Bragg Sues Jim Jordan To Block GOP Meddling In Trump Case

Manhattan DA asks judge to block House subpoena
NEW YORK, NEW YORK - APRIL 04: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg speaks during a press conference following the arraignment of former U.S. President Donald Trump April 4, 2023 in New York City. Former U.S. Pre... NEW YORK, NEW YORK - APRIL 04: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg speaks during a press conference following the arraignment of former U.S. President Donald Trump April 4, 2023 in New York City. Former U.S. President Donald Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts stemming from hush money payments in 2016. With his indictment, Trump will become the first former U.S. president in history to be charged with a criminal offense. (Photo by Kena Betancur/Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg asked a federal judge on Tuesday to block Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) from interfering in his case against President Trump.

Bragg sued Jordan in a 50-page complaint that seeks to block a series of subpoenas that Jordan and House Republicans had issued to Bragg and to current and former members of his office.

Jordan, head of the House Judiciary Committee and the subordinate House Weaponization Committee, has taken it upon himself to combine cable news theatrics with slavish devotion to Trump, trying to meddle in Bragg’s probe of Trump through a series of increasingly outrageous maneuvers.

These have included various subpoenas to Bragg and to Mark Pomerantz, a former prosecutor in the Manhattan DA’s office who wrote a tell-all about the Trump investigation before resigning. Next week, Jordan will bring the House GOP roadshow to Manhattan, holding a hearing of the Weaponization Committee outside of Bragg’s office which will double as a protest.

Bragg said in the lawsuit, filed in Manhattan federal court, that “rather than allowing the criminal process to proceed in the ordinary course, Chairman Jordan and the Committee are participating in a campaign of intimidation, retaliation, and obstruction.”

“Chairman Jordan and the Committee have, in essence, appointed Congress as a super grand jury that can flex its subpoena power to second guess the judgment of New York citizens and interfere with the state criminal justice process,” the lawsuit reads.

Bragg says that Congress, as the federal legislature, has no oversight authority over his activities as a state prosecutor.

It’s a straightforward claim, and comes after Republicans spent years ignoring attempts at oversight from the House when Democrats were in control under the Trump administration. During that period, Trump administration officials refused to comply at even a bare minimum level with dozens of subpoenas issued by Democrat-controlled panels, a striking break with past practice.

That obstruction led to a Supreme Court decision in the Mazars case, which redefined how courts decide whether congressional subpoenas are legitimate; Bragg cited that decision in his lawsuit against Jordan.

He declared the subpoena issued to Pomerantz “invalid, unenforceable, unconstitutional” in part because it “has no legitimate legislative purpose,” a callback to the argument used by Republicans to halt congressional investigations issued by House Democrats.

Jordan said in a statement that Bragg’s office had received federal dollars, which, he suggested, might allow a lever of congressional oversight.

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

Jordan and the House Weaponization Committee’s focus on Bragg over the past month hasn’t only rubbed legal scholars and state-level Manhattan prosecutors the wrong way.

At least one MAGA pundit suggested on Monday that it’s a way for Jordan to avoid focusing on the much hairier issue of the DOJ and FBI’s ongoing dragnet of January 6 insurrectionists — an issue that lies squarely within congressional jurisdiction, as dubious as it might be to suggest that those investigations are somehow unjust.

Bragg suggested in the lawsuit that Jordan is working on Trump’s behalf, seeking to help the former President as he fights off the New York indictment. It’s an obstructive form of theater, the suit says.

“Mr. Trump is free to avail himself of any and all criminal procedure processes
available to him. Indeed, his motions in his criminal case are due in August. If he wishes to argue that his prosecution is ‘politically motivated,’ he is free to raise that concern to the New York state criminal court,” attorneys for Bragg wrote. “Chairman Jordan is not, however, free to unconstitutionally deploy Congress’s limited subpoena power for raw political retaliation, intimidation, or obstruction.”

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. Gym needs a slap down…

  2. He needs more than that.
    …but it’s a start.

  3. This is the difference between when you pass the bar exam and when you don’t pass the bar exam, those that don’t pass the bar get a lesson on the Constitution.

  4. In this corner: Smart as a whip Bragg.
    And in this corner: Dumb as a rock Jordan.

    Ladies and gentlemen, place your bets.

Continue the discussion at

205 more replies


Avatar for pluckyinky Avatar for mondfledermaus Avatar for rollinnolan Avatar for teenlaqueefa Avatar for sniffit Avatar for chelsea530 Avatar for ralph_vonholst Avatar for civarum Avatar for alyoshakaramazov1 Avatar for leftcoaster Avatar for dave_mb Avatar for thunderclapnewman Avatar for jinnj Avatar for jonney_5 Avatar for kimaanderson Avatar for karlwlewis Avatar for jm917 Avatar for bcgister Avatar for occamscoin Avatar for yellowbeard Avatar for kovie Avatar for iafixture Avatar for timbomov Avatar for NewMexMom

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