Breaking: In a 17 pg opinion (⤵️) U.S. District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson today rejected DOJ request to put a long-term stay on her ruling that McGahn testify AND she lifted her earlier stay while waiting for Appeals. #MondayMotivation politico.com/f/?id=0000016e…
2-"“This Court has no doubt that further delay of the Judiciary Committee’s enforcement of its valid subpoena causes grave harm to both the Committee’s investigation and the interests of the public more broadly,” Jackson wrote.
3-"Last week, Jackson decided Trump couldn’t claim “absolute immunity” to prevent his former aides from testifying under oath. But she also later agreed to a 7-day freeze on her opinion to hear out the Justice Department on its arguments for a longer-term hold pending the appeal.
4-"In the meantime, the department has backstopped itself against Jackson’s decision to reject its stay request. It has already secured a Jan. 3 hearing on its appeal before a three-judge panel that includes two appointees of past Republican presidents.
5-"DOJ said it would keep on fighting if it lost its requests for a stay at the D.C. Circuit. In a request for an emergency decision from appellate court, the dept said it still had enough time to petition the Supreme Court should it fail to win a reprieve from the D.C. Circuit.
6-"Chief Justice John Roberts would be first to rule on an administrative stay to halt enforcement of the House subpoena against McGahn. But five justices would need to give the OK to grant anything longer than a temporary stay.
7-"In Jackson’s decision on Monday, she suggested that the department’s chances of winning on appeal were “exceedingly low.” In the meantime, she said the House would suffer given the fast-moving nature of its impeachment proceedings.
8-"“DOJ also does not, and cannot, deny that whatever additional information that the Committee (and the public) might glean from McGahn’s live testimony will be lost if the Judiciary Committee does not have an opportunity to question him prior to any House vote on impeachment,”
9-"Jackson also took issue with what she called the department’s “disingenuous” argument that the Judiciary Committee wouldn’t be meaningfully harmed by a stay." ~politico
