U. S. Troops and the debate against military bases named after confederate soldiers. Chairman smith i call the meeting to order. I welcome our witnesses, secretary of defense esper and chairman of the joint chiefs of staff milley. We appreciate you being here today. I do have to read an Opening Statement here about procedure in light of the fact that we do have members who are participating remotely in his in this hearing, in accordance with house rules. So i will do that and then a couple other programming notes and we will get started. I would like to welcome members who are joining todays markup remotely. Those members are reminded that they must be visible on screen within the Software Platform for the purposes of Identity Verification when joining their andeedings, establishing maintaining decorum, participating, and voting. We will not be voting, but participating members must use the Software Platform video function while attending the proceedings unless they experience connecti
For independents and others, that is 202 7488002. You can also send us a tax. Make sure you tell us your name and where you are texting from. That is 202 7488003. On twitter, it is cspanwj. Lets start with the polling on this. Both cases are the result of cases on the front of the new york time. Present isnt above the law. Custis is decide. Two cases. The court ruled seven to two that new york prosecutors could seek mr. Trumps financial records. Vote they call the liberal block and conservative block, those considered in this decision that voted for this. Same result in the second case, and the same majority ruled mr. Trump, for now, could block disclosure of his financial records to House Committees, returning the case to lower courts to narrow the scope of the records sought. Both of those cases in the polling on the cases from the New York Times shows in obtaining the right to the president tax records, most people,ulled most 61 , polled the prosecutors have a right in the president
Draw near and give their attention so the court is now sitting. Be seated, please. Case number 195331 committee on the judiciary of the United States house of representatives versus Donald F Mcgahn 2nd appellate. Good morning, your honor. May it please the court. The House Judiciary Committee seeks to assert an implied cause of action to enforce the subpoena to compel mr. Mcgahn to testify regarding his duties as white House Counsel over the objection of the president of the United States. This interbridge dispute over institutional prerogatives bears no resemblance to be against nonfederal officials, congress enforce subpoenas against federal executive officials asserting executive prerogative objections and what gives the senate statute. How does that help us think about the constitutional issue and stability issue. I think it does in two ways, your honor, first, we have a straightup subject matter jurisdiction argument because of the senate statute. But the second point, if you rule
May it please the court. The House Judiciary Committee seeks to assert an implied cause of action to enforce the subpoena to compel mr. Mcgahn to testify regarding his duties as white House Counsel over the objection of the president of the United States. This interbridge dispute over institutional prerogatives bears no resemblance to be controversies under article 3 and moreover, while congress has purported to authorize senate commutes to enforce certain subpoenas against nonfederal officials, congress itself has expressly carved out the authority of the senate to enforce subpoenas against federal executive officials asserting executive prerogative objections and what gives the senate statute. How does that help us think about the constitutional issue and stability issue. I think it does in two ways, your honor, first, we have a straightup subject matter jurisdiction argument because of the senate statute. But the second point, if you rule that theres no authority, this court can avo
On the judiciary of the United States house of representatives versus Donald F Mcgahn 2nd appellate. Good morning, your honor. May it please the court. The House Judiciary Committee seeks to assert an implied cause of action to enforce the subpoena to compel mr. Mcgahn to testify regarding his duties as white House Counsel over the objection of the president of the United States. This interbridge dispute over institutional prerogatives bears no resemblance to be controversies under article 3 and moreover, while congress has purported to authorize senate commutes to enforce certain subpoenas against nonfederal officials, congress itself has expressly carved out the authority of the senate to enforce subpoenas against federal executive officials asserting executive prerogative objections and what gives the senate statute. How does that help us think about the constitutional issue and stability issue. I think it does in two ways, your honor, first, we have a straightup subject matter juri