The agreement on McGahn’s testimony means we are likely to be left with more questions than answers. First, it is not clear the parameters of this agreement will shed significant light on the actions that Trump took that are subject to the Mueller report.
The report detailed 10 instances of potential obstruction of justice but did not come to a conclusion as to whether Trump actually committed that crime. McGahn’s testimony has long been seen as the key to determining whether the former president’s actions could lead to federal criminal charges.
The White House also claimed McGahn possessed “ absolute immunity ” from the congressional subpoena. Then-White House counsel Pat Cipollone argued in a letter that the records covered by the subpoena implicated “Executive Branch confidentiality interests and executive privilege.”.
McGahn’s imbroglio began when Democrats who control the House Judiciary Committee sought his testimony in spring 2019 as they investigated elements of the Russia probe by former special counsel Robert Mueller. After the White House repeatedly claimed McGhan was immune, the committee filed suit.
They say interviewing McGahn would help them craft policy on election security, campaign finance, use of electronic data, and other conduct described in the Mueller Report. The Justice Department has consistently said courts must back off from territory strictly reserved for the White House and Congress.
In another closely watched case, House Democrats sought testimony from Charles Kupperman, the president’s former deputy national security adviser, in the impeachment inquiry. Kupperman asked a court to declare whether he had immunity, but a judge dismissed his case as moot in December after Democrats withdrew their subpoena.
But Trump’s Justice Department has claimed to possess an exceptionally broad shield, saying top aides like McGahn are “absolutely immune from compelled congressional testimony.”. Justice Department lawyers representing McGahn argued in a Jan. 3 hearing that courts should stay out of the current “political food fight.”.
Justice Department spokesperson Brianna Herlihy praised the Friday ruling, saying in a statement that it shows Congress "cannot invoke the power of the courts in its political disputes with the Executive Branch.
But many believe the McGahn case is destined for the Supreme Court. McGahn had departed the White House in October 2018, well before Trump’s conversations with Ukraine that led to the impeachment inquiry, but as the case rolled ahead, House Democrats insisted his knowledge was relevant to removing the president from office as well.
The Trump White House and the Justice Department have invoked the absolute immunity argument to defy subpoenas and requests for testimony before — including from White House senior counselor Kellyanne Conway, former senior adviser Hope Hicks, and former presidential aides Rick Dearborn and Rob Porter.
The Trump White House blocked McGahn from complying with Democrats' subpoena, arguing he was "absolutely immune" from testifying. The Judiciary Committee went to court in August 2019 to enforce the subpoena, but a three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit last year ordered the case to be tossed out on technical grounds and said it didn't have ...
Once McGahn's interview with the Judiciary Committee is complete, the Justice Department and House Democrats agreed to ask the D.C. Circuit to dismiss their case and request the court to toss out the earlier opinion from the three-judge panel in favor of McGahn.
The interview will be limited to information from McGahn, who worked in the Trump White House, in the publicly available parts of special counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election. The former White House counsel voluntarily met with Mueller's investigators about his interactions with former President ...
Drew Angerer / Getty. The agreement, filed with the D.C. Circuit, notes that McGahn's communications with other executive branch officials not disclosed in the public portions of Mueller's report are outside the scope of his interview with the Judiciary Committee.
Washington — Former White House counsel Don McGahn is expected to answer questions from the House Judiciary Committee behind closed doors "as soon as possible" after Democrats on the panel and the Justice Department reached an agreement this week in a long-running dispute over enforcement of a subpoena for his testimony.
However, executive privilege cannot be asserted with regard to the information McGahn provided to Mueller and attributed to him in the public report. The Justice Department and House Democrats notified the court in a filing Tuesday that the two sides reached an agreement and noted that "former President Trump, who is not a party to this case, ...