Locked-Down DC Circuit Keeps Apparent Mueller Grand Jury Fight Under Wraps
In a remarkable step, the fifth floor of the courthouse was closed to the public in an effort to keep the proceedings secret.
December 14, 2018 at 03:26 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
An entire floor at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was locked down Friday as judges heard arguments in a sealed case involving a grand jury subpoena that's believed to be linked to the special counsel's investigation.
The lockdown came as a three-judge panel considers a case arising out of a grand jury subpoena fight, suspected to be linked to Robert Mueller's special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Details about the case—particularly the identity of the party hoping to suppress the subpoena—have been held under wraps.
Judges Thomas Griffith, David Tatel and Stephen Williams heard two other lawsuits Friday morning: one suit addressing the president's financial disclosure reporting requirements and another revolving around individuals who've participated in an annual diversity visa lottery. Once those arguments drew to a close an hour later, court security officers announced a recess and promptly ushered the audience out. Only law clerks were permitted to stay.
Officers cleared not only the room, but the entire fifth floor, where Friday's proceedings were held. For over an hour, a U.S. marshal declined to let reporters pass through the hall, and the court gave no indication as to how long the hearing would last.
The lockdown sent reporters scattering about the courthouse, searching for clues about the case. Sightings of any special counsel prosecutors or other attorneys remained elusive.
Only public reporting and court docket entries have offered clues about the dispute. The subpoena appears to have first been issued to the elusive party in August, with a district judge in D.C. ruling on the matter shortly after. The case then arrived at the appeals court, before it was sent back to the district court, and appealed a second time to the D.C. Circuit.
In the first attempt to bring the challenge to the appeals court, a panel dismissed the case. When the witness sought to have the full bench reconsider the decision, the sole Trump-appointed judge on the court—Greg Katsas, a former Trump White House deputy counsel—appeared to recuse himself. The cloak-and-dagger case was first brought to the public's attention through an October story published by Politico.
The case appears to mirror a separate dispute over a grand jury subpoena involving Andrew Miller, an ex-aide to Trump confidant Roger Stone. In that case, Miller is challenging the legitimacy of the special counsel's appointment in his bid to fend off a subpoena. A separate D.C. Circuit panel heard arguments in November, but hasn't yet ruled.
One floor down Friday, a federal district judge was hearing arguments in a challenge to Matt Whitaker's appointment as acting attorney general. During the more than 90-minute hearing, Judge Randolph Moss appeared skeptical of whether Whitaker's challenger, Las Vegas resident Barry Michaels, has standing to bring the case. But Moss also pressed Justice Department attorney Hashim Mooppan on Whitaker's appointment, saying it was “concerning” to have an official lead the DOJ without being Senate-confirmed.
When asked whether Whitaker had recused himself from the numerous challenges to his appointment, Mooppan demurred, responding that the Justice Department didn't have to make a “representation about whether the acting attorney general is personally involved.”
Mooppan added that Michaels needs to have standing before going on a “fishing expedition” into the happenings at the Justice Department. Toward the end of the hearing, Michaels' attorney, Tom Goldstein, said he was withdrawing his emergency motion for a preliminary injunction to give Moss time to fully consider Whitaker's appointment without deadline pressure.
Moss said he would rule soon but did not give a specific timetable.
Read more:
Cohen's 'Blind Loyalty' Leads to 3-Year Prison Term
4 Things to Know About William Barr, Trump's Pick to Replace Jeff Sessions
In Wake of Kavanaugh Hearings, California Chief Justice Drops Republican Party Affiliation
Judges Push Back at Trump's Anti-Judiciary Tweets
9th Circuit Warns Judges About Setting Nationwide Injunctions
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAn ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Travis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How ‘Bilateral Tapping’ Can Help with Stress and Anxiety
- 2How Law Firms Can Make Business Services a Performance Champion
- 3'Digital Mindset': Hogan Lovells' New Global Managing Partner for Digitalization
- 4Silk Road Founder Ross Ulbricht Has New York Sentence Pardoned by Trump
- 5Settlement Allows Spouses of U.S. Citizens to Reopen Removal Proceedings
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250