https://www.innercitypress.com/sdny83cvyskocilbraggvjordanicp041923.html------
On April 19, the argument took place. Inner City Press live tweeted it, thread here:
OK - now Bragg v. Jim Jordan argument - Bragg wants to enjoin House subpoenas, incl of frmr ADA Pomerantz.
All rise!
Judge Vyskocil: Appearances, please. Matthew Berry representing Jim Jordan... Todd Tatelman, for Congressional defendants...
Bragg's lawyer: This court should enjoin this subpoena on Federalism grounds, would harm the State of NY and the DA
Bragg's lawyer Boutrous: We have Congress seeking to supersede both DA Bragg and Judge Marchan --
Judge Vyskovil: How? Boutrous: They are trying to conduct oversight. Judge Vyskocil: He's speaking generically. He lists 3 legislative purposes for the subpoena
Judge Vyskocil: They want to know if Federal funds are being used. Boutrous: We've already given that information. Judge Vyskocil: Then it will be a short deposition. Hasn't there been a waiver of privilege, in the book? Boutrous: Ms. Dubeck will address that.
Boutrous: This is to intimidate DA Bragg. They said, We're going to hold him accountable. Judge Vyskocil: Shouldn't I try to not read minds on either side here? If there's a valid legislative purpose, that's the end of the inquiry, right? Boutrous: It's improper
Judge Vyskocil: Let's go back to the book. Boutrous: I knew you'd ask me about it... The Mazars decision really changed things. It didn't get enough play -- Judge Vyskocil: There's politics going on on both sides here, right? Boutrous: I don't concede that
Boutros: The ALVIN Act, I think it's an insulting name- Judge Vyskocil: I can't and won't look at the possible Constitutionality of an act they would pass. Your opening brief didn't address the Speech and Debate Clause.
Judge Vyskocil: What's before me is the subpoena, not all the political invective that's been flying back and forth. That's just color.
Ms. Dubeck, how has the privilege not been waived in the book? Dubeck: It's the privilege of my office, not Mr. Pomerantz Judge Vyskocil: Have you read the book? Dubeck: Yes. Judge Vyskocil: Do you think it violated privileges?
Dubeck: Yes. And he has exposed himself to criminal liability under the City Charter. 2606 c - a misdemeanor, a former employee may not disclose
Dubeck: They haven't shown why the deposition has to happen tomorrow. They are trying to chill our office, over $5000 in Federal forfeiture funds.
Judge Vyskocil: You won't contest you spent it. Why isn't that a legislative purpose, to look into that? Dubeck: If the court were to limit the deposition to the use of Federal funds.... Judge Vyskocil: They have asserted other legislative purposes as well.
More at link.
