On the Hill, Democrats are creating a weapon that might backfire on them

CNN reported this week that House Democrats are building a new legal weapon for 2027: civil lawsuits forcing compliance with congressional subpoenas. This is the latest instrument in what conservatives call “lawfare.”

It is aimed at the Iran war, the White House ballroom project, the Trump family’s business dealings, and the Epstein files.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who could chair the House Judiciary Committee next year, says that a majority would give Democrats “a lot more authority to get ourselves into court.” That’s fair enough. But before anyone sharpens this new blade, it is worth checking whose fingerprints are on the handle.

Right now, as a minority in Congress, House Democrats can send letters and hold press conferences. They cannot force anyone to answer.

If they win the majority, they will gain committee gavels, subpoena power, contempt votes, and, as Raskin referenced, one new option: asking federal judges to order compliance instead of waiting on Trump’s own Justice Department to prosecute him.

This innovation will probably be slower than advertised. The fight over former White House Counsel Don McGahn’s testimony, for example, ran from 2019 to 2021 and ended in a negotiated deal, not a courtroom victory. Subpoena litigation measures progress in years, not in news cycles.

Then there’s the target list. Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), likely the next Armed Services Committee chairman, won’t rule out subpoenas for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over Iran and a string of firings. None of that proves wrongdoing — a subpoena is a question, not a verdict. But Pentagon privilege and classification fights alone can eat a........

© The Hill