. "We hope that the defendants will accept this decision and expect that we will receive relevant documents and call Ms. Miers to testify in September."

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said, "I look forward to working with the White House and the Justice Department to coordinate the long overdue appearances."

___

Associated Press reporters Laurie Kellman and Ben Evans contributed to this story.

WASHINGTON — President Bush's top advisers are not immune from congressional subpoenas, a federal judge ruled Thursday in a long-running dispute between the two political branches. Congressiona...
WASHINGTON — President Bush's top advisers are not immune from congressional subpoenas, a federal judge ruled Thursday in a long-running dispute between the two political branches. Congressiona...
Filed by Rachel Weiner  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
245
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next › Last » (9 pages total)
- Durango I'm a Fan of Durango 144 fans permalink

The only legitimate reaction to the courts decsion:

WELL DUHHH.

Of course they have to appear. Of course they have to give over any documents that they are not claiming privilege for.

AND: All privilege is limited. Even Attorney Client privilege.

And will not apply to violations of the law.

Or political actions.

Ought to be some good fishing going on.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:21 PM on 07/31/2008
- ElkoJohn I'm a Fan of ElkoJohn 16 fans permalink
photo

`
now let's see . . .
the Dems have been in Congress since '06
and now they want to play ''token'' hard-ball
with the Prez . . .
i smell a rat
`

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:15 PM on 07/31/2008
- esquire07 I'm a Fan of esquire07 25 fans permalink

The Deomcrats failed the people when Pelosi took "Impeachement off the Table." Democrats used to be the less of two evils... at this point there is really no difference between the two packs of swine.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:39 PM on 07/31/2008
- dadw5boys I'm a Fan of dadw5boys 281 fans permalink
photo

What good is impeachment without the VOTING MAJORITY???????

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:48 PM on 07/31/2008
- Kahni I'm a Fan of Kahni 8 fans permalink

C'mon john. If you are trying to make some sort of point, here, just spit it out. And what exactly is "token" about going after the rover? Gotta start somewhere.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:46 PM on 07/31/2008
- guajiro I'm a Fan of guajiro 64 fans permalink

" i smell a rat"

Yeah, but who's the rat? Lieberman's already talking about accepting the V.P slot for the Republican Party so his cat's out of the bag. If you're talkin bout Pelosi we already know her colors ever since she stated "impeachment is off the table". Why the cloak and dagger?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:52 PM on 07/31/2008
- RTIII I'm a Fan of RTIII 87 fans permalink

Nancy The Zero - right you are.
.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:53 PM on 08/02/2008
- thromulese I'm a Fan of thromulese 21 fans permalink
photo

They will send out more subpoenas

The subpoenas will be ignored

They will be called in contempt of congress

It will also be ignored

Nothing will change

The dems will write a letter

The letter will also be ignored

There will be no consequences

The rule of law does NOT apply to fascist republiCONs.

The spineless democrats do NOT apply the rule of law.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:52 PM on 07/31/2008
- abouttime I'm a Fan of abouttime 22 fans permalink

Re: "Had Bush prevailed, it would have dramatically weakened congressional authority in oversight investigat­ions."
He may have.

By not complying with the law Bush is:
1.Using courts to delay disputes of executive privilege until he is out of office.
2. Using judicial activism to change the Peoples Constitution in favor of the "unitary executive" which is essentially a "dictators­hip."

When the Federal Judge ruled that "there's no legal basis for Bush's argument" he basically said that Meirs and Bolton must "appear" before the committee. He said that If they "refuse to testify," they "must do it in person."

Bolton amd Miers will go to the hearing, (date yet determined) swear under oath and "refuse to testify." Then the federal judge will make another ruling (with no teeth) and Bush will appeal at which time another delay, and on and on... Until the Supreme Court rules which could take months, or more than likely, years.

IF the Supreme Court upholds the long established checks and balances Bush is trying to destroy, then the delay wil have worked - Bush is out of office. If the Supreme Court rules for the unitary executive, then this "judicial activism" will have effectively overthrown the Constitution of the United States and a coup will have taken place.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:41 PM on 07/31/2008
- TXfemmom I'm a Fan of TXfemmom 195 fans permalink

At this point, legal proceedings could take a good while, and any criminal charges would occur long after Bush has left office, meaning no pardons.

This Congress is actually aiders and enablers for this administration, and Pelosi and Reid both need to be replaced after the election. Neither have been effective or proactive, and they should both go, go, go.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:19 PM on 07/31/2008
- Gatormouth I'm a Fan of Gatormouth 22 fans permalink
photo

Now if Current Attorney General Michael Mukasey still acts to impede Congress there is even less of an excuse. Either his impeachment or performance should be immediate.

"...withou­t a miracle change of actions and attitude by the AG, Mr. Mukasey will be leaving his office after the November elections in total disgrace and without any kind of a reputation for legal integrity.­"

"FOR A SUPPOSED; "NATION OF LAWS",
BUSH'S JUSTICE DEPARTMENT IS A BIG JOKE"
American Chronicle, Gary Ater, July 30, 2008

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/69971

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:17 PM on 07/31/2008
- WasteNJ I'm a Fan of WasteNJ 28 fans permalink
photo

Congress is only running the clock out on this, they aren't going to do anything besides talk. Rove et. all should already be locked up in the jail under Congress, congress has the power after a contempt ruling. They are spineless.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:15 PM on 07/31/2008

whether this actually gets enforced or not, it's still an important legal precedent to have on the books. i'm actually surprised the judge didn't rule for BushCo. they always seem to get their way otherwise.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:14 PM on 07/31/2008
- JoeBlough I'm a Fan of JoeBlough 60 fans permalink
photo

Nothing will be done about it. Just move along.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:04 PM on 07/31/2008
photo

It will be years and dependent on who is on the Supreme Court if anything ever happens.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:44 PM on 07/31/2008
photo

IT will be done in September.

