Judge Rejects Bid by Michael Flynn to Block Jan. 6 Capitol Probe Subpoena

Source: Resist the Mainstream

Date: 12/24/2021

A judge has weighed in on the request of Lieutenant General Michael Flynn to stop the January 6 House Select Committee from subpoenaing his testimony and documents.

District Judge Mary Scriven has denied the request but said that the general can refile the case under certain conditions despite having been denied a temporary restraining order, NBC News reported.

The judge took action the day after Flynn filed his motion in federal court in Florida, where he lives.

U.S. District Judge Mary Scriven of Tampa said Flynn’s motion, which was filed Tuesday, failed for two reasons, including a lack of urgency.

She noted that the committee postponed Flynn’s deposition to “a date to be determined.” And while the committee’s subpoena said he should produce the documents it requested by Nov. 23, “there is no evidence in the record as to the date by which the select committee now expects Flynn to comply with its document requests,” she said.

For those and other reasons, Scriven said, “there is no basis to conclude that Flynn will face immediate and irreparable harm,” which is what he would have to demonstrate to get a restraining order.

Scriven said Flynn’s lawyers also failed to follow the correct procedure for such requests. Federal rules require someone seeking a temporary restraining order to notify the other party or parties — in this case, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and the Jan. 6 committee — or say why the notice shouldn’t be required. Flynn’s lawyers failed to do either, an omission that the judge said was fatal to his motion.

The judge said that the general can apply again “if he believes he can comply with the procedural requirements.”

“Of course, if the Select Committee attempts to expedite the response dates for document requests from Flynn or for the third-party subpoenas, Flynn may seek appropriate relief from the Court. If Flynn chooses to renew his request for a temporary restraining order, he must adequately explain why injunctive relief is necessary before Defendants have an opportunity to respond,” the judge said.

David Warrington, the attorney for Flynn, said that the judge’s decision would not affect their case challenging the subpoena.

“General Flynn looks forward to obtaining relief from Congress’s unconstitutional and unlawful investigation in the normal course of his pending suit for injunctive relief that was not affected by today’ order,” he said.

The retired general sued, challenging the validity of the subpoena for his testimony and phone records, arguing that is violates his Constitutional rights.

“Without intervention by this Court, General Flynn faces the harm of being irreparably and illegally coerced to produce information and testimony in violation of the law and his constitutional rights,” his complaint said. “He will also be illegally and irreparably harmed by the Select Committee’s unlawful and secret seizure of his and his family’s personal information from their telecommunications and/or electronic mail service providers.”

This is an excerpt from Conservative Brief.


Back to Top