General Discussion

edhopper

(33,604 posts) Sun Oct 20, 2019, 12:32 PM Oct 2019

When the Courts rule in favor of the Congressional subpeonas

And the Trump cronies still fail to comply, what then?

Seriously, without the DOJ or any Federal agency to support them, what action can they take?

I think failing to press the matter is a mistake, but I also don't know how they get the documents and testimony they need.

15 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

When the Courts rule in favor of the Congressional subpeonas (Original Post) edhopper Oct 2019 OP

I doubt if DOJ will fail to comply, its not like they have a choice once the court makes a ruling beachbumbob Oct 2019 #1

The court is in a much better position to enforce it's orders than Congress is StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #3

this is why I don;t see a compliance failure once the court rules, beachbumbob Oct 2019 #5

The court can order them jailed for contempt of court StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #2

Which I believe is much better, politically, than using inherent contempt. CaptainTruth Oct 2019 #8

You get it! StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #9

The question is, when will the courts rule on the issue of answering subpoenas? After the election? shockey80 Oct 2019 #4

It won't take that long StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #10

"They are taking way too long" - Are there civil contempt cases dragging in the courts? CaptainTruth Oct 2019 #12

Amy Klobuchar said stiff fines are the way to go vlyons Oct 2019 #6

Can't the Speaker/House suspend their pay? 2naSalit Oct 2019 #7

No. StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #11

Thanks. 2naSalit Oct 2019 #13

Remember, Susan McDougall Sogo Oct 2019 #14

She refused to comply with a subpoena to testify to the grand jury. StarfishSaver Oct 2019 #15

beachbumbob

(9,263 posts)

1. I doubt if DOJ will fail to comply, its not like they have a choice once the court makes a ruling

Reply to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Oct 20, 2019, 12:34 PM

Oct 2019

on the validity of a congressional subpoena besides, Pelosi can exercise the power she has under house rules with the Sgt of Arms

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)

3. The court is in a much better position to enforce it's orders than Congress is

Reply to beachbumbob (Reply #1)

Sun Oct 20, 2019, 12:37 PM

Oct 2019

And a federal judge will not look kindly on anyone disobeying his or her direct order. They'll send the marshals for them post haste.

beachbumbob

(9,263 posts)

5. this is why I don;t see a compliance failure once the court rules,

Reply to StarfishSaver (Reply #3)

Sun Oct 20, 2019, 12:43 PM

Oct 2019

the long game will be to stretch it out as long as possible in courts. But the precedent is 100% clear so this will never get to the SC level at all

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)

2. The court can order them jailed for contempt of court

Reply to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Oct 20, 2019, 12:35 PM

Oct 2019

And the U.S. Marshals will make that happen.

That has much more teeth than any enforcement Congress can undertake.

CaptainTruth

(6,599 posts)

8. Which I believe is much better, politically, than using inherent contempt.

Reply to StarfishSaver (Reply #2)

Sun Oct 20, 2019, 01:45 PM

Oct 2019

Civil contempt (enforcing subpoenas via the courts) stages the conflict as being between the Tump admin & the courts, between Trump & the rule of law. That's the proper frame for the conflict because it's what is actually happening.

Inherent contempt stages the conflict as being between the Trump admin & Democrats, which makes it much easier for Republicans to dismiss & spin as a partisan attack. "Democrats" would be locking people up as opposed to "the courts are locking people up for refusing to comply with the law," just like courts would do for any other person who broke the law, even Trump supporters.

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)

9. You get it!

Reply to CaptainTruth (Reply #8)

Sun Oct 20, 2019, 01:50 PM

Oct 2019

And a refusal to obey a court order is a much stronger count for impeachment than refusing to obey a Congressional subpoena.

shockey80

(4,379 posts)

4. The question is, when will the courts rule on the issue of answering subpoenas? After the election?

Reply to edhopper (Original post)

Sun Oct 20, 2019, 12:40 PM

Oct 2019

They are taking way too long and it is a big problem that must be corrected in the future. This is a matter of national security, they should move with much more urgency.

The courts can move quickly when they want. Remember how fast they moved after the 2000 election?

StarfishSaver

(18,486 posts)

10. It won't take that long

Reply to shockey80 (Reply #4)

Sun Oct 20, 2019, 01:54 PM

Oct 2019

And the courts are moving very quickly, much faster than normal. Bush v. Gore was a different kind of case and while these subpoena cases are time-sensitive, it's a matter of degrees and these aren't nearly as urgent at this point as the recount case was.

CaptainTruth

(6,599 posts)

12. "They are taking way too long" - Are there civil contempt cases dragging in the courts?

Reply to shockey80 (Reply #4)

Sun Oct 20, 2019, 01:58 PM

Oct 2019

I know there were criminal contempt referrals, which Barr ignored as expected. The House also voted to hold Barr in civil contempt, but I wasn't aware that's gone to court yet. Of course if there's no case, there's no ruling.

Let me know if there are active civil contempt cases in court, I try to keep up but there's just so much Trump crap every day ... I can't keep up with it all. Thanks.