Former President Donald Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael Flynn, lost his attempt to overturn a subpoena for his testimony and phone records a day after he sued the special House committee investigating the riot on January 6 at the Capitol.
The lawsuit – which sought a temporary injunction – was filed Tuesday in federal district court in Fort Myers, Fla., A day before Flynn was due to appear before the committee to testify. United States District Court Judge Mary Scriven cited the lack of urgency as one of the reasons for the dismissal of Flynn’s claim on Wednesday, according to NBC News.
While the committee originally requested documents from Flynn by November 23, the judge noted “that there is no evidence on file as to when the select committee now expects Flynn complies with its requests for documents “. Scriven also noted that Flynn’s deposition has been postponed to “a date to be determined.”
As a result, the judge ruled that there was “no basis for concluding that Flynn would suffer immediate and irreparable harm” through the document request. Scriven also noted that Flynn’s attorneys did not follow the correct process to file a restraining order request by failing to notify the other party or reveal why notice was not needed.
If Flynn “feels he can comply with the procedural requirements,” he can try again, the judge said.
In the 42-page dossier, Flynn, sacked by President Barack Obama in 2014 as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, alleged that the committee’s request was a “scandalous intrusion” that risked violating his rights to the first, fourth and second. fifth amendments.
“The summons requires tapes of General Flynn’s communications on the 2020 elections, and seeks to identify the basis of his beliefs and the people with whom he has associated, in addition to contacts with government officials. This therefore constitutes a frontal attack on his 1st Amendment rights to freedom of expression, association and petition, ”the lawsuit read.
“Without the intervention of this Court, General Flynn risks being irreparably and illegally compelled to produce information and testimony in violation of the law and of his constitutional rights,” he continued. “He will also suffer unlawful and irreparable harm by the illegal and secret seizure by the select committee of his personal information and that of his family from their telecommunications and / or email service providers.”
Flynn asked the court to declare the current subpoena and future committee summons “illegal and unenforceable” due to violations of his and his family’s Fourth Amendment rights as well as their Fifth Amendment privilege against the car. -crimination, wrote his lawyer Matthew Sarelson.
Keywords: Michael Flynn convicted for saying America should only have one religion
In his lawsuit, Flynn and his legal team cited the 45th president’s claim of executive privilege over certain communications that took place on and around January 6.
According to the lawsuit, Flynn informed the committee of his intention to prosecute Monday, noting that there “appeared to be no” way to resolve his conflict with the committee’s demands without court intervention. Sarelson wrote that the panel informed Flynn that it could fire him “for contempt of Congress” if he did not show up to testify.
The committee has laid charges against several former Trump aides who refused to comply with subpoenas. However, former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon is the only one to have been charged so far.
Besides Trump, several other figures affiliated with the events of January 6 have filed a lawsuit against the committee, challenging its subpoenas and refusing to testify. These include former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, Infowars founder and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, and “Stop the Steal” campaign organizer Ali Alexander.
See: Roger Stone says he invoked the Fifth Amendment in testimony before the Jan.6 committee – on every question asked
In notifying Flynn of his subpoena last month, committee chairman Bennie Thompson pointed to a meeting held on December 18, 2020, which Flynn is said to have attended and where “participants discussed the seizure of the machinery. to vote, the declaration of a national emergency, the invocation of certain emergency powers in matters of national security, and continue to spread the false message that the elections of November 2020 were marred by widespread fraud . ”
“The day before, Flynn gave an interview to Newsmax TV in which he spoke about the seizure of the voting machines, the foreign influence in the election and the alleged precedent for the deployment of military troops and the declaration of martial law to “remake” the election, “said Thompson, a Democrat from Mississippi, added.
Keywords (March 2021): Trump advocate Sidney Powell justifies his allegations of electoral theft by conceding that “reasonable people” do not believe them
Among its other claims, Flynn’s lawsuit argues that the committee is not legally constituted because it does not include any members appointed by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, the Republican of California.
Archives (July 2021): McCarthy withdraws full list of Republican nominees for January 6 select committee after Pelosi rejects Jordan and Banks
See also (January 2021): Kevin McCarthy becomes Republican standard-bearer by stepping back recent criticism of Trump
“Thus, the select committee as it now exists – and stood at the time it issued the subpoenas in question – does not have the power to conduct business because it is not of a select committee duly constituted “, one reads in the continuation.
MarketWatch has contributed to this.
A version of this report appeared on NYPost.com.