When the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit hears arguments Friday in a pair of lawsuits from the House Judiciary Committee, the courtroom will feature a number of faces familiar to those keeping a close eye on the litigation between House Democrats and President Donald Trump.

House general counsel Douglas Letter has typically taken the lead in arguing the House's cases and will do so again Friday for oral arguments over Mueller grand jury materials. In the next case, fellow former Justice Department lawyer Megan Barbero will step up to the plate for the arguments over whether former White House counsel Don McGahn can be compelled to testify.

Barbero joined the office in March 2019, weeks after Speaker Nancy Pelosi tapped Letter to lead the House's legal fights. She spent five years in DOJ's civil appellate team, where she was involved in defending Trump in a pair of emoluments lawsuits, and was previously at Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale.

She and Letter split time in arguing the McGahn testimony case last year at the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, before U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson. Barbero led arguments over standing issues in the case, a topic that is sure to face further scrutiny on Friday.

>> Sign up for the Trump Watch newsletter to get weekly news and analysis on the Trump administration here.

Arguing for the Justice Department on Friday will be a pair of DOJ appellate heavyweights: Mark Freeman will again argue against Letter in the Mueller grand jury materials case, while Hashim Mooppan will represent the administration for the McGahn arguments.

Freeman took over Letter's old job, leading DOJ's civil appellate division. He and Letter have already argued over a stay in the case before the same D.C. Circuit panel they will face on Friday.

Letter brought up the two lawyers' relationship during the November arguments, saying he recommended Freeman for his current job. "After this is all over, we will shake hands and hug," Letter, who spent 40 years at DOJ, told the panel of him and Freeman.

Mooppan, a deputy assistant attorney general at DOJ and former Jones Day partner, is a rising star in Trump's Justice Department. He has helped lead litigation in emoluments clause lawsuits against Trump, arguing on the president's behalf last month before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit as well as the D.C. Circuit.

Just as significant to Friday's arguments as the lawyers are the panels of judges who will rule in the cases. The panels are nearly identical; Judges Thomas Griffith and Judith Rogers will be on both.

Griffith, appointed to his seat by former President George W. Bush, previously served as the Senate legal counsel, a role he alluded to during the oral arguments for a stay on the Mueller grand jury materials case.

Judge Karen Henderson, a President George H.W. Bush appointee, will sit on the panel hearing the McGahn arguments, and Judge Neomi Rao will take her spot for the Mueller grand jury materials case. Rao, a Trump appointee who was confirmed to the bench last year, previously worked at the White House Office of Management and Budget, meaning she might have interacted with McGahn and could have been recused from the case over his testimony.

Griffith and Rao both suggested during the past Mueller arguments that the courts might not be the appropriate forum to handle the case. But Rogers, appointed by President Bill Clinton, questioned how else the House would be able to get the Mueller grand jury information without effectively having to redo the special counsel's probe.

The arguments take place just weeks after the House voted, largely along party lines, to impeach Trump. House lawyers have argued in both lawsuits that the information is necessary to determine whether articles of impeachment were necessary.

Moments after the House voted to impeach, both panels asked attorneys for the House and DOJ to submit filings on how impeachment impacted the cases.

The Justice Department suggested in its filings that the court should stay out of the McGahn proceedings entirely. But the House said what is revealed through obtaining the grand jury materials or hearing McGahn's testimony could be used in a Senate impeachment trial or potentially for additional articles of impeachment.

Read more: