House Minorities Hold Oversight Powers, D.C. Circuit Says

WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 11:  The Trump International Hotel located at 1100 Pennsylvania Ave, NW. The building that was the Old Post office and Clock Tower was completed in 1899 and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.  (Photo by Jonathan Newton / The Washington Post)
WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 11: The Trump International Hotel located at 1100 Pennsylvania Ave, NW. The building that was the Old Post office and Clock Tower was completed in 1899 and is listed on the National Register of... WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 11: The Trump International Hotel located at 1100 Pennsylvania Ave, NW. The building that was the Old Post office and Clock Tower was completed in 1899 and is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. (Photo by Jonathan Newton / The Washington Post via Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Lawmakers in House minorities can issue demands for records from the executive branch, a federal appeals panel held Tuesday.

In an 2-1 ruling first noticed by Politico, the D.C. circuit upheld a demand issued by  Democrats on the House Oversight Committee in 2017 for documents relating to President Trump’s downtown D.C. hotel.

The decision — issued by Judge Patricia Millett — goes to an arcane 1920s law which created the seven-member rule. That statute authorizes any seven members of the House Oversight Committee, regardless of party affiliation, to go to any part of the executive branch and demand records.

In 2017, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee did just that, demanding information from the General Services Administration about President Trump’s lease agreement for his D.C. hotel.

GSA eventually rejected the requests, before House Democrats went to court to enforce the demand.

The ruling by Millett, an Obama appointtee, upholds the minority’s limited authority to issue these investigative demands, and comes as Joe Biden prepares to take office next month.

It also illustrates the slow churn that congressional investigations can experience when every step in an investigation must be litigated in the federal judiciary. After securing a majority in the House in 2018, Democrats launched broadsides of subpoenas to executive agencies and various third-party custodians of President Trump’s financial records.

Trump and the GOP chose to litigate those requests that focused on the President’s personal finances; the outcome of those cases remain pending.

Latest Muckraker

Notable Replies

  1. Just in time for the House Qidiots to launch endless fishing trips against President Biden.

    It would have been nice to give the Dem winners of this lawsuit some kind of reward.

  2. More than a day and a corrupt lawless administration late … How in God’s name did this take so long? 4 years of stalling worked. This ruling while nice doesnt address the real issue - Drumpf’s lawlessness.

  3. Justice delayed is justice denied.

  4. Timing is everything…you may wager that Biden will be suitably hamstrung by endless superfluous demands for " stuff"

  5. Avatar for tpmfan tpmfan says:

    And I suppose he can litigate as well, why not?

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

55 more replies

Participants

Avatar for discobot Avatar for becca656 Avatar for drriddle Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for sonsofares Avatar for joelopines Avatar for alyoshakaramazov1 Avatar for karlsgems Avatar for grandpajoe Avatar for topchap Avatar for zlohcuc Avatar for tribalogical Avatar for thunderclapnewman Avatar for tpmfan Avatar for tena Avatar for jonney_5 Avatar for texacali Avatar for castor_troy Avatar for khyber900 Avatar for ekcambridge Avatar for justruss Avatar for occamscoin Avatar for emiliano4 Avatar for Ethics_Gradient

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: