The Supreme Court announced Monday it would hear a case that could decide the extent of Congress’ investigative powers and whether a small group of lawmakers can force the administration to comply with document requests.
The case involves a years-old challenge some Democrats filed after the Trump administration’s General Services Administration declined to turn over documents concerning the Trump Organization’s lease of hotel space in Washington.
Those Democrats, who were in the minority at the time, had pointed to a federal law that said seven members of the House Oversight Committee could request documents from an executive agency. They went to court to demand access.
A district judge tossed their case, saying they don’t have standing to sue because they were a small minority of the House, not the House itself speaking. An appeals court, in a 2-1 ruling, disagreed.
GSA asked the justices to review that ruling, and, in a brief order Monday, they agreed to take the case.
Stanley Brand, former House general counsel from 1976 to 1983, said the decision to hear the case is striking because the Supreme Court generally dislikes getting involved in litigation between a president and Congress.
He said this case will give the justices an opportunity to draw lines on when and how members can sue a president or an executive agency.
“This is a recurring issue over the last 40 years,” he said. “It comes in the wake of a lot of Trump era litigation … which in one way or another has trimmed the Congress’ sails in this issue.”
The case creates some strange alliances, with the Biden administration defending the same stance as the Trump administration is arguing against expansive congressional inquiry powers.
Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law, said the executive branch — no matter which party controls it — doesn’t want to be subject to litigation.
“The long-term interest crosses over any party lines,” he said, explaining why both the Trump and Biden administrations fought the request.
The case is Robin Carnahan, Administrator of the General Services Administration v. Carolyn Maloney, and it will be argued during the 2023 term, which begins in October. Ms. Maloney is a former member of Congress representing New York, who lost her re-election bid last year.
The lawsuit was originally filed by Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, who died in 2019. Ms. Maloney took over his role as leading Democrat on the oversight committee, and thus the case.
He and fellow Democrats wanted to explore the terms of the lease the GSA, which acts as the federal government’s main landlord, had signed with the Trump Organization in 2013 to convert the Old Post Office building, located on Pennsylvania Avenue, into a hotel.
Mr. Trump was not president in 2013 and, though a celebrity tycoon for decades, had never held any federal political office to that date.
The Democrats believed the lease constituted a conflict of interest for the president, and also meant he was drawing personal income from the lease, in violation of the Constitution’s emoluments clauses.
Cases involving the conflicts of interest raged throughout Mr. Trump’s time in office, but the Supreme Court dismissed them in 2021, saying they became moot once Mr. Trump left office.
Mr. Trump’s stake in the hotel is not at issue in the case the justices will now hear.
Instead, it looks at whether a small group of lawmakers can allege enough of a legal injury to have the courts step in and referee.
The Biden administration asked the high court to review the case — becoming the second administration to fight the release of the records.
“Our Nation’s history makes clear that an informational dispute between Members of Congress and the Executive Branch is not of the sort traditionally thought to be capable of resolution through the judicial process,” Elizabeth Preloger, the U.S. Solicitor General, argued in the government’s petition.
• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.