A federal judge on Monday dismissed former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows’s legal challenge against a subpoena issued by the House Jan. 6 committee for his testimony.
Meadows tried to assert executive privilege to shield himself from the controversial Democrat-led probe, but the judge concluded that the subpoenas are protected legislative acts. That is, they are protected by the Speech or Debate Clause of the First Amendment.
In his 27-page ruling (pdf), U.S. District Court Judge Carl Nichols said Meadows raises “a number of unsettled questions, including whether a senior aide to a former President can be compelled to testify before Congress; whether a former President can validly assert executive privilege; and whether a sitting President may override a former President’s claim of privilege.”
The House Select Committee was convened to probe “the facts, circumstances, and causes” of the events of Jan. 6, 2021, when protesters went to the U.S. Capitol to express their views about the results of the 2020 general election, which many disputed.
Most of the crowd were supporters of former President Donald Trump. Questions have been raised about whether some of the protesters were not genuine Trump supporters, with video footage and witness accounts disputing the prevailing media narrative about the violence on the day.
The events of Jan. 6, 2021 are often referred to as an “insurrection” by legacy media outlets, Democrats, and a small number of Republicans.
The Jan. 6 panel is expected to conclude at the end of the year, after which it will report back to Congress with “recommendations for corrective measures.”
Subpoena
Meadows, who was subpoenaed on Sept. 23, 2021, argued he was “immune from being compelled to testify before Congress regarding his service as White House Chief of Staff.”
President Joe Biden disagreed and declined to assert executive privilege or immunity “with respect to Meadows’s testimony or document production,” according to the court filing. The panel also rejected the premise that Trump, as a former president, could shield Meadows.
According to a letter accompanying the subpoena by the panel’s chair, Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the panel believes Meadows has “critical information regarding many elements” of the inquiry.
Thompson said the probe had “revealed credible evidence” that Meadows was “with or in the vicinity of President Trump on January 6, had communications with the President and others on January 6 regarding events at the Capitol, and [is] a witness regarding activities of that day.”
Meadows has argued that the subpoena is invalid because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) only appointed nine members to the panel without the recommendation of Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Ky.).
He argued that House Resolution 503, which created the panel, mandated that the speaker “shall appoint 13 Members to the Select Committee, 5 of whom shall be appointed after consultation with the minority leader.”
Ultimately, the judge found that although the panel didn’t assert Speech or Debate Clause immunity, it doesn’t “constitute a waver,” and he dismissed Meadows’s legal challenge.
Meadows is expected to appeal the ruling, which could mean the panel will conclude before his testimony could be ordered by a court.
From The Epoch Times
