House Dems can view Mueller records
WASHINGTON — House Democrats won access to confidential records from special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation, a victory over President Donald Trump’s efforts to deny them information.
“It is the district court, not the Executive or the Department, that controls access to the grand jury materials at issue here,” U.S. Circuit Judge Judith Wilson Rogers in Washington wrote for the majority. The panel delayed its ruling for seven days to give the Trump administration an opportunity to seek a so-called en banc rehearing before a larger panel of appeals court judges.
The outcome is in contrast to the same appeals court’s Feb. 28 ruling, which sided with the administration in saying the judiciary could not decide a dispute between the executive and legislative branches. In that 2-1 decision, the court dismissed a congressional lawsuit seeking the testimony of former White House counsel Don McGahn.
House Democrats have requested an en banc rehearing of the McGahn ruling, which has since been cited by the Trump administration in seeking the dismissal of other congressional cases, including one seeking his tax returns and other financial information.
A message seeking comment from the Justice Department on Tuesday’s ruling wasn’t immediately returned.
The federal appeals court in Washington ruled Tuesday that impeachment proceedings met the legal standard for access to sealed grand jury record. In a 2-1 decision, the court rejected the Justice Department’s argument that the court lacked authority over the case.
Rogers, who was named to the court by President Bill Clinton, was joined in Tuesday’s ruling by U.S. Circuit Judge Thomas Griffith, a George W. Bush appointee. Trump appointee Neomi Rao dissented, citing the McGahn ruling.
Griffith had also sided with the majority in the McGahn ruling, in which Rogers dissented. That decision “all but assures future presidential stonewalling of Congress,” Rogers wrote at the time.
Tuesday’s majority said House Democrats’ quest for grand jury records was different from their subpoena for McGahn’s testimony, since the records had already been obtained as part of the judicial process.
Grand jury records typically remain sealed to protect the identity of those who are investigated but not charged, as well as details of ongoing investigations.