DC Circuit Gives DOJ Breathing Room on Turning Over Mueller Grand Jury Info
U.S. Chief District Judge Beryl Howell had ordered the grand jury materials be turned over to the House Judiciary Committee by Oct. 30.
October 29, 2019 at 07:59 PM
4 minute read
A three judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on Tuesday granted an administrative stay on a district court order requiring the release of grand jury information from the Mueller report to House Democrats.
In a one-page order, Judges Patricia Millett, Cornelia Pillard and Robert Wilkins granted an administrative stay as they consider the Department of Justice's motion for an emergency stay, hours before U.S. Chief District Judge Beryl Howell's order on the release of materials would have gone into effect.
"The purpose of this administrative stay is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the motion," the order states, "and should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits of that motion."
Department of Justice attorneys first asked for the stay Monday, days after Howell ruled the agency must hand over grand jury material redacted from special counsel Robert Mueller's report to the House Judiciary Committee by Oct. 30.
In the filing in Howell's court, the government attorneys argued they would be "irreparably harmed" if they had to give the grand jury information to the House committee without having a chance to appeal the case to the D.C. Circuit.
And they claimed that the information detailed in the Mueller report "is not the current focus of impeachment inquiry."
DOJ lawyers repeated that argument in another filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit later Monday. They asked that court to grant them a stay as they prepare to appeal Howell's ruling, or "enter an administrative stay, or continue such a stay, for a reasonable period to allow the Solicitor General an opportunity to seek relief from the Supreme Court."
House attorneys, who have argued the grand jury information is crucial in determining whether to approve articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, swatted back in a court filing Tuesday.
"DOJ is wrong about the scope of the House's inquiry: as the Committee confirmed at oral argument, 'it's not just Ukraine that's the focus,'" House attorneys wrote.
And they argued that further delaying their access to the information "would impair the public's interest in an efficient, fair impeachment process based on all of the relevant evidence."
The motion for a stay will now be briefed further in the D.C. Circuit, but on a tight timeline. The judges asked the House to file a response to a motion by Friday, and DOJ to offer any reply by the following Tuesday.
Howell, in a ruling last week, rejected DOJ's argument that the impeachment inquiry was not a judicial proceeding and that it could not be accepted as legitimate because the House hadn't voted to authorize the proceedings.
"The need for continued secrecy is minimal and thus easily outweighed by [House Judiciary Committee's] compelling need for the material," Howell wrote. "Tipping the scale even further toward disclosure is the public's interest in a diligent and thorough investigation into, and in a final determination about, potentially impeachable conduct by the president described in the Mueller Report."
House Democrats have seized on Howell's ruling to rebuke Republican claims that the impeachment inquiry is illegitimate.
Democrats on Tuesday also introduced a resolution on how their impeachment inquiry will be conducted as it goes public, including the release of certain evidence and how lawmakers can question witnesses during televised hearings.
Among other items in the resolution, it allows for the chair and ranking members of the House Intelligence Committee—Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff and GOP Rep. Devin Nunes—to tap committee counsel to question witnesses for up to 90 minutes at the start of a hearing. That time is to be divided evenly between the two members.
Read more:
House Faces First Court Test Over Witness Testimony in Impeachment Inquiry
Trump Lawyers Set the Stage for Supreme Court to Rule on Mazars Subpoena
Steve Bannon Expected to Appear as Government Witness in Roger Stone's Trial
Judge Pierces Mueller Report Secrecy, Orders Material Disclosed to House Democrats
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 AllGovernment Attorneys Face Reassignment, Rescinded Job Offers in First Days of Trump Administration
4 minute readRFK Jr. Will Keep Affiliations With Morgan & Morgan, Other Law Firms If Confirmed to DHHS
3 minute readAm Law 200 Firms Announce Wave of D.C. Hires in White-Collar, Antitrust, Litigation Practices
3 minute readTrending Stories
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