海角大神

By the time the Justice Department hands over the full Mueller report to House Democrats 鈥� if it ever does 鈥� Donald Trump may no longer be president. In other words, get ready for a long tangle if this fight goes to court, as seems to be the intent of the House Judiciary chairman if he doesn鈥檛 get his way.

On Wednesday, the House Judiciary Committee voted along party lines to give its chairman, Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., authority to issue subpoenas for documents, testimony, and underlying evidence related to special counsel Robert Mueller鈥檚 investigation of the Trump campaign and Russia. Mr. Mueller found no collusion between the two, and in a summary of the report, Attorney General William Barr said that he and the deputy attorney general found that evidence was not sufficient to support a finding of presidential obstruction of justice.

But Mr. Nadler and his fellow Democrats want to see the report for themselves 鈥� the entire report, not the redacted version that Mr. Barr is promising by mid-April. Mr. Barr says he cannot legally hand over the entire report because it contains information related to a grand jury, or to ongoing prosecutions, or that is classified or may unduly infringe on personal privacy.

Hence Mr. Nadler鈥檚 subpoenas and court threat, which he intends to deliver on in 鈥渟hort order鈥� if the Justice Department does not comply with a full report. Yet this seemingly tough stance belies a weakness in the supposedly mighty congressional subpoena: Its enforcement can be 鈥渋nadequate,鈥� in part because resolution can take years, according to a new report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.

The Judiciary Committee鈥檚 subpoena move 鈥� based on a partisan vote 鈥� also points to a different kind of weakness, say legal and government experts. It鈥檚 born of the expectation that as soon as an opposition party takes control in Congress, it cranks up the investigation machine 鈥� which in turn feeds the perception that subpoenas are much more about the interest of a party, than the interest of Congress as an institution.

鈥淚t鈥檚 become increasingly routine for congressional committees to pound their chest and use the subpoena,鈥� says Prof. Neal Devins, a constitutional scholar at William and Mary Law School in Williamsburg, Virginia. 鈥淲hen you do something repeatedly, it becomes a little ritualistic, it loses a little of its oomph.鈥�

This week, the House Committee on Oversight and Reform also authorized subpoenas 鈥� relating to security clearances given to 25 people despite rejection by career staffers, and to a question about United States citizenship in the upcoming Census.

Congress has two ways to enforce a subpoena, and both are problematic, according to the Congressional Research Service Report, which came out last month.

One is to ask the executive branch to enforce a criminal contempt citation for an individual who is willfully refusing to comply with a committee鈥檚 subpoena. But there鈥檚 an inherent conflict there if the executive branch is being asked to lower the hammer on itself.

The other way is to pursue the case through the courts, which can take a long time and does not always ensure access to the information that a committee wants.

Only four times in recent history has the House held an executive branch official (or former official) in criminal contempt for refusing to comply with a subpoena. Not surprisingly, in all four cases the executive branch refused to prosecute, and three times the House looked to the courts.

In one instance, Americans had elected a new Congress and president by the time a settlement was reached and the case dismissed (Committee on the聽Judiciary聽v. Miers). Most of the documents were provided, however, and Harriett Miers, the former White House counsel under President George W. Bush, had to testify under oath, but in a closed, transcribed hearing. Ms. Miers and White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten had refused subpoenas in 2007 for testimony and documents relating to the dismissal of U.S. attorneys, citing executive privilege.

Similarly, former Attorney General Eric Holder also asserted executive privilege when he failed in 2012 to comply with a congressional subpoena in the 鈥淔ast and Furious鈥� case about gunrunners, Mexican criminals, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. In that case, too, the House turned to the courts. It is still unresolved, even as the presidency and Congress have changed hands.

Rep.聽Madeleine Dean, D-Pa., of the House Judiciary Committee says she is concerned about Congress鈥檚 ability to enforce subpoenas. In the case of the Mueller report, however, she says the public is on the side of Democrats. A slew of opinion polls show the vast majority of Americans want the full Mueller report released.

鈥淭he American people will demand it,鈥� says Congresswoman Dean. 鈥淏etween their pressure and the power of the majority and this chairman offering the subpoena, I think we鈥檒l be successful.鈥澛�

Last month, before Mr. Mueller submitted his report to the attorney general, the House voted almost unanimously to release the full report to Congress and to release all of the report to the public except those parts that are 鈥減rohibited by law.鈥�

But Republicans now say Democrats are playing politics with Mr. Nadler鈥檚 subpoena authorization. They argue that he鈥檚 pressing for the full report before he鈥檚 even seen the redacted version, and point to the restrictions that Attorney General Barr legally faces in sending the report to Congress.

鈥淭hey鈥檙e just determined to go after the president because Mueller wasn鈥檛 what they hoped,鈥� says Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, ranking member on the Oversight Committee who also has a seat on Judiciary.

Lawmakers and observers say it鈥檚 too early to know how the tussle between investigators in Congress and this White House will compare with previous times when the opposition took over 鈥� especially in the House, where it鈥檚 much easier for the majority party to work its will.

Almost every shift in partisan control of Congress after a unified government has been followed by a wave of congressional investigations, and that鈥檚 especially true in intensely polarized times, says Douglas Kriner, co-author of the book, 鈥淚nvestigating the President: Congressional Checks on Presidential Power鈥� and a government professor at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York.

Looking ahead, he says 鈥淒emocrats have a lot of opportunities to score political points, just the way Republicans had a lot of opportunities in investigating Obama.鈥