"Legal Battle Erupts: Bragg vs. Jordan Over Anti-Trump Interference"

TL;DR Summary
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is using a legal strategy to defy federal subpoenas by invoking state sovereignty, which he previously used while working in the New York attorney general's office. Bragg's lawsuit against Rep. Jim Jordan and his House Judiciary Committee seeks to block a subpoena seeking testimony from a former assistant DA who criticized aspects of his Trump investigation. The conflict raises delicate questions about the balance of power between Congress and the states. Bragg's lawsuit replicates many of the arguments made in a 2016 and 2017 subpoena fight over a climate change investigation.
Topics:nation#alvin-bragg#congressional-oversight#jim-jordan#legal-strategy#politics#state-sovereignty
- In Bragg v. Jordan, a familiar legal strategy emerges POLITICO
- Alvin Bragg sues Jim Jordan: Four takeaways The Hill
- Jordan blasts Bragg lawsuit: Prosecutor upset Congress wants oversight on his anti-Trump former associate Fox News
- Analysis | Bragg's Manhattan vs. Jordan's Mansfield: Which one has more crime? The Washington Post
- Why Alvin Bragg filed a lawsuit against Jim Jordan's pro-Trump interference MSNBC
Reading Insights
Total Reads
0
Unique Readers
0
Time Saved
4 min
vs 5 min read
Condensed
89%
865 → 96 words
Want the full story? Read the original article
Read on POLITICO