Court rules House can enforce McGahn subpoena, but law professors say Trump's stalling already did its job

(Image credit: Win McNamee/Getty Images)

published 7 August 2020

It's been more than a year since the Trump administration blocked House Democrats' attempt to secure testimony from former White House Counsel Don McGahn, a pivotal figure in the Mueller investigation. At the time, it appeared to be what former U.S. attorney Preet Bharara called a "stalling tactic," and a way for the Trump administration to "run out the clock" to a point where McGahn's testimony didn't matter anymore.

Indeed, President Trump's impeachment trial came and went without a word from McGahn. And even though U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled Friday that the House could enforce its subpoena against McGahn, dissenting judges in the case acknowledged that the House's chances of hearing from McGahn soon are "vanishingly slim."

Barb McQuade, a professor at the University of Michigan's law school, said in a tweet it was clear that Trump still "wins by losing" in this case. The House still has to formally sue McGahn, "causing further delay," McQuade continued. "Trump's bad faith stall game needs to be called out and the rules changed to defeat it," McQuade continued. Harvard University law professor Laurence Tribe echoed McQuade's sentiment, tweeting that McGahn's case was sure to continue past Trump's term. And Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who led the impeachment hearings, called on Congress to make sure McGahn's subpoena stalling never happened again. Kathryn Krawczyk