Legal News

If the former president refuses the drama of testifying, his legal team could present several constitutional and procedural arguments in court.

As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give away each month. Anyone can read what you share.

WASHINGTON – If former President Donald J. Trump decides to fight the extradition granted him Friday by the House committee investigating his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, his lawyers are likely to collect a slew of constitutional and procedural arguments for why a court should. let him not testify.

In the most basic sense, any legal arguments trying to get Mr Trump off the hook would need to be weighty enough to generate two and a half months of litigation. If Republicans pick up enough seats in the mid-term elections to take over the House in January, as polls suggest is likely, they are almost certain to shut down the committee on January 6, a move that would invalidate r subpoena.

The issues raised by the extraordinary subpoena, which the panel issued at a hearing last week, are too complex to be resolved definitively before a potential power shift in the House, said Mark J. Rozell, a George Mason University professor and author of “Executive Privilege: Presidential Power, Secrecy and Accountability.”

“We are in a constitutional gray area here where there is no clear guidance as to what exactly should happen,” said Mr Rozell. “That gives the former president some leeway to present various creative legal arguments and ultimately delay the process until it no longer matters.”

Several former presidents have voluntarily testified before Congress, including Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, Herbert Hoover, Harry S. Truman and Gerald Ford. But there is no Supreme Court precedent that says whether Congress has the power to compel former presidents to testify against their will about their actions in office.

There are two historical precedents, but neither produced court rulings. In 1846, the House impeached two former presidents, John Quincy Adams and John Tyler, for an investigation into accusations of misappropriation by a secretary of state. According to a report by the Congressional Research Service, Tyler testified and Adams submitted a deposition.

And in 1953, the House Committee on Un-American Activities pawned Truman. But although he later testified voluntarily before Congress on other subjects, Truman refused to honor the committee’s hostage, claiming that as a former chief executive he was immune from compelled testimony by the legislative branch. The House let the matter drop.

One open question, then, is whether Truman was right. If Mr. Trump’s legal team chooses to argue that it is, one Supreme Court precedent could be relevant: In 1982, the court ruled that former presidents are immune from being sued for damages over official decisions they made while in office.

In that case, Nixon v. Fitzgerald, the majority reasoned that presidents must be able to carry out their constitutional duties without being hampered by the fear that a decision might expose them to civil damages after they leave office. The question in Mr Trump’s case would be whether a president could be similarly hindered by fear of being forced to testify before Congress.

Mr.’s legal team could Trump also invoked executive privilege to try to stop the annexation. In another case involving Richard Nixon, the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled in 1974 that a Senate committee investigating the Watergate scandal could not compel then-president Nixon to turn over tapes of his conversations in the Oval Office over.

The appeal court ruled that the Senedd’s need for the tapes was not sufficient to overcome the presumption of secrecy that protects the presidential decision-making process. That general secrecy is important, the courts decided, so that presidents can receive good-faith advice from their aides about how best to carry out their constitutional functions.

(More famously, about three months later, the Supreme Court upheld a Watergate prosecutor’s objection to the tapes, citing the greatest need for them in a criminal case. Shortly thereafter, Nixon resigned to avoid impeachment.)

Unlike Nixon in 1974, however, Mr. Trump is now a former president — not a sitting one — and his claims of executive privilege would be weaker. The incumbent, President Biden, who has more authority to invoke or suspend executive privilege, may not support it.

How Times reporters cover politics. We rely on our journalists to be independent observers. So while Times staff members can vote, they are not allowed to endorse or campaign for political candidates or causes. This includes taking part in marches or rallies to support an organization or donate money, or raise money for, any political candidate or election cause.

Notably, Mr. Biden refused to support an earlier attempt by Mr. Trump to invoke executive privilege to prevent the committee January 6 from subpoenaing the National Archives for White House records. The Supreme Court, which ruled against Mr Trump, refused to block the subpoena, although it did so in a way that left the scope of a former president’s powers under executive privilege unresolved.

Still, courts may view compelling a former president to appear at the Capitol and testify under oath as different from obtaining documents. Mr. Biden could also be more reluctant to establish a precedent that could help a Republican-controlled Congress subpoena him for testimony.

Mr Trump could also try to present a procedural argument that the subpoena is invalid.

