Activist Judge Alert: Rules Bush Advisors NOT Immune from Congress Subpoenas

Judge John G. Bates of the US District Court ofor the District of Columbia has ruled against Harriet Miers and Josh Bolton, saying they have no immunity when it comes to testifying before Congress about the firings of US Attorneys. I suppose the Bush appointed judge, a US Attorney himself once upon a time, respects US Attorney independence.

Commentary By: Steven Reynolds

Well, look to the right wingers to hammer Judge John G. Bates of the US District Court for District of Columbia. He’s made a ruling against the claims by Bush advisors that they hold immunity from Congressional subpoenas. Of course, the Bushies will appeal. They’re likely going to hope that the US Supremes will find in their favor, as so many of them were appointed by Bush, or are sympathetic to him. From the New York Times:

The House Judiciary Committee wants to question the president’s chief of staff, Josh Bolten, and former legal counsel Harriet Miers, about the firing of nine U.S. attorneys. But President Bush says they are immune from such subpoenas. They say Congress can’t force them to testify or turn over documents.

U.S. District Judge John Bates disagreed. He said there’s no legal basis for that argument. He said that Miers must appear before Congress and, if she wants to refuse to testify, she must do so in person.

“Harriet Miers is not immune from compelled congressional process; she is legally required to testify pursuant to a duly issued congressional subpoena,” Bates wrote.

He said that both Bolten and Miers must give Congress all non-privileged documents related to the firings.

But wait, wait! According to his biography, Judge John G. Bates was appointed in December of 2001. That would mean he was appointed by Dubya himself! So is he an activist judge or not? I’m thinking the guy is merely following the law. Perhaps this is Bush incompetence at its finest, where they can’t even appoint judges who will consistently rule in their favor, thus cover for their crimes.

A note by Marty: If a crime is suspected and can be duly shown to a judge in this light, there is no kind of privilege that can keep Congress from seeing documents and questioning aides under oath. That is part of the balance of powers between the three branches of government. Of course there is separation of power, but balance of power is of more importance if a crime is suspected of having been committed by anyone in the executive, and this goes all the way to the top echelons. There is enough evidence already known for impeachment, quite frankly. Now it is only a matter of finding out who all was involved. It is against the law for the president or anyone else, for that matter, to use any agency of the executive for purposes of partisan electoral politics. The DOJ is the worst possible agency for people like Karl Rove to punish and file false charges against Democrats for political reasons. When people lose faith in their social institutions, LOOK OUT! It's a very bad sign for a society.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.