Former House counsel Michael Stern writes that Black's lawsuit "must fail" and that the committee "is entitled to question Black under oath"
Michael SternAttorney who writes on congressional legal issues and a former Senior Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives, in a post on his blog Point of Order
In a September 23, 2026 post on his blog Point of Order, Michael Stern wrote that Black's lawsuit against the Oversight Committee "must fail" because courts lack power to restrain a committee's subpoena. He wrote that the committee "is entitled to question Black under oath in a formal deposition" even if Black had answered questions in a voluntary interview.
Responding to
In a federal complaint, Leon Black alleged that the House Oversight Committee's two subpoenas are invalid to the extent they exceed its delegated authority by seeking private information that has no legitimate connection to its legislative purpose.
“Black’s lawsuit must fail because it is well-settled that courts lack power to restrain congressional committees from issuing or enforcing a subpoena, regardless of the recipient’s claim that the subpoena violates constitutional privilege, was improperly motivated, or is otherwise unlawful. ... COGR is entitled to question Black under oath in a formal deposition even if Black had answered every pertinent question in a voluntary interview.”
Official statement
Original text
Original text
Analysis
Where this statement fits
Was the House justified in holding Leon Black in contempt of Congress over the Epstein inquiry?
On June 26, 2026, Leon Black appeared voluntarily for a transcribed interview in the House Oversight Committee's Epstein investigation. The committee said he declined to answer questions about nondisclosure agreements, and Chairman James Comer issued two subpoenas that day, one for a deposition and one for nondisclosure agreements. Black did not appear for the September 3 deposition and sued the committee that day; his attorneys said he had produced the only confidentiality agreement within the committee's stated purpose and that the subpoenas exceed its authority. The committee voted 41-0 on September 15 to recommend contempt, and the House agreed to the resolution by unanimous consent on September 16 with no recorded vote. Comer and Ranking Member Robert Garcia said Black defied the subpoenas, while Black's attorneys called the action retaliatory. The CourtListener copy of the lawsuit docket, last updated September 18, listed no ruling on Black's claims, and as of September 25, 2026 we could not locate a public Justice Department decision on the referral.
Source and context
Official statement
About this source
Author biography on the blog Point of Order.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Original text
About this source
Court docket for Black's lawsuit, assigned to Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly. The entries viewed run from the complaint on September 3 through appearance filings on September 9 and include no ruling.
Original text
About this source
Official record of the House floor action on H. Res. 1543: Comer's request for unanimous consent, the absence of objection, and agreement to the resolution.
Analysis
About this source
Blog post by an attorney and former House counsel analyzing Black's federal lawsuit against the Oversight Committee and Chairman Comer.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Black filed a lawsuit against the committee and Comer on September 3, 2026, seeking injunctive and declaratory relief regarding the two subpoenas. The House agreed to the contempt resolution by unanimous consent on September 16.
After the quotation
As of September 26, 2026, the CourtListener copy of the docket listed filings through September 9 and no ruling on Black's claims.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
Relative to the decision to hold Black in contempt over the two subpoenas, Stern argues that Black's grounds for resisting them fail as a matter of law and that the committee could compel a deposition after a voluntary interview. That supports the basis for the action. The post analyzes Black's lawsuit and does not evaluate the House vote itself.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Leon Black
More from this case
Read the full caseSen. Ron Wyden says "Black is doing everything in his power to dodge questions from Congress"
“No surprise Black is doing everything in his power to dodge questions from Congress.”Read statement
Rep. Yassamin Ansari says "Congressional subpoenas are binding, not suggestions"
“The House just unanimously approved our Oversight contempt resolution for Leon Black ... Congressional subpoenas are binding, not suggestions.”Read statement
Black's attorneys call the House contempt action "politically motivated and completely retaliatory"
“an outrageous action that ignores the facts and the truth about Mr. Black ... The House of Representatives has rushed through every stage of this inquiry. ... The full House is holding him in contempt without any regard to the active litigation challenging the lawfulness of the Committee’s actions and the ethics complaint against Chairman Comer ... politically motivated and completely retaliatory by a Chairman who is focused solely on himself and his own political ambitions without any regard for the truth and the law. ... To think, he is being held in contempt over invalid subpoenas is ridiculous.”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Former House counsel Michael Stern writes that Black's lawsuit "must fail" and that the committee "is entitled to question Black under oath"
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/2736-in-a-september-23-2026-post-on-his
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Former House counsel Michael Stern writes that Black's lawsuit "must fail" and that the committee "is entitled to question Black under oath"". First published: 2026-09-26. Last updated: 2026-09-26. https://disputeindex.com/events/2736-in-a-september-23-2026-post-on-his