That tactic has been used by nearly 30 people – among them, former aides to Mr Trump – who have filed lawsuits seeking to remove subpoenas from the committee on January 6. Many of these witnesses have argued that the improper composition of the panel and that the subpoenas are not sufficiently connected to the writing of laws.

The first argument goes like this: The House resolution authorizing the committee anticipated that Speaker Nancy Pelosi would appoint 13 members, including five in consultation with the Republican leadership. But the panel has only nine members, and neither of the two Republicans – Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois – was approved by the minority leader, Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, who boycotted the process after for Ms. Pelosi to reject several of its members. choices.

As for the second, lawyers for the witnesses have argued that the subpoenas were not sent with the aim of assisting Congress in its role in drafting laws, but rather as a politically motivated fishing trip for embarrassing information about Mr Trump.

Most of the lawsuits challenging the subpoenas on these – and other grounds – are still working their way through the courts. But in May, a federal judge in Washington dismissed both arguments, claiming the subpoenas were invalid in a case brought by the Republican National Committee against the panel.

However, that ruling was vacated several months later by the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit after the committee dropped its order for the Republican National Committee.

A Federal District Court judge also rejected claims that the committee’s subpoenas were invalid in the criminal prosecution of Stephen K. Bannon, a former adviser to Mr. Trump, who was sentenced to four months in prison on Friday for defying a subpoena from a House panel.

In a ruling in the case, Judge Carl J. Nichols, one of Trump’s appointees, noted that the full House voted to hold Mr. Bannon and others challenged subpoenas in contempt, stating that the body considered the committee’s subpoena valid. Judge Nichols said courts must defer to the House’s interpretation of its own rules, so it “cannot conclude as a matter of law that the committee has an invalid constitution.”

Still, rulings by district court judges are not definitive precedents, leaving much to litigation.

It also remains unclear what court path a fight against Trump’s order might take. Mr. could Trump filed his own suit asking a judge to remove it. Or he could wait for the House to try to enforce his plea.

One way for that to happen would be for the full chamber to vote on whether to hold him in contempt and refer the matter to the Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution, as it did in Mr Bannon’s case.

It would then be up to Attorney General Merrick B. Garland to decide whether to bring criminal charges.

The January 6 committee could also file its own lawsuit against Mr. Trump is seeking a judicial order for him to comply. In August 2019, for example, the House Judiciary Committee sued Mr. Trump’s former White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, who, at the direction of Mr.

The lawsuit set off a series of convoluted legal battles over constitutional issues and was still pending even when Mr. Biden became president in January 2021. That underscores the lack of time for extended litigation in Mr. Trump’s case.

Mr Trump’s aides have said he has weighed whether he should testify, but only on the condition that he is live and on television. That would deprive the committee of controlling what is seen or of only releasing selected extracts.

Mr said. Rozell that was not surprising.

“If Trump is going to go out there and make himself vulnerable, he’s going to do it in a public way,” he said. “It’s going to be a Trump show, and he’ll be playing to his own crowd. At that point, argument and legalese would be out the window. “

By Michele Gorman (October 21, 2022, 4:01 PM EDT) — A new report found that many legal teams are not adopting the most useful compliance technologies available, and the former top lawyer at Cognizant accused the company of intentionally disrupting his preparations for a criminal trial in March….

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You need to know what is happening with customers, competitors, practice areas and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.

Legislative Dems continue remote access case … and more

While the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal in a lawsuit by New Hampshire House Democrats seeking remote participation in the state Legislature — dealing with the effort is a major hurdle — Democrats say they’re not done litigating.

The New Hampshire Bulletin reported that the top court upheld the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruling against the Democrats’ effort, meaning that the denial to appeal that ruling now stands.

But Democrats say the circuit court ruled on their request only for a preliminary injunction, a common initial step in a lawsuit. With the appeals for that proposal now over, the party has returned to the federal court in Concord to try to conduct a full civil case.

“The state takes the position that all the issues are essentially decided, there is nothing else, there is no other basis for us to move forward,” said Israel Piedra, a Democratic state representative from Manchester and an attorney representing r Democrats in the case. “And we obviously disagree.”

The Democratic plaintiffs, which include current House Democratic Leader David Cote, are asking the court to compel the New Hampshire House to allow House lawmakers to vote remotely on session days, arguing that the decision to require in-person meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic prevented immunocompromised members from voting.

