House Democrats are preparing for a possible midterm election victory by considering investigations into the Trump administration and ways to use Congress’s spending power to enforce compliance. If Democrats regain control of the House, President Trump’s proposed West Wing renovation and Washington, D.C., triumphal arch could face new funding challenges, sources say. Inner Loop.
The scope of those investigations—and the areas where Democrats would seek to restore congressional oversight—remain uncertain because a House Democratic majority is not guaranteed.
Still, House Democrats are developing plans for multiple investigations if they take control of the chamber in November. Congressional committee aides are already examining ways to compel administration officials and members of the president’s family to comply with subpoenas.
President Trump has placed unusual emphasis on personal construction and renovation projects during his current term. Democrats are considering whether to use Congress’s power of the purse to challenge or restrict funding for those initiatives.
If President Trump attempts to obstruct congressional investigations or authorizes additional building projects without congressional approval, House Democrats could seek to withhold funding for future West Wing renovations or block appropriations for projects such as the proposed Washington, D.C., triumphal arch.
Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, suggested this week that Congress could also use funding restrictions to limit projects President Trump has already begun.
“We have the power of the wallet, and we’re going to make sure that Donald Trump doesn’t destroy other federal buildings and landmarks,” Raskin told reporters when asked what options Democrats would have after the sharp split over the Supreme Court dispute over the White House ballroom. Trump has allowed construction of the banquet hall to continue.
“The White House is apportioned by Congress, and Congress decides that. It’s not the president who decides whether to bulldoze half the White House simply because he wakes up one day and thinks it’s a good idea,” Raskin said.
Enforcing a congressional subpoena through the courts can traditionally take years as cases move through the federal district court in Washington, followed by appeals. During President Trump’s first term, for example, the administration invoked executive privilege after former White House Counsel Don McGahn was subpoenaed. However, Trump did not testify during his presidency.
Democratic aides are also considering additional ways to make subpoena noncompliance more costly, including cumulative penalties through a contempt provision in House rules, according to people familiar with the discussions. Inner Loop.
Legal experts have long argued that the most effective way to resolve subpoena disputes would be legislation requiring faster judicial review. Such a process could allow courts to settle challenges while a president remains in office.
Among the most viable proposals discussed in recent years are measures that would send congressional subpoena challenges directly to a panel of federal district courts, with appeals proceeding directly to the Supreme Court. However, such reforms would not eliminate every obstacle because the Justice Department prosecutes subpoena violations and has rarely pursued cases involving its own employees. Experts have outlined several congressional subpoena reform proposals.
President Trump may ultimately face a choice between complying with a congressional subpoena and submitting a legal affidavit explaining his refusal.
This is an edition of Hugo Lowell’s Inner Loop newsletter. Read previous newsletters here.
Source: www.wired.com