Judge postpones ruling on Comey challenge to GOP subpoena

The Hill ^ | 11/30/18 | Olivia Beavers and Morgan Chalfant

[yesthatjallen]

A district court judge on Friday postponed issuing a ruling on former FBI Director James Comey’s effort to quash a GOP-issued subpoena.

Judge Trevor McFadden gave the two sides the weekend to provide additional information about their arguments. The court will reconvene Monday at 10 a.m. for a ruling.

Comey on Thursday sought to quash the subpoena for closed-door testimony, arguing that House Republicans would seek to “peddle a distorted, partisan political narrative about the Clinton and Russia investigations through selective leaks” if he was not interviewed in public.

Comey’s attorneys Vincent Cohen and David Kelley argued in the motion that the subpoena “exceeds a proper legislative purpose, is issued in violation of House rules, and unduly prejudices and harasses the witness.”

“They just want to zero in and gang up,” Kelley told the judge on Friday.

Comey, who did not appear in court, says he welcomes the opportunity to testify publicly, which he says would remove the threat of selective leaking.

Comey's legal team separately filed a motion to stay his closed-door testimony until after the case could be argued and the judge could issue a ruling on it.

Thomas Hungar, the general counsel for the House of Representatives, challenged the legitimacy of Comey’s legal efforts, arguing that it would be unprecedented for the courts to interfere with their efforts to subpoena witnesses.

Hungar says the federal government has “absolute” sovereign immunity in a civil suit and that even a court-issued stay would be viewed as interfering in congressional proceedings.

In response, Kelley quipped to the judge: “Here’s your opportunity to make some law.”

Hungar also appeared to mock Comey’s argument about distorting the nature of his testimony. He said that the closed-door depositions are not classified so lawmakers can appropriately discuss his testimony afterward and that the First Amendment protects these GOP lawmakers who may mutter remarks that Comey doesn't like.

The subpoena initially requested for Comey to appear on Monday — but the House committees have since said they now want to have him interviewed on Tuesday. The change, Kelley argued, warrants a new subpoena.

Critics view the GOP-led probe as part of a broader push to discredit special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into potential collusion between President Trump’s campaign and Moscow.

Comey has become an outspoken critic of Trump since the president abruptly fired him in May 2017, an event that ultimately triggered the appointment of Mueller as special counsel. Mueller is said to be probing the circumstances surrounding Comey’s removal in an effort to determine whether Trump obstructed justice.

House Republicans have been jockeying for Comey’s testimony for months. In October, Comey declined a nonbinding request from Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee and the Oversight and Government Reform Committee for his testimony, which ultimately led Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) to issue the subpoena last week.

Goodlatte has also subpoenaed former Attorney General Loretta Lynch to submit to a closed-door interview on Dec. 4.

[Lurkinanloomin]

“Here’s your opportunity to make some law.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

He won’t if he’s a Trump judge.

If he’s a Roberts type he will.

[Lurkinanloomin]

The DOJ, The FBI, The CIA, and the headquarters is the State Department.

[truthkeeper]

In response, Kelley quipped to the judge: “Here’s your opportunity to make some law.”

So much for subtlety.

[Robert DeLong]

Yep. One more month, and the RINO's are trying to delay anything getting done. Ryan and his statement about the border wall was just as disingenuous as has been his time in office.

But Flake & Corker are even worse. They are outright destructive of the party.

[PubliusMM]

So, Comey sued base on what he believes the Congressional Committee might do?
Why is this even given a hearing?
Ridiculous.

[frog in a pot]

The judge should slap this crap down Monday at 9 am.

Exactly. This is not some backwoods controversy, it is being watched across the nation by a largely astute audience. No matter what the judge's political inclinations, he can't appreciate counsel publicly urging him to legislate from the bench.

[shanover]

The Founders would are disgraced.

[Lurker]

“No matter what the judge’s political inclinations, he can’t appreciate counsel publicly urging him to legislate from the bench.”

Exactly. He should dismiss this case with prejudice and sanction the Attorney involved. Comey should be ordered to pay all costs associated. A Contempt citation is well within the purview of the Judge as a former Director of the FBI should know better.

L

[Revel]

If the judge was following the law then he would rule that he has no standing to even rule on the case.

[trebb]

Comey on Thursday sought to quash the subpoena for closed-door testimony, arguing that House Republicans would seek to “peddle a distorted, partisan political narrative about the Clinton and Russia investigations through selective leaks” if he was not interviewed in public.

IOW - he likes to start witch hunts but doesn't want to take a chance of being caught in one...because he knows they are dishonest....ironic.

[kvanbrunt2]

I bought my first car, a 1965 dodge dart, from Trevor’s grandfather Willie.

[kvanbrunt2]

he is a trump appointee. and related on my father side. but i do not vouch for his understanding of the constitution.

[kvanbrunt2]

he was appointed by Trump. he worked on the campaign. His father and my father are cousins somewhere between the Funston’s and Laird’s. I have no idea if he can even spell “constitution”