24 McLane attorneys named Super Lawyers

The McLane Middleton law firm has announced that 24 of its attorneys have been selected for inclusion in the 2022 edition of the New England Super Lawyers or Massachusetts Super Lawyers list.

Great Lawyers is a ranking service of lawyers from more than 70 practice areas who have been judged to have achieved high degrees of peer recognition and professional achievement. McLane Middleton solicitors selected to include:

Manchester Office: Peter D. Anderson, family law; Steven M. Burke, tax; Michael A. Delaney, criminal defense; Steven J. Dutton, business litigation; Bruce W. Felmly, civil litigation-defense; Joseph A. Foster, bankruptcy business; Wilbur A. Glahn III, business litigation; Adam M. Hamel, business litigation;

Scott H. Harris, business litigation; Ralph F. Holmes, estate and trust litigation; Linda S. Johnson, schools and education;

Daniel J. Norris,, business/corporate; Margaret “Peg” O’Brien, employment and labour; Jennifer L. Parent, business litigation;

Mark C. Rouvalis, environmental litigation; Cameron C. Shilling, cyber security; Mark A. Wright, intellectual property; and William V.A. Zorn, trusts and estates.

Concord Office: Mary Susan Leahy, estate and probate; Barry Needleman, environmental litigation; and Gregory H. Smith, environmental.

Portsmouth office: Patrick Closson, business/corporate.

Woburn, Mass. office: John D. Colucci, business/corporate and George L. Cushing, estate and probate.

$5 million in COPS funding went to the NH

New Hampshire US Senator Jeanne Shaheen, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee that funds the Department of Justice, has announced that over $5 million in federal funding going to New Hampshire has been allocated through the department’s Community Policing Technology and Equipment Program (COPS).

The program helps communities develop and acquire equipment, technology and communication systems aimed at helping improve community policing efforts and responding to and preventing crime. Recipients of this funding include the Merrimack and Durham, Cheshire and Strafford County police departments as well as the NHS Security Department. The money will be used to upgrade communications infrastructure and provide advanced training for law enforcement officers.

Insurance Department, NEC in educational partnership

The New Hampshire Department of Insurance and New England College have teamed up to create what they say is a first-of-its-kind course designed to give students an opportunity to learn about the insurance industry.

The course will introduce students to the nature of risk, risk identification, general risk management techniques and risk management through insurance. It covers why the individual or corporation buys insurance, what constitutes a smart insurance plan, what products are available in the insurance market and how those products are regulated by the NHID.

The four-credit course will begin in the Spring 2023 semester, and students will have the opportunity to undertake an internship for additional academic credit. A team of experts in the Insurance Department will teach the course.

Insurance Commissioner Christopher Nicolopoulos said the course aims to attract “well-informed individuals to the industry – whether as producers or regulators” because it is “critically important to the health of our markets and to furthering our consumer protection efforts.”

The news publisher gives up the dispute over the arrest of political ads

The publisher of The Londonderry Times, a weekly newspaper, has waived her arrest, pleading not guilty to charges that she published ads for local races that were not properly marked as political ads, the state attorney general’s office said.

The six misdemeanor charges allege the publisher, Debra Paul, failed to identify the ads with “proper language” identifying them as advertisements and say who paid for them as required by state law, she said. attorney general’s office in August after reviewing cases going back to 2019.

At the time, Paul said the AG’s action made it a case of “small business needing to protect itself from government overreach.”

Is NH constitutional carry?

Since February 22, 2017, New Hampshire has been a constitutional carry state, which does not require a permit to open carry or conceal carry a firearm in public. Concealed carry permits are still issued for reciprocity purposes with other states.

Can you conceal carry NH without a permit? A person may carry a loaded pistol or concealed revolver without a permit, unless such person is otherwise prohibited by New Hampshire or federal statute.

Can I carry a loaded handgun in my car in NH?

Can You Have a Loaded Gun in Your Car in New Hampshire? Yes, anyone who is at least 18 years of age and is not otherwise prohibited by statute from possessing a firearm may carry a loaded handgun in a vehicle without a permit.

Can I leave my firearm in the car in NH?

Under the new law, anyone who can legally possess a gun under state and federal law can carry it concealed in a purse, car, or briefcase without a permit. State statute prohibits felons or people subject to restraining orders from possessing a gun.

Where can I carry my gun in New Hampshire?

Concealed carry in NH Anyone who can legally possess a firearm may carry it openly or concealed without a permit, unless in a location where guns are specifically restricted.

