Michael Stern

Michael Stern is an attorney who writes about legal issues affecting Congress, including congressional investigations, ethics, elections and lobbying. He served as Senior Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives from 1996 to 2004 and later held staff roles on Senate and House committees. He publishes the blog Point of Order and has contributed to Lawfare and Just Security.

What DI has documented

DI has documented statements by Michael Stern on Government Transparency, Privacy, and U.S. Politics. Read the quotations, original sources and related cases below.

Topics in this coverage

Statements by Michael Stern

Michael Stern

Role at the time: Attorney 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

Defended or excused

Response to this claim

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.”
Open source (opens in a new tab)Leon Black’s Frivolous Lawsuit (Point of Order) · Michael SternSections headed Legal Analysis and Conclusion
Why we used 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.

A participant is a subject of the case. A speaker has a statement documented in it. A commentator has an opinion or editorial documented in it.