When Democrats achieved a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives in November 2018, it wasn’t difficult to predict that there would be a lot of investigations and subpoenas from Democrat-led House committees. But President Donald Trump has consistently responded to subpoenas — both before and during the Ukraine scandal — by demanding that those in his administration defy them. And according to law professor Frank O. Bowman III, who teaches at the University of Missouri, the anti-subpoena arguments Trump and his allies have been making during his impeachment are “without precedent or legal justification.”
Bowman, in a January 28 article for The Atlantic, explains why Trumpian anti-subpoena assertions are so flawed. And Colin Kalmbacher, in Law & Crime, highlights some of Bowman’s best arguments.
Patrick Philbin, one of Trump’s attorneys, has claimed that the subpoenas issued by House committees prior to a House vote authorizing an impeachment inquiry are not valid. But Bowman strongly disagrees with Philbin’s reasoning — or lack thereof. Continue reading.