Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg initiated a federal lawsuit on Tuesday, aiming to obstruct a House Judiciary Committee subpoena issued by Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan to a former prosecutor who was instrumental in Bragg's criminal investigation of former President Donald Trump. The lawsuit also requests a judge to declare that any potential future subpoenas by the Judiciary Committee or Jordan on Bragg or his current and former employees would be "invalid, unenforceable, unconstitutional."
Bragg's lawsuit escalates a conflict that started when Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, and other Trump allies in the House recently launched an inquiry into Bragg's prosecution of Trump, demanding documents and other materials. The lawsuit describes the inquiry as an "unprecedentedly brazen and unconstitutional attack by members of Congress on an ongoing New York State criminal prosecution and investigation of former President Donald J. Trump."
On Tuesday, a magistrate judge denied Bragg's request for a temporary restraining order against the subpoena issued to Mark Pomerantz, a former special assistant District Attorney. However, the judge scheduled an April 19 hearing in Manhattan federal court to address the challenge to the subpoena. The hearing is set for the day before Pomerantz's testimony would take place according to the subpoena.
In the 50-page complaint, Bragg asserts that "Congress has no power to supervise state criminal prosecution" and accuses Jordan and his committee of conducting "a campaign of intimidation, retaliation, and obstruction." The lawsuit names Jordan, the Judiciary Committee, and Pomerantz as defendants.
Pomerantz, along with another prosecutor, resigned from the District Attorney's office in early 2022 after Bragg indicated he would not seek an indictment against Trump in connection with false statements regarding the valuations of real estate assets owned by the Trump Organization. Pomerantz later authored a book about his involvement in the investigation.
Last week, Jordan and the committee served Pomerantz with a subpoena, two days after Trump's arraignment in Manhattan Supreme Court on a grand jury indictment alleging 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. The prosecution, the first against any U.S. president, current or former, is related to a $130,000 hush money payment that Trump's then-attorney Michael Cohen made to adult film star Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 presidential election.
According to Bragg's lawsuit, the subpoena and other information requests by Jordan "seek highly sensitive and confidential local prosecutorial information that belongs to the Office of the District Attorney and the People of New York." The suit argues that "basic principles of federalism and common sense, as well as binding Supreme Court precedent, forbid Congress from demanding it."
Bragg contends that the subpoena for Pomerantz "has no legitimate legislative purpose" and that even if it did, it would still be unenforceable because it could allow the Judiciary Committee to request secret grand jury material and other legally protected investigative information. Jordan quickly responded to Bragg's lawsuit with a tweet, accusing Bragg of suing to block congressional oversight while asking questions about the federal funds they claim to have used for the investigation.