Can I conceal carry in my car?

It is illegal to carry a concealed handgun in a vehicle unless the person has a valid concealed carry permit.” A convicted non-felon may carry a handgun if it is not concealed.

Can I carry my gun from NH to MA?

A: Yes. Under federal law (Title 18 US Code, chapter 44, Section 926A), you can interstate transport a firearm as long as you can legally carry it in the state of origin and in the state of destination.

Can I carry a gun in my car in Massachusetts?

Massachusetts law criminalizes the knowing possession of a firearm, or the knowing control of a firearm in a vehicle, whether loaded or unloaded, unless the owner is at their residence or place of business or has the card or the correct license for the firearm possessed. .

Can I travel through New Hampshire with a firearm?

Yes. New Hampshire is a constitutional carry state. Anyone who is at least 18 years of age and is not otherwise prohibited by statute from possessing a firearm may carry a handgun openly or concealed without a permit.

Can a non resident concealed carry in Massachusetts?

You must apply for a non-resident permit to carry firearms or a resident alien permit through the Firearms Records Bureau. You will need the following: A complete non-resident firearms license or an application for a resident alien licence. The required application fee.

Does Massachusetts Bar have reciprocity?

Reciprocal Jurisdictions The process in Massachusetts is not based on reciprocity of bar with other jurisdictions. Attorneys who meet the requirements may apply for admission.

Which states have Massachusetts Bar reciprocity? 5 and 6. Examinees will have the opportunity to seek admission to a bar in any of the jurisdictions that have agreed to reciprocity if they meet the score requirement for that jurisdiction. Massachusetts has reached agreements with Connecticut, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, Tennessee, Vermont and Washington, D.C.

Does Massachusetts have reciprocity with PA?

In terms of reciprocity, Massachusetts does not honor licenses from any other states.

What states are reciprocal with Pennsylvania?

The following states have reciprocity agreements with Pennsylvania: Indiana, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia.

Which states have the easiest bar exams?

According to test difficulty, Alabama, Minnesota, Missouri, New Mexico, North Dakota tied as the easiest (UBE passing score of 260!). According to academic first time pass rate, Oklahoma is the winner (86.90%), and Puerto Rico (40.45%) is the hardest to pass!

Does New York have reciprocity with Pennsylvania?

In terms of reciprocity, New York does not honor licenses from any other states.

Can I transfer my MBE score to Massachusetts?

Admission by Examination It is acceptable to take the MBE in another jurisdiction and transfer the scores to Massachusetts only if the MBE is taken at the same time as the Massachusetts essay exam. MBE scores from a previous exam period will not be accepted.

Can you transfer an MBE score?

The NCBE will transfer your MBE score to admissions authorities in other jurisdictions on request and payment of a fee. The MBE Score Transfer Application can be completed and submitted online through the NCBE website at www.ncbex.org.

What states have reciprocity with New York bar?

Many district courts require that an attorney be admitted to practice before the state courts of the state in which the federal court sits. NEW YORK: Has reciprocity with the following states: AK, CO, DC, GA, IL, IN, IA, KY, MA, MI, MN, MO, NE, NH, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA , TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY.

Is Massachusetts an MBE state?

Massachusetts administers the UBE. The exam includes the Multistate Performance Test (MPT), Multistate Essay Examination (MEE), and the Multistate Bar Exam (MBE).

Can a New York lawyer practice in Massachusetts?

NEW YORK: Has reciprocity with the following states: AK, CO, DC, GA, IL, IN, IA, KY, MA, MI, MN, MO, NE, NH, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA , TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY.

Which states accept NY bar exam?

Alaska	Arizona	Connecticut
Iowa	Kansas	Maine
Michigan	Minnesota	Missouri
Nebraska	New Hampshire	New Mexico
North Dakota	Ohio	Oregon

Does New York bar have reciprocity?

Admission on Offer (Acceptable) New York State allows admission on offer, without examination, for applicants who have practiced for five of the previous seven years, who are admitted to practice in at least one bilateral jurisdiction in the US, and has graduated from an American Bar Association approved law school.

Can a lawyer practice in any state?

Can lawyers practice in any state? Mostly, no. Most areas of practice are governed by state law, and those will require a State Bar license. Even areas of law that are mostly federal – bankruptcy, immigration, etc.

