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
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.”
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)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.