Skip to content

House panel and Justice Department fail to resolve subpoena clash

Judge orders both sides to explain in lawsuit related to House probe of Hunter Biden case

From left, Reps. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and James Comer, R-Ky., Chairman of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, prepare for a news conference in December as part of their probe into Hunter Biden.
From left, Reps. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and James Comer, R-Ky., Chairman of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, prepare for a news conference in December as part of their probe into Hunter Biden. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)

The House Judiciary Committee and Justice Department told a judge that a lawsuit should move forward over two congressional subpoenas related to the criminal case against President Joe Biden’s son Hunter, since four months of negotiations couldn’t resolve the dispute.

But Judge Ana Reyes of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, who previously called this a “bad, bad case” for both sides and ordered them to reach an agreement instead, issued her own plan instead on Monday.

Reyes ordered lead attorneys both sides to file sworn declarations that describe the negotiations so far and how many hours of attorney time the case is expected to take and at what cost, and then come to her courtroom in October for a hearing to discuss it.

The Judiciary Committee filed the suit in March seeking to enforce subpoenas against two DOJ attorneys, Mark Daly and Jack Morgan, for their testimony about possible favorable treatment of Hunter Biden in the criminal investigation.

The committee subpoenaed the two officials for depositions, but DOJ directed the attorneys to defy the subpoenas because agency counsel would not be allowed to attend under House rules, according to the lawsuit.

At a status conference in April, Reyes criticized the House and DOJ for pursuing the lawsuit and urged both sides to work out a solution outside of court. At the time, Reyes said the suit would take a long time to resolve and that it may be a waste of taxpayer money.

On Monday, the House and DOJ told her in a joint status report that both sides “worked diligently and in good faith” to settle the case but did not see the possibility of a settlement without a court fight. They proposed a schedule that would have had the sides filing briefs in the case through September and October.

“Over the last four months, counsel for the parties exchanged numerous letters and emails, spoke by phone, and met in person at the U.S. Department of Justice’s office,” the report states. “They thoroughly discussed different settlement options and explored resolutions in the hope that there would be a compromise acceptable to all parties.”

Republicans for months have argued that Hunter Biden received preferential treatment from the DOJ. Initially prosecutors and Hunter Biden agreed to a plea deal to resolve the investigation last year. However it was withdrawn following skepticism from the judge in the case, U.S. District Judge Maryellen Norieka, and prosecutors filed the criminal cases.

Hunter Biden was convicted following a federal trial in Delaware in June on three felony counts tied to his 2018 gun purchase, where prosecutors argued he lied about being addicted to illegal drugs on federal forms. Hunter Biden faces a separate trial on federal tax charges in California next month.

Recent Stories

Nevada’s Horsford likely to rejoin Ways and Means panel

Few GOP challengers in solidly blue Massachusetts

The happy-to-be-there caucus

Takeaways from first Harris interview, Trump’s vow to ‘produce babies’

NJ Democrats pick longtime legislator to replace Pascrell on November ballot

Trump vows EPA rollbacks as climate becomes hot campaign issue