Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

News

Supreme Court Justice Blocks Jan. 6 Committee Subpoena

Efforts by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol incursion to examine phone records of the Arizona Republican Party chairwoman have been stymied by a member of the U.S. Supreme Court’s liberal wing.

Justice Elena Kagan on Wednesday temporarily blocked the panel from accessing the phone records of Dr. Kelli Ward and her husband, Mark Ward, according to The Hill.

Kagan’s order was terse, saying, “Upon consideration of the application of counsel for the applicants, it is ordered that the October 22, 2022 order of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, case No. 22-16473, is hereby stayed pending further order of the undersigned or of the Court.

“Likewise, respondent T-Mobile USA, Inc. is temporarily enjoined from releasing the records requested by the House Select Committee pending further order of the undersigned or of the Court.

“It is further ordered that a response to the application be filed on or before Friday, October 28, 2022, by 5 p.m. (EDT).”

Kagan was involved because she is the justice assigned to handle emergency requests from Arizona.

The Wards had sued to block access to their phone records. After losing their case at the district court level, they appealed, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit voted 2-1 to deny their bid to protect their records, according to CNN.

That prompted the emergency appeal to Kagan. “This is an unprecedented case with profound precedential implications for future congressional investigations and political associational rights under the First Amendment,” the Wards said in the appeal.

“In a first-of-its-kind situation, a select committee of the United States Congress, dominated by one political party, has subpoenaed the personal telephone and text message records of a state chair of the rival political party relating to one of the most contentious political events in American history—the 2020 election and the Capitol riot of January 6, 2021.”

The appeal painted the case as potentially setting a dire precedent.

“If Dr. Ward’s telephone and text message records are disclosed, congressional investigators are going to contact every person who communicated with her during and immediately after the tumult of the 2020 election. That is not speculation, it is a certainty. There is no other reason for the Committee to seek this information,” the Wards’ filing said.

“There can be no greater chill on public participation in partisan politics than a call, visit, or subpoena, from federal investigators,” they wrote.

The appellate panel ruled against the Wards, saying the federal subpoena “is substantially related to the important government interest in investigating the causes of the January 6 attack and protecting future elections from similar threats.”

“The investigation, after all, is not about Ward’s politics; it is about her involvement in the events leading up to the January 6 attack, and it seeks to uncover those with whom she communicated in connection with those events,” Judges Barry Silverman and Eric Miller wrote in the majority opinion. “That some of the people with whom Ward communicated may be members of a political party does not establish that the subpoena is likely to reveal ‘sensitive information about [the party’s] members and supporters.’”

The two judges who formed the majority castigated the activities of the Wards, who were electors pledged to former President Donald Trump.

“Ward participated in a scheme to send spurious electoral votes to Congress, a scheme that the committee describes as ‘a key part’ of the ‘effort to overturn the election’ that culminated on Jan. 6,” the opinion said.

In her dissent, Judge Sandra Ikuta said the Wards have valid constitutional rights that were insufficiently considered.

“The communications at issue here between members of a political party about an election implicate a core associational right protected by the First Amendment,” Ikuta wrote.

“Regardless of Ward’s position regarding the 2020 election, her right to engage in discussions with her political associates remains entitled to First Amendment protection against the government’s compelled disclosure of her political affiliations,” the judge said. “We must be vigilant to protect First Amendment rights — even when raised by an individual alleged to have engaged in a nefarious ‘scheme.’”

46 Comments
  • moon says:

    Jan. 6 committee should be hanged for there treasonous ways.

  • Mark says:

    Government officials, no matter their job in their various corporations/branches of government, are under laws that demand transparency throughout their tenure. They gave up their rights to a private life and chose freely to be under public redress for actions committed while holding office.

  • This is just so much more of Cheney’s shenanigans. They’ll keep it up until they’re shut down permanently! And unless America all of a sudden gets a spine and turns back to God, there’s NO HOPE to change this crap around anyway!

  • Milton Wiseman says:

    Just another pair of judge’s working a political angle, they know that the first amendment protects our political speech and attempted to bypass it, at last a liberal justice spoke up in its defense and stayed their opinions.
    This J6 crew is nothing more than an attempt to silence their opposition from an illegally formed committee of the democratic party and and their supporters. These people are out of control and need to be deeply investigated, and punished. They are on a witch hunt and we the people are the witches they are after. Let’s fix this bunch of hacks by voting out the democratic party November 8th and release all those being held in political prison, and if necessary sentence them to time served as a misdomeaer as well as releasing all that are in federal prison, also reducing their sentences to misdommeaers as well. And while we are at it, suspending that capital police officer that shot and killed an unarmed USAF veteran without cause or threat. Then set up a panel to investigate him, refer him for charges of at least manslaughter.
    Just a word, if you have not noticed, the only person who committed a felony was promoted and we have not heard a word about him accept on the MSM where he expressed no regrets in the uncalled for murder of this unarmed woman.

  • EZ says:

    subpoena everyone’s phone records on the committee, even up the playing feild

  • Trending Today

    News

    As Arizona’s Cochise County on Thursday moved to certify the results of the Nov. 8 election, lawyers for GOP candidates Kari Lake and Mark...

    News

    Hunter Biden’s laptop from hell, the story that Democrats and their allies in the mainstream media tried desperately to squash in the weeks before...

    News

    In May, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed into law No. 7172-1 that will ban opposition parties and seize their property. The law targets opposition...

    News

    Pfizer’s CEO has been rapped by the UK’s pharmaceutical watchdog for making “misleading” statements about children’s vaccines, The Telegraph can disclose. Dr Albert Bourla...

    >