UPDATE: Bragg Settles Allowing Testimony After ACLJ Files Amicus Brief Opposing DA Bragg’s Attempt To Obfuscate Congressional Subpoena To Hide Political Prosecutions

Today, the ACLJ just filed an amicus brief with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals against Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s attempt to obfuscate the truth about the use of federal funds to conduct political prosecutions and influence federal elections.

After first indicting former President Trump in a blatantly political prosecution, DA Bragg has now filed a lawsuit against Representative Jim Jordan and the House Judiciary Committee to block key testimony about how Bragg’s office used federal funds to conduct this political investigation. At issue is a former prosecutor in Bragg’s office, Mark Pomerantz, who wrote a tell-all book earlier this year about the political nature of this prosecution. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jordan subpoenaed Pomerantz to testify. Bragg filed a lawsuit to stop it.

The absurdity is that Pomerantz has already divulged damaging information in his book (released in February). The House Judiciary Committee merely wants to get his story on the record as part of a legitimate congressional investigation into how federal dollars are spent by local district attorneys and available legal options to discourage this type of political gamesmanship.

The trial court in the case correctly ruled that Rep. Jordan and the Judiciary Committee’s subpoena was justified and in furtherance of legitimate legislative ends.  The court concluded that its inquiry into the action of a co-equal branch of government ended there, and the deposition of Pomerantz could continue as planned.

Significantly, the federal district court’s ruling relied heavily on a pair of U.S. Supreme Court cases in which ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow was counsel regarding congressional and grand jury subpoena power and authority (e.g., Trump v. Mazars).

Bragg quickly appealed and sought an emergency stay at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The Second Circuit issued a temporary stay requesting all the parties to file briefs by Saturday. The ACLJ has now filed a motion for leave and an amicus brief arguing that the trial court was correct in its ruling.

We argued specifically that the House Judiciary Committee was fully within its authority to subpoena Pomerantz to testify before the Committee. We explained:

[A] valid congressional subpoena that will shed more light on or expose additional revealing facts about a state official’s actions impacting federal interests is not a threat to federalism. . . . There are no grounds for judicial quashing of this congressional subpoena, as it serves a valid legislative purpose, relating to and furthering a legitimate task of Congress. Given the undisputed facts and the admissions on the record and the straightforward and limited scope of the Court’s role, the Court’s inquiry must end.

Politically motivated prosecutions have no place in our constitutional republic. And Congress has an undeniable role to intervene and stop them. Congress must continue working to ensure that federal funds are not abused and misused in this manner, and we applaud Rep. Jim Jordan, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, for doing his part. At the ACLJ, we will continue to fight for the Constitution and the proper administration of justice.

UPDATE 04.21.2023: Shortly after we filed our amicus brief in this case opposing DA Bragg’s attempt to block critical congressional testimony, Bragg settled with Rep. Jordan and the Judiciary Committee paving the way for Pomerantz’s deposition.