Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson Makes Her Mueller-Arena Debut With McGahn Case
Chief Judge Beryl Howell ordered that the lawsuit get a new judge, citing a "potential for manipulation" over case assignments.
August 14, 2019 at 12:52 PM
5 minute read
U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson of the District of Columbia will now oversee House Judiciary Democrats' lawsuit seeking ex-White House counsel Don McGahn's public testimony.
Jackson, who was confirmed to the bench in 2013 during the Obama administration, was randomly assigned the case Wednesday. She had not yet overseen any of the high-profile legal fights between House Democrats and the Trump administration, nor anything related to the former special counsel Robert Mueller III's probe.
Jackson was among the candidates reviewed by the White House in 2016 to potentially fill late Justice Antonin Scalia's seat on the U.S. Supreme Court.
And she presided over the 2018 criminal case of ex-Senate Intelligence Committee staffer Jim Wolfe, who pleaded guilty to lying to investigators about his dealings with the media. Jackson sentenced Wolfe to two months in prison, significantly less time than the two years sought by federal prosecutors.
The House lawsuit against McGahn was initially assigned to Chief Judge Beryl Howell, as House general counsel Douglas Letter sought to have the case related to Democrats' petition to obtain grand jury materials related to the Mueller report.
But Howell rejected that request in an order earlier Wednesday, finding that the legal issues and facts of the cases "are so far apart on the core issues for decision that judicial efficiency is not a reason for relation."
"The potential for manipulation of the ordinary rule of random assignment would be particularly acute if the House Judiciary Committee could relate any matter arising from its ongoing investigation to a single judge on this court, irrespective of the particularities of each case," Howell wrote.
The Judiciary Democrats had argued that Howell should oversee both cases because they will each play a role in determining whether they should start formal impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump.
But Department of Justice attorneys, in a filing made on behalf of McGahn on Tuesday, suggested that the lawmakers were attempting to judge shop.
"Allowing plaintiffs to relate subsequent cases to a matter that is itself not randomly assigned would further exacerbate the potential for mischief in the committee's inversion of the test for relatedness," the Tuesday filing said.
"And that potential will be especially glaring here, where the committee will apparently take the position that all of the many suits it might attempt to file as part of its so-called 'impeachment investigation' are related to its original application for Grand Jury material."
This is the second time in a month that a D.C. federal judge has ordered a case reassigned amid concerns of judicial shopping. U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden of the District of Columbia stepped away from Trump's lawsuit seeking to block House Democrats from obtaining his New York tax returns after the president's attorneys initially asked that it be related to the lawsuit over Trump's federal tax returns in McFadden's court.
The House Judiciary Democrats are seeking a court order to compel McGahn, who is now at Jones Day, to testify publicly before their committee, characterizing him as a crucial witness as they make a decision on impeachment proceedings.
"The Judiciary Committee is now determining whether to recommend articles of impeachment against the President based on the obstructive conduct described by the Special Counsel," the lawsuit, filed in D.C. District Court last week, reads. "But it cannot fulfill this most solemn constitutional responsibility without hearing testimony from a crucial witness to these events: former White House Counsel Donald F. McGahn II."
McGahn was subpoenaed by the committee earlier this year, but defied the request at the direction of the White House. Trump officials claim that McGahn is "immune" from revealing details of his conversations and actions at the White House.
Democrats disagree, pointing to his several interviews with Mueller that detailed his interactions with Trump officials, including the president, and the release of those interviews' contents in Mueller's report.
Democrats say McGahn is one of the only first-hand witnesses to potential acts of obstruction of justice by Trump, including an effort to fire Mueller and then create a false record to hide the attempted firing. Mueller declined to make a charging decision on whether the president obstructed justice, and Attorney General William Barr and then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said, after reviewing Mueller's report, that they believed there was insufficient evidence to bring such a charge.
Read more:
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
© 2024 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 AllRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readAmir Ali, MacArthur Justice Center Director, Confirmed to DC District Court
From ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute readConservative Boutiques That Backed Trump Reap Their Rewards
Trending Stories
- 1Simpson Thacher Replenishes London Ranks With Latest Linklaters Defection
- 2Holland & Knight, Akin, Crowell, Barnes and Day Pitney Add to DC Practices
- 3Squire Patton Boggs Associate Among Those Killed in String of Methanol Poisonings
- 4Womans Suit Alleging Negligence to Sex Trafficking by Hotel Tossed by Federal Judge
- 5More Big Law Firms Rush to Match Associate Bonuses, While Some Offer Potential for Even More
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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