A decision based on the speech and debate clause - which has been getting lots of mileage recently.
Recall that the speech and debate clause protects the legislature from the judiciary. The judge did not rule on the merits - meaning the substantive question at hand - but whether the courts can even rule on it. He argued that they cannot.
- Click here for the article.
A federal judge dismissed former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows' lawsuit on Monday night that sought to nullify two subpoenas from the House select committee investigating the U.S. Capitol riot.
The big picture: Meadows is believed to have information on former President Trump's role in efforts to stop the certification of President Biden's election win. He initially cooperated with the panel before backing out. He cited in his lawsuit against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and all nine members of the Jan. 6 select panel Trump's claims of executive privilege.
However, Nichols wrote in the ruling in the District of Colombia, which Meadows could appeal: "The record makes clear that the challenged subpoenas are protected legislative acts."
What they're saying: "We will review the decision carefully and consider any further steps that may be appropriate," Meadows' attorney George Terwilliger told Politico.
What we're watching: Republicans are expected to disband the Jan. 6 panel if they gain control of the House in next week's midterm elections.Several key GOP members have threatened to subpoena records of the Jan. 6 committee if Republicans do retake the majority.
- Meadows v Pelosi.
- Judge Carl Nichols.
- Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr.
