Democratic Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg filed a lawsuit on Tuesday against the House Judiciary Committee and Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) in response to that committee's efforts to conduct federal oversight of Bragg's criminal prosecution of former President Donald Trump.
Bragg's lawsuit sought the immediate issuance of a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction to block a committee subpoena of a former prosecutor in the DA's office but the judge presiding over the suit summarily rejected that request, the Conservative Brief reported.
The court proceedings were summed up in an admittedly biased manner by Mike Davis, founder of the conservative Article III Project and a former attorney for Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, who stands staunchly opposed to DA Bragg's apparent political persecution of former President Trump.
Davis tweeted Tuesday night, "Soros-funded Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's (frivolous) lawsuit against House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan is already off to a bad start for Bragg: The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York declined to even enter a temporary restraining order."
His thread of tweets included screenshots from the brief order issued by the judge assigned to the case, Trump-appointed U.S. District Mary Kay Vyskocil, who instead set a date of April 19 for a hearing on Bragg's request after both sides had properly submitted motions and responses on the matter.
Davis added, "Summary of Soros-funded Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's (frivolous) legal argument: Congress is interfering in Bragg's misuse of federal funds and misuse of federal law to politically interfere in the next presidential election."
Fox News reported on Tuesday that DA Bragg had filed his lawsuit that accused Rep. Jordan and the committee of harassment and intimidation of his office as part of "an unprecedently brazen and unconstitutional attack by members of Congress on an ongoing New York State criminal prosecution and investigation of former President Donald J. Trump."
As noted, the DA's suit sought an immediate block of a committee subpoena for testimony from former prosecutor Mark Pomerantz, who quite publicly resigned in protest from the Manhattan office in early 2022 over, in his view, the failure of Bragg at that time to move with sufficient speed on the effort to criminally indict the former president, and has since been vocal in publicly pressuring the DA to make progress in that regard.
"Chairman Jordan's subpoena is an unconstitutional attempt to undermine an ongoing New York felony criminal prosecution and investigation," Bragg said in a statement. "As our complaint details, this is an unprecedented, illegitimate interference by Congress that lacks any legal merit and defies basic principles of federalism."
"The Manhattan D.A.'s Office focuses on the law and the evidence, not political gamesmanship or threats. We look forward to presenting our case in court to enjoin enforcement of the subpoena," he added.
In response to the lawsuit filed by DA Bragg, Rep. Jordan said in a tweet, "First, they indict a president for no crime. Then, they sue to block congressional oversight when we ask questions about the federal funds they say they used to do it."
For what it is worth, in addition to the subpoena of Pomerantz for a deposition, Jordan also sent a letter last week requesting documents and testimony from Matthew Colangelo, senior counsel for the Manhattan DA's office, in light of allegations that he'd been hired to "jump-start" the stalled Trump investigation that Pomerantz had complained about.
The pressure campaign of Pomerantz and assistance from Colangelo appear to have worked, as Bragg infamously unveiled a 34-count felony indictment against Trump in relation to the 2016 "hush money" payment of $130,000 to porn actress Stormy Daniels to buy her silence about an alleged 2006 affair.
Meanwhile, Fox News also noted that the House Judiciary Committee has scheduled an in-field hearing next week in Manhattan to discuss DA Bragg's "pro-crime, anti-victim" policies that will feature testimony from victims and family members who feel they've been denied justice by Bragg's lack of prosecutorial action against the criminals who wronged them.