It's election season---things will happen.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:43 PM on 07/31/2008
photo

In a democracy, the law is the Constitution that governs, not any one person who choses to be "above the law." If you want to live in a kingdom, a dictatorship, or under the rule of a military junta, by all means feel free to do so.There are plenty to go around. The Bush administration wants it both ways. They want to make the laws and hold other people accountable, but not be held to the laws under which they were elected and swore to uphold.

Now if GWB and Co. wish to stage a coup and take over the ruling of the people directly, they can try. But then they would have to declare themselves the law of the land in public. Now they just sneak around and use weasel words to cover their tracks. Unitary Executive Branch. Dictatorship. Tyranny. They are all the same.Un-Am­erican.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:51 PM on 07/31/2008

All will be pardoned.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:49 PM on 07/31/2008

Not a chance. They can not be pardoned before they are convicted. They won't be convicted before boosh leaves office.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:58 PM on 07/31/2008
- esquire07 I'm a Fan of esquire07 25 fans permalink

Yes they can... Nixon was pardoned before he was convicted.

BushCo. Criminals will all walk.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:40 PM on 07/31/2008
- cardtosser I'm a Fan of cardtosser 6 fans permalink
photo

To the best of my knowledge, you can pardon a crime but you cannot keep someone from being subject to a subpoena. If fact, people are routinely allowed to testify at hearings with immunity from prosecution, even in low profile cases.

I think it is a given that Rove will never serve any time in prison, but he surely can be compelled to testify before Congress.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:21 PM on 07/31/2008
- jennbeez I'm a Fan of jennbeez 12 fans permalink
photo

You know, I believe you are right. Blanket pardons for all the war criminals for any crimes that have been or may have been committed during the Bush administration:

http://www.slate.com/id/2195689/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:57 PM on 07/31/2008
- PuffDragon I'm a Fan of PuffDragon 9 fans permalink

. . . and their legal fees will be paid for by Exxon-Mobil.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:44 PM on 07/31/2008

. . . and all will be pardoned.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:53 PM on 07/31/2008
- plainsman I'm a Fan of plainsman 16 fans permalink
photo

I don't recall. I don't recall. I don't recall. I don't recall. I don't recall. I don't recall.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:42 PM on 07/31/2008

You will receive an email shortly, please choose a position in the Justice Department and a salary range. Your next thoughts will be sent via courier.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:59 PM on 07/31/2008

You have to find irony in the ruling. Pelosi will be too cowardly to enforce it, yet when the Dems get in next year, the Republicans will use it to its fullest extent. Look at the bj the taxpayers spent $30 million investigating.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:25 PM on 07/31/2008
- dadw5boys I'm a Fan of dadw5boys 281 fans permalink
photo

Taxpaerr spent????

No non you mean Republicxans spent!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:24 PM on 07/31/2008

Where do you think the Republicans got the money????? Out of their own pockets????? ha ha ha, yeah, okay.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:29 PM on 07/31/2008
- JackND I'm a Fan of JackND 28 fans permalink

Pelosi is hardly cowardly..­.but she's extremely calculating.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:40 PM on 07/31/2008
- Indubio I'm a Fan of Indubio 25 fans permalink

Democrats will control both houses after November so there won't be any repeat of the Clinton era because the minority party must petition the majority party to approve any hearings, GOP can hold "investigations" as Conyers did after Ohio but they are essentially meaningless. In 2004 for example, Conyers attempted several times to open hearings on the Ohio elections and was rebuked. So I doubt there need be any fears of GOP sponsored hearing after November.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:42 PM on 07/31/2008
- BobSF94117 I'm a Fan of BobSF94117 11 fans permalink

You're absolutely correct! The president's Super Powers only apply when the president is a member of the GOP. John Yoo said so!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:42 PM on 07/31/2008
- lisakaz2 I'm a Fan of lisakaz2 84 fans permalink
photo

She does appear cowardly imo too. The whole "off the table" thing enabled Buuu$hco to continue and made us all less safe. Those proposed anti-birth control rules can be lain directly at her door. Congress has had its powers reaffirmed in several cases but still does not act. Unbelievable. What is their problem!?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:50 PM on 07/31/2008

The case for her being a coward could be made, the case for exceedingly competent colusion seems stronger!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:06 PM on 07/31/2008
- syllepsis I'm a Fan of syllepsis 24 fans permalink

She is trying to benefit her party, not the people she is mandated to serve.
Cowardly, calculating, and not doing her job.
And if in fact she is pursuing a strategy, it is one that is to the detriment of the American people.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:09 PM on 07/31/2008

FTA: "In his ruling, U.S. District Judge John Bates said there's no legal basis for Bush's argument and that his former legal counsel, Harriet Miers, must appear before Congress..­."

Oh really, she must appear... or what? Congress shakes a finger at her and laments about how naughty she's being? This judge's decree means nothing unless it involves sending US Marshalls to find Meyers and all the others who are claiming "executive privilege", then letting them know that they can be escorted either to the Hill to testify as ordered, or to jail.

Of course going to jail would mean nothing to these people because they would be out in a matter of minutes and the media campaign would focus on the idea that democrats are just playing politics & trying to make the Bush administration look bad.

These people will never be procecuted for their crimes, that's just not how its done in the world of power politics. Everyone is guilty of everything, yet no one is held responsible for anything.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:22 PM on 07/31/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next › Last » (9 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect