Lincoln Diaz-Balart: “I opposed this rule last night because of my concern related to the separation of powers, not with regard to the process…”

“I opposed this rule last night because of my concern related to the separation of powers, not with regard to the process of discovery in this case. I agree with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California that, and I would quote the court, in the review of its discovery process, Congress is not seizing a function not constitutionally entrusted to it, and there is no separation of powers violation, end quote, but, rather, in the demand that the resolution makes that the U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California filed criminal charges. It was alleged more than once during the almost 4 hours that we listened to the testimony in the Committee on Rules last night that legal authority exists preventing that outright demand by Congress of the U.S. attorney. The Gorsuch case in the 1980's, specifically in 1983, was referred to. So what we do with this amendment that the chairman of the Committee on Rules is proposing to the rule is to state and make clear that when the House makes its demands upon the U.S. attorney, that the determination to prosecute must be made by the U.S. attorney pursuant to its finding that it is appropriate according to the law and the facts in this case.”