House Faces First Court Test Over Witness Testimony in Impeachment Inquiry
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon was assigned Monday afternoon to preside over a case filed by Charles Cooper on behalf of a former Trump administration official set to testify at the House impeachment inquiry.
October 28, 2019 at 02:42 PM
7 minute read
A Washington federal judge has been asked to declare whether a former Trump administration national security official can lawfully testify as part of the House impeachment inquiry, despite an assertion from the White House that the adviser is entitled to immunity and cannot be forced to sit for a deposition.
The former official, Charles Kupperman, represented by Charles Cooper of the Washington boutique firm Cooper & Kirk, named President Donald Trump and House Democrats as defendants in the complaint in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Kupperman had been scheduled to testify Monday morning, but he did not show up.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon was assigned Monday afternoon to preside over the dispute, the first that directly confronts testimony from a would-be witness in the House's impeachment inquiry. The inquiry, focused on whether Trump abused the power of the presidency by asking Ukraine to investigate a chief political rival of Trump, has secured testimony from nine other witnesses.
Leading House Democrats reportedly called Kupperman's lawsuit "an obvious and desperate tactic by the president to delay and obstruct the lawful constitutional functions of Congress and conceal evidence about his conduct from the impeachment inquiry." House leaders said Monday they will "move forward" with the inquiry despite the lawsuit.
"The lawsuit that Dr. Kupperman filed has no basis in law. A private citizen cannot sue the Congress to try to avoid coming in when they are served with a lawful subpoena," U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, chair of the House Intelligence Committee, said Monday. "We expect that the court will make short shrift of that argument."
Any failures to appear by witnesses, Schiff said, will build a "powerful case" for an obstruction case against Trump. "We are not willing to let the White House engage us in a lengthy game of rope-a-dope in the courts, so we press ahead," Schiff said Monday.
The Trump White House tried several weeks ago to thwart any cooperation from the administration with House Democrats. The White House has derided the impeachment inquiry as "constitutionally defective," a position ridiculed by conservative and progressive lawyers. The Trump White House has largely failed to stop officials from speaking with House Democrats.
Witnesses appearing before House investigators have confronted Trump's plan to withhold $391 million in security aid to Ukraine until leaders there agreed to investigate Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden and his son Hunter. One top U.S. diplomat, Gordon Sondland, represented by Paul Hastings partner Robert Luskin, said the pressure Trump put on Ukraine amounted to a quid pro quo, according to a report from The Wall Street Journal. Trump has denied any illegal effort to enlist a foreign power to influence U.S. elections, claiming that his July 25 call with the president of Ukraine was "perfect."
Kupperman, a former deputy national security adviser, "is faced with irreconcilable commands by the legislative and executive branches of the government," Cooper wrote in the lawsuit. Cooper said his client "obviously cannot satisfy the competing demands of both the legislative and executive branches, and he is aware of no controlling judicial authority definitively establishing which branch's command should prevail."
Cooper said Kupperman "takes no position on whether the command of the legislative branch or the command of the executive branch should prevail; he seeks only to carry out whichever constitutional obligation the Judicial Branch determines to be lawful and binding."
Trump-appointed leaders at the Justice Department have broadly argued that current and former administration officials are immune from congressional demands for information.
Those assertions are being contested in various court cases, including one that demands testimony from Donald McGahn, the former White House counsel who has since returned to the law firm Jones Day. McGahn was a central witness in the special counsel's investigation of the Trump campaign's ties to Russia and the president's purported efforts to derail the investigation through allegedly obstructive acts.
Pat Cipollone, the White House counsel, said in a letter to Cooper that Kupperman was not permitted to testify in the impeachment inquiry. Cooper had asked the White House for its position on the subpoena the House issued to Kupperman.
"[I]n order to protect the prerogatives of the office of president today and in the future, and in response to your request, the president directs Mr. Kupperman not to appear at the committee's scheduled hearing on Monday, October 28, 2019," Cipollone wrote. "This long-standing principle is firmly rooted in the Constitution's separation of powers and protects the core functions of the presidency."
The policy Cipollone pointed to "applies only to senior White House advisers," according to a post at Just Security from former congressional lawyer Michael Stern. "There is nothing in Cipollone's October 25 letter to suggest that Kupperman is prohibited from testifying because the House inquiry is invalid or on any other ground that would be broadly applicable to administration officials," Stern wrote.
Cooper is a well-known Republican lawyer who ran the Justice Department's office of legal counsel in the George H.W. Bush administration. He represented Jeff Sessions, then the U.S. attorney general, in the special counsel's Russia investigation. Cooper also now represents John Bolton, the former Trump national security adviser who resigned last month.
Bolton is widely seen as a critical witness for House investigators as part of the impeachment inquiry.
University of California Berkeley School of Law professor John Yoo, a former George W. Bush administration Justice Department leader, told The New York Times that the Trump White House would likely "go to the mat" to block any deposition of Bolton, who played a central role in U.S. foreign policy initiatives.
"If the White House were to fight the House impeachment on executive privilege grounds, Bolton would be the hill on which to die," Yoo told the Times. "The Trump White House could claim not just that the impeachment investigation is illegitimate, which is its current line of defense, but that it is defending the right of future presidents to have an effective White House and to conduct a successful foreign policy."
Cooper's complaint is posted below:
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
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