DOJ Fights Claims Mueller's Probe Is Out of Control
A D.C. Circuit panel heard arguments challenging the special counsel's appointment, brought by Andrew Miller, a former aide to Trump confidant Roger Stone.
November 08, 2018 at 03:09 PM
4 minute read
In oral argument before a D.C. Circuit panel Thursday afternoon, a U.S. lawyer from the special counsel's office issued a defense of Robert Mueller III's probe, fighting assertions that it's an uncontrolled investigation.
“It is not the case that the special counsel is wandering in a free floating environment and can decide” when to report to the acting attorney general, appellate lawyer Michael Dreeben said.
His defense came as a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard arguments in a case challenging Mueller's appointment, brought by Andrew Miller, a former aide to Trump confidant Roger Stone. Attorney Paul Kamenar, who is representing Miller, has argued in part that Mueller's May 2017 appointment violated the appointments clause of the U.S. Constitution, contending that the special counsel is a principal, not an inferior, officer under the clause, which would have required a presidential appointment and Senate confirmation.
“Because of his extraordinary powers as a prosecutor, coupled with the lack of supervision and control over this conduct, the Special Counsel, like U.S. Attorneys, was required to be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate,” Kamenar wrote in a brief for the appeal.
On Thursday, Kamenar cast Mueller as a prosecutor with “extraordinary” power and little supervision at the Department of Justice, describing him as “like a U.S. attorney at large.”
The D.C. Circuit panel that heard Thursday's case included Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson, Judith Rogers and Sri Srinivasan. Henderson is a George H.W. Bush appointee. Rogers was appointed to the court by Bill Clinton, and Srinivasan by Barack Obama.
Srinivasan did not appear ready to take up Kamenar's position, pressing him to differentiate Thursday's case from Morrison v. Olson and a D.C. Circuit case, where courts have found that officials “with many of the same attributes” were still considered inferior officers.
Rogers asked Kamenar how he arrived at the conclusion that Mueller operated without supervision, noting that the way she read the record, “we just don't know what's going on.”
The arguments were held a day after the abrupt resignation of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, submitted at the White House's request. President Donald Trump named Matthew Whitaker, Sessions' chief of staff, to fill in as acting attorney general.
At the beginning of Thursday's session, Henderson instructed attorneys to argue as if the session were taking place before the previous day's “events.” She indicated the court would likely ask attorneys for supplemental briefing.
Thursday's case arose out of a grand jury subpoena fight involving Miller, who had sought to quash a subpoena that the special counsel's office had served against him earlier this year. Miller has so far refused to comply—he was held in contempt of court this summer—instead focusing on challenging the legitimacy of Mueller's appointment. The special counsel's office has sought to interview Stone's associates as it examines possible links between the ex-Trump adviser and the group WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign.
There have been multiple efforts to challenge Mueller's appointment on legal and constitutional grounds. None has succeeded.
Most recently, U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich, appointed to the Washington, D.C., federal trial court by Trump, rejected a challenge to Mueller's appointment brought by Concord Management and Consulting, a Russian troll farm that was indicted earlier this year.
Reed Smith attorney James Martin represented the Russian company, an amicus curiae in the Miller case, during oral argument Thursday. He argued there was no statutory authority that allowed Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to appoint Mueller, because Mueller was a private lawyer at the time of his appointment.
Even so, Kamenar has already indicated he and Miller expect to lose their case before the appeals court. He told a radio show that the D.C. Circuit was full of liberals, and that they're ultimately eyeing an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, where they believe they'll find more a favorable reception.
Read more:
Meet Matt Whitaker, the Acting Attorney General and Mueller Critic
Justice Ginsburg Hospitalized After Fall Breaks Three Ribs
After Midterms, Lawyers and Lobbyists Look for Opportunities in Divided Government
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 AllUS Judge Cannon Blocks DOJ From Releasing Final Report in Trump Documents Probe
3 minute readPrivate Equity Giant KKR Refiles SDNY Countersuit in DOJ Premerger Filing Row
3 minute readThree Akin Sports Lawyers Jump to Employment Firm Littler Mendelson
Trending Stories
- 1Pa. High Court: Concrete Proof Not Needed to Weigh Grounds for Preliminary Injunction Order
- 2'Something Else Is Coming': DOGE Established, but With Limited Scope
- 3Polsinelli Picks Up Corporate Health Care Partner From Greenberg Traurig in LA
- 4Kirkland Lands in Phila., but Rate Pressure May Limit the High-Flying Firm's Growth Prospects
- 5Davis Wright Tremaine Turns to Gen AI To Teach Its Associates Legal Writing
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