Federal judge rules against Miers, White House on subpoenas

[Wretched Excess]

this will be appealed, of course.  ironically, this judge was appointed by george w. bush.

Federal judge rules against Miers, White House on subpoenas

A federal judge ruled Thursday that top advisers to President Bush are not immune from congressional subpoenas, striking a blow to former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, current White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and other current and former administration officials who have claimed executive privilege in refusing to testify before Congress.

The House Judiciary Committee wanted to question Miers about the firing of nine former U.S. attorneys and review White House paperwork related to their dismissal. The Bush administration argued that the documents and the former aide were protected under separation of powers and refused to allow Miers or Bolten to respond to the subpoenas. Bolten, as White House chief of staff, was subpoenaed by the panel for documents.
.
.
.
Bates also rejected the White House's argument of absolute immunity in refusing to turn over a detailed list, known as a"privilege log," of documents it withheld from the commttee. Bates, instead, said that the White House must provide the committee with more information before making any decision.

The decision is a vindication for House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) and other Democrats who supported the precedent-setting civil lawsuit. Some Democrats, backed by the GOP leadership, had opposed the lawsuit on the grounds that if the House lost, it would give more power to the executive branch at Congress' expense.

"Today’s landmark ruling is a ringing reaffirmation of the fundamental principle of checks and balances and the basic American idea that no person is above the law," Conyers said in a statement. "Judge Bates’ decision makes clear that the Congress had the right to subpoena Harriet Miers to learn of her role in the U.S. attorney firings, that her claim to be immune from subpoena was invalid and that the committee was entitled to challenge that claim in court."

Link

[Lord Undies]

The decision is meaningless, but the press won't let that fact get in the way. 

[Chris_]

That pesky "Separation of Powers" thing in the Constitution........the democrats think that since they got away with it in Nixon's case, that it will go on forever.  I doubt if the current SCOTUS will uphold congressional subpoena powers involving members of the executive branch, and I figure the Dem's will back off well before the case gets to that level, as they live in mortal fear of losing the power to threaten......

doc

[Lord Undies]

That pesky "Separation of Powers" thing in the Constitution........the democrats think that since they got away with it in Nixon's case, that it will go on forever.  I doubt if the current SCOTUS will uphold congressional subpoena powers involving members of the executive branch, and I figure the Dem's will back off well before the case gets to that level, as they live in mortal fear of losing the power to threaten......

doc

You said a mouthful!  Add to this the judicial branch has no more power over the executive branch than the legislative branch has over the judicial branch or the executive branch.  In the end, executive privilege is pretty much what the President says it is. 

Why is it assumed congress has no one looking over them?

[Jim]

Why is it assumed congress has no one looking over them?

because the people have been failing that test regularly every two years.

[Chris_]

Add to this the judicial branch has no more power over the executive branch than the legislative branch has over the judicial branch or the executive branch.  In the end, executive privilege is pretty much what the President says it is. 

Absolutely!    I'm reminded of a story , and the names and details escape me at the moment......which happened, perhaps in the late 19th century.....where a president and the Supreme Court got into a pissing contest over an issue, and the court held aganst the administration.   When asked by a newspaper reporter about the court's decision against him, the president calmly replied........"fine, let's see if they can enforce it".........

doc

[Chris_]

Add to this the judicial branch has no more power over the executive branch than the legislative branch has over the judicial branch or the executive branch.  In the end, executive privilege is pretty much what the President says it is. 

Absolutely!    I'm reminded of a story , and the names and details escape me at the moment......which happened, perhaps in the late 19th century.....where a president and the Supreme Court got into a pissing contest over an issue, and the court held aganst the administration.   When asked by a newspaper reporter about the court's decision against him, the president calmly replied........"fine, let's see if they can enforce it".........

doc

IIRC, that was Ol' Hickory - Andrew Jackson for those out there who're victims of a public education.

[Airwolf]

I can't wait to see how they'll try and make it stick . In the meantime by the time it gets to an appeal the Dems will look even more desperate or stupid or both.

[MrsSmith]

That pesky "Separation of Powers" thing in the Constitution........the democrats think that since they got away with it in Nixon's case, that it will go on forever.  I doubt if the current SCOTUS will uphold congressional subpoena powers involving members of the executive branch, and I figure the Dem's will back off well before the case gets to that level, as they live in mortal fear of losing the power to threaten......

doc

You said a mouthful!  Add to this the judicial branch has no more power over the executive branch than the legislative branch has over the judicial branch or the executive branch.  In the end, executive privilege is pretty much what the President says it is. 

Why is it assumed congress has no one looking over them?

Our libs are used to having the court system rule the country and force their agenda on us all.  It's quite foreign to them to think that anyone, even the President, could possibly have equal powers in their adored oligarchy.