On the recordJune 28, 2018
H. Res. 970, which is before us now, includes a reference to a document unilaterally issued by the House Judiciary Committee on March 22, 2018. It is my understanding that the issuance of this purported subpoena is defective because it did not comply with committee rules providing that: At least two business days before issuing any subpoena, the Chair shall consult with the Ranking Member, and the Chair shall provide a full copy of the proposed subpoena. While, in this instance, the chairman did provide me, as ranking member, with a copy of a proposed subpoena on March 19, the document the chairman issued on March 22 was substantively and materially different from the document that was shared on March 19, in abrogation of committee rules. My parliamentary inquiry is whether these circumstances would have any bearing on consideration of this resolution, H. Res. 970, and, absent that, whether the defective nature would have any bearing on any future attempts by the House to enforce the supposed subpoena? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The House is currently considering H. Res. 970. The Chair cannot separately comment on committee proceedings. That is a matter for debate on the resolution.
Source
govinfo.gov




