Compelling Testimony Reinforces Checks and Balances
May 30th, 2008
Yesterday, CREW, along with three other groups (Rutherford Institute, Judicial Watch and the Brennan Center) filed a friend of the court brief supporting the House Judiciary Committee’s efforts to compel former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and former White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolton to comply with congressional subpoenas. CREW’s amicus brief can be found here. Also, the Associated Press reported that a bi-partisan group of 20 former U.S. Attorneys also filed an amicus brief in this case.
The Judiciary Committee is investigating whether the White House and top Justice Department officials fired U.S. Attorneys because of their refusal to give in to partisan political considerations in their decisions on who to prosecute. The White House has taken the extreme and unprecedented position that Miers and Bolton are absolutely immune from congressional subpoenas, meaning that according to the White House they are free to ignore the subpoenas at the unilateral and unreviewable decision of the president. In the lawsuit, the White House has argued that the Court cannot and should not even hear the matter.
CREW joined with the other groups, who represent a broad spectrum of interests, in arguing that the checks and balances that are so fundamental to our democracy require that the court hear and resolve the case. The President’s actions have prevented Congress from carrying out its constitutional responsibility to investigate very serious allegations of executive wrong-doing and to consider a possible legislative fix. Dismissing the case will only reward the White House for its intransigence and create a perverse incentive to never comply with a congressional request for information, secure in the knowledge that the courts will not intervene to protect Congress’ legitimate constitutional interests.
As a watchdog group that frequently relies on the courts to act as a check on unlawful executive branch conduct, CREW is especially interested in ensuring that courts remain available to resolve these kinds of disputes. As CREW explained in the brief, it has experienced a disturbing trend away from government openness that includes an effort by the White House to thwart groups like CREW from using the courts to resolve claims of executive misconduct.
Permalink | Comment on this post (0)
By

