Federal Judge Tosses Out RNC Bid to Block Select Committee Subpoena 

May 2, 2022 by Dan McCue
Federal Judge Tosses Out RNC Bid to Block Select Committee Subpoena 

WASHINGTON — A federal judge has tossed out a Republican National Committee bid to block a subpoena to a third-party vendor from the select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, siege on the U.S. Capitol by angry supporters of then-President Donald Trump.

The 56-page ruling handed down Sunday by U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly is a significant victory for the Select Committee to Investigate the Jan. 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Kelly, who was appointed to the District Court for the District of Columbia by former President Donald Trump, dismissed claims by the RNC that the committee lacks the standing to exercise investigative power and that its subpoena to Salesforce, the third-party vendor, failed to advance a valid legislative purpose.

The committee subpoenaed Salesforce in February, and the vendor initially signaled it planned to withhold any and all requested documents. Then, in early March, attorneys for Salesforce informed the RNC that after discussions with staff for the select committee, the company had changed its position.

They said Salesforce, which holds sensitive financial data and records of the GOP, would immediately begin producing the documents unless a court intervened.

The RNC then sued House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., the select committee, its members and the third-party vendor, and asked Kelly to impose an injunction blocking the production of documents.

In doing so the Republicans asserted the scope of the subpoena was so broad that it amounted to an illegitimate incursion on political rivals. 

The select committee responded by saying it was only pursuing evidence that the RNC’s post-2020 election email barrage — communications to supporters, often coordinated with the Trump campaign — helped sow distrust in the presidential election results and contributed to the tension that arose ahead of the attack on the Capitol.

“This case presents an unusual thicket of procedural and substantive issues, in part because of the way the select committee decided to defend the case; in part because of the exceedingly rare spectacle of a congressional committee subpoenaing the records of one of our country’s two major political parties; and in part because those records reside with the RNC’s third-party vendor, rather than the RNC itself,” Kelly wrote earlier on in his ruling. “The court now proceeds into the thicket.”

“To begin with, the RNC’s claims against House defendants must be dismissed,” he wrote. “As the framers intended, House defendants are immune from suit under the speech or debate clause. Further, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to pass on the merits of the claims against them in the alternative, as they urge. 

“Turning next to the RNC’s claims against Salesforce, the court finds that the RNC has standing to pursue them. But on the merits, those claims come up short — except one, which is moot — given the highly deferential review the Court must give Congress’s investigative power and the nature of the materials at issue.

“Even so, the RNC identified important First Amendment interests implicated by the subpoena that would have presented a much different question for the court had the materials at issue not been narrowed after discussions between the select committee and Salesforce,” the judge said.

Later, Kelly described exactly how House defendants and Salesforce greatly narrowed the scope of the materials at issue. 

“For example, House defendants are not seeking, and Salesforce is not producing, any disaggregated information about any of the RNC’s donors, volunteers or email recipients, including any person’s personally identifiable information,” he said. “Moreover, even the RNC’s own confidential information that is undeniably at issue is relatively narrow in scope.”

Based on this, Kelly found the “subpoena, as narrowed by negotiations that clarified the materials at issue, does not violate the First Amendment.”

“First, the select committee has a strong — that is, a ‘sufficiently important’ — interest in the records demanded. The D.C. Circuit has already recognized Congress’ ‘uniquely weighty’ and ‘vital interest in studying the Jan. 6 attack,’ which is being undertaken by the select committee to help propose ‘remedial legislation’ that will safeguard Congress’ ‘constitutional and legislative operations.’ … Indeed, it is hard to imagine a more important interest for Congress than to preserve its own ability to carry out specific duties assigned to it under the Constitution.

“In sum, the materials demanded have particular ‘value’ to the select committee ‘in the exercise of legislative duty,’ and its interest in this information is strong,” Kelly wrote.

The lone bright spot in the ruling for the RNC is that given the subpoena’s return date was Monday, May 2, Kelly imposed a brief administrative injunction to give the Republicans time to appeal.

The administrative injunction will dissolve automatically on Thursday, May 5. 

“If the RNC has not moved for an injunction pending appeal by then … the administrative injunction will dissolve automatically upon the resolution of that motion.”

Dan can be reached at [email protected] and at https://twitter.com/DanMcCue

A+
a-
  • court ruling
  • Federal Court
  • Republicans
  • Salesforce
  • Select Committee on Jan 6 Attack on the Capitol
  • In The News

    Health

    Voting

    Jan. 6

    March 5, 2024
    by Tom Ramstack
    Court’s Ruling Would Reduce Sentences for Some Jan. 6 Capitol Insurrectionists

    WASHINGTON — The Justice Department is trying to decide whether to appeal a federal judge's ruling Friday that would free... Read More

    WASHINGTON — The Justice Department is trying to decide whether to appeal a federal judge's ruling Friday that would free about 100 of the Jan. 6, 2021, rioters at the Capitol earlier than anticipated. They were sentenced to prison with an "enhancement" for interfering with the... Read More

    February 7, 2024
    by Dan McCue
    Gaetz, Stefanik, 60 Colleagues Advance Resolution Saying Trump Not Insurrectionist

    WASHINGTON — Reps. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., and more than 60 of their Republican colleagues have advanced... Read More

    WASHINGTON — Reps. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., and more than 60 of their Republican colleagues have advanced a resolution declaring former President Donald Trump “did not engage in insurrection” prior, during or after the siege of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.... Read More

    Trump's Presidential Bid Hangs in the Balance at the Supreme Court

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The fate of former President Donald Trump’s attempt to return to the White House is in the hands... Read More

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The fate of former President Donald Trump’s attempt to return to the White House is in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court. On Thursday, the justices will hear arguments in Trump’s appeal of a Colorado Supreme Court ruling that he is not eligible to run again for president because... Read More

    Trump Stays on Illinois' Ballot as Election Board Declines to Ban Him

    CHICAGO (AP) — Illinois’ election board on Tuesday kept former President Donald Trump on the state’s primary ballot, a week... Read More

    CHICAGO (AP) — Illinois’ election board on Tuesday kept former President Donald Trump on the state’s primary ballot, a week before the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on whether the Republican’s role in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol disqualifies him from the presidency. The eight-member board’s... Read More

    Illinois Election Board Will Consider Whether to Boot Trump From Ballot Over Insurrection Amendment

    CHICAGO (AP) — Illinois' election board on Tuesday is scheduled to consider whether to keep Donald Trump on the state’s... Read More

    CHICAGO (AP) — Illinois' election board on Tuesday is scheduled to consider whether to keep Donald Trump on the state’s primary ballot after a recommendation that he be removed over the Constitution's insurrection provision. The meeting of the Illinois State Board of Elections, which is split evenly between... Read More

    Supreme Court Urged to Rule Trump Ineligible to Be President Again Due to Jan. 6 Riot

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court should declare that Donald Trump is ineligible to be president again because he spearheaded the violent attack... Read More

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court should declare that Donald Trump is ineligible to be president again because he spearheaded the violent attack on the U.S. Capitol in an effort to overturn his 2020 election loss, lawyers leading the fight to keep him off the ballot told the justices on... Read More

    News From The Well
    scroll top