Is California Bar Ube?

What’s on the California Bar Exam? The California Bar Exam is a three-day exam that includes the MBE (i.e. the same two hundred multiple-choice questions as on the UBE), six one-hour essays, and two three-hour performance tests.

Can I transfer my Ube score to California? Yes, UBE jurisdictions will accept transferred scores that meet their own passing standards regardless of whether the score met the passing standard in the testing jurisdiction or not, assuming all other admission requirements of the jurisdiction are be satisfied.

Will California ever adopt the UBE?

Unfortunately, at this time, California has refused to adopt the UBE. However, there is good news for California bar exam students. In July, California will shorten its three-day exam to two days: one day of essays (five 1-hour essays and a 90-minute performance test) and one day of the MBE.

Is Ube different from California bar?

The California Bar Exam and the UBE have a written portion and a multiple choice portion. Both exams offer the exact same multiple-choice portion of the exam (the Multi-State Bar Exam or MBE). The National Conference of Bar Examiners drafts the MBE. So, the only real difference is the written part.

Can you take the UBE and California bar?

On the other hand, California does not accept UBE scores from any other state. If you are an attorney who has been practicing for less than four years in one state and wants to practice in California, you will have to prepare for and pass the California Bar Exam.

Is the UBE the same as the bar exam?

The UBE is a standardized bar exam created by the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE). It is designed to test the knowledge and skills that all lawyers should have before being licensed to practice law.

Is the California Bar Ube?

The California Bar Exam is a three-day exam that includes the MBE (i.e. the same two hundred multiple-choice questions as on the UBE), six one-hour essays, and two three-hour performance tests.

Does California administer the UBE?

Jurisdiction	UBE was adopted
Alaska	Yes
Arizona	Yes
Arkansas	Yes
California	No

How many states administer the UBE?

States That Have Adopted the UBE (âUBE Statesâ) There are 36 states or jurisdictions in America that have adopted the UBE.

Is California MBE the same as Ube?

Multi-State Bar Examination The MBE is one component of the UBE. The MBE also includes half the weighting of the UBE. The UBE was designed by the NCBE to test such skills and knowledge that all lawyers should possess before being licensed to practice law.

Where is the NH Bar exam held?

The NH Bar Exam is held at the University of New Hampshire School of Law in Concord, New Hampshire.

How difficult is the New Hampshire bar exam? Pass rates for each New Hampshire bar exam may differ. Pass rates have ranged from 57% to 92% for first-time takers, 59% to 93% for first-time takers, and 0% to 100% for those which takes a second time.

Is NH A UBE state?

The New Hampshire Bar Exam uses the two-day Uniform Bar Exam (UBE) that includes the Multistate Bar Exam (MBE), one Multistate Performance Test (MPT), and six state essay questions.

Does New Hampshire bar have reciprocity?

The Acceptance on Motion procedure in New Hampshire is based on bar reciprocity. Attorneys must be licensed in a jurisdiction that allows Admission on Motion for New Hampshire attorneys under circumstances similar to the New Hampshire Rules.

What states are not UBE States?

• California.
• Delaware.
• Florida.
• Georgia.
• Guam.
• Hawaii.
• Louisiana.
• Mississippi.

What state has the highest Ube score?

Alaska is the state with the highest UBE score at 280. This is followed by Colorado (276), Arizona (273), and Idaho/Pennsylvania (272).

How do I get admitted to New Hampshire Bar?

In order to become a member of the bar of this district, an attorney must be an active member in good standing of the New Hampshire Supreme Court bar. Apply for admission electronically using the PACER system at pacer.uscourts.gov. Detailed step-by-step instructions are provided here.

What does admitted to a bar mean?

Admission to the bar in the United States is the granting of permission by a particular court system to a lawyer to practice law in the jurisdiction and before those courts.

What states have bar reciprocity with New Hampshire?

NEW HAMPS POST: In January 2005, the states of Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont entered into a reciprocity agreement allowing attorneys to be admitted to each other’s bars without taking the bar exam for that state.

Does the New Hampshire Bar have reciprocity?

The Acceptance on Motion procedure in New Hampshire is based on bar reciprocity. Attorneys must be licensed in a jurisdiction that allows Admission on Motion for New Hampshire attorneys under circumstances similar to the New Hampshire Rules. Attorneys have the burden of proving that their home jurisdiction is equal.