Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Home Front: Politix

Stay in Your Lane

2023-04-12

[Yahoo] Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg filed a lawsuit Tuesday against Republican House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, asking a court to block elements of the congressional inquiry into his case against former President Donald Trump.

Calling it an "unprecedently brazen and unconstitutional attack" of an ongoing investigation, Bragg said in the suit that allowing Jordan's demands, including subpoenaing former Assistant DA Mark Pomerantz, would cause "imminent irreparable harm if the secret and privileged material is compelled to be disclosed."

Bragg's suit asked the court to block Jordan's subpoena of Pomerantz. Jordan, R-Ohio, wants Pomerantz to sit for a deposition as part of the Judiciary panel's investigation into the indictment of Trump. The former president pleaded not guilty last week to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records related to his role in hush money payments made toward the end of his 2016 presidential campaign.

"Chairman Jordan’s subpoena is an unconstitutional attempt to undermine an ongoing New York felony criminal prosecution and investigation," Bragg said in a statement Tuesday. "As our complaint details, this is an unprecedented, illegitimate interference by Congress that lacks any legal merit and defies basic principles of federalism."

A federal judge in New York has scheduled an April 19 hearing for Bragg’s lawsuit.

Bragg is also suing Pomerantz "to protect the District Attorney’s Office’s interests and privileges and in light of the District Attorney’s Office’s instruction to Mr. Pomerantz not to provide any information or materials relating to his work in the District Attorney’s Office in response to the subpoena."

In response, Jordan tweeted that the lawsuit attempts to block congressional oversight.

"First, they indict a president for no crime," he wrote. "Then, they sue to block congressional oversight when we ask questions about the federal funds they say they used to do it."

He who pays the piper calls the tune. Which is why a few schools are giving up federal funds.

Pomerantz didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

The lawsuit said that beginning in March, Jordan launched a "transparent campaign to intimidate and attack" Bragg, "making demands for confidential documents and testimony from the District Attorney himself as well as his current and former employees and officials."

Bragg's office argued that "basic principles of federalism and common sense" as well as Supreme Court precedent forbid Congress from demanding "highly sensitive and confidential local prosecutorial information."

Congress doesn't have any power to supervise state criminal prosecutions or power to serve subpoenas "for the personal aggrandizement of the investigators or to punish those investigated," the lawsuit said.

Jordan's subpoena of Pomerantz last week "is no less of an affront to state sovereignty than subpoenaing the District Attorney himself," it continued.
Much more at the link

Posted by:Deacon Blues

#8 Must assume if a man in a public position like Bragg doesn't want people to know what he's doing then he's up to no good.

Posted by: Abu Uluque 2023-04-12 12:14

#7 NN2N1 that was my thought as well.

Posted by: Deacon Blues 2023-04-12 09:50

#6 "Isn't the Prosecution required to share ALL data, collection processes & Evidence with the Defendants legal team?"

Required? Yes.
Do they? LOL (see that recent verdict out of Texas)

Posted by: DooDahMan 2023-04-12 07:43

#5 Prosecutors violate Brady Motions whenever they feel like it. Always have.

Posted by: Lowspark 2023-04-12 07:34

#4 The left has a very selective love affair with "sovereignty."

Posted by: M. Murcek 2023-04-12 07:25

#3 Good catch NN.

Posted by: 49 Pan 2023-04-12 07:15

#2 "imminent irreparable harm if the secret and privileged material is compelled to be disclosed."

Question :
Isn't the Prosecution required to share ALL data, collection processes & Evidence with the Defendants legal team?

So has the DA just admitted some hidden evidence, data, political motives, and possible illegally collected items?

Posted by: NN2N1 2023-04-12 06:33

#1 NYC 1/2023 1/2022
Murder 30 31
Rape 130 132
Robbery 1332 1265
Fel. Assault 2056 1790

Posted by: Clem Pholuque8480 2023-04-12 03:08

00:00