Former Apollo Global Management CEO Leon Black has taken the unusual step of filing a lawsuit seeking to preclude the House of Representatives’ Committee on Oversight and Government Reform from enforcing subpoenas the Committee issued in its investigations related to Jeffrey Epstein.  Black’s complaint, which challenges the Committee’s authority to enforce its subpoenas through civil litigation, poses a question that was left unresolved by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2021.  Though the court may ultimately decline to reach that question in the present litigation, the case presents an intriguing opportunity to clarify the ability of House committees to compel compliance with investigative demands.

The Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (“OLC”) has issued a new legal opinion that may offer the administration new tools to withhold from disclosure the President’s communications with certain private parties.  In an opinion published this week, OLC concluded that the presidential communications privilege shields from disclosure certain communications between the President and what OLC described as his “private advisers,” who could be “anyone . . . outside the Executive Branch,” including “members of the public, state officials, or employees of other branches of the federal government.” 

In a moment when Democratic Members of Congress are preparing for sweeping inquiries of the administration should they win control of the House or Senate in the upcoming midterm elections, the practical implications of OLC’s analysis for future oversight disputes appear to be very significant.  Most immediately, the opinion opens another front in the long-running institutional struggle between the political branches over congressional access to executive branch information, with Democratic congressional leaders already signaling their intention to forcefully contest any forthcoming privilege claims.  At the same time, however, the opinion seems likely to extend those disputes to communications between the administration and companies, individuals, and entities outside the government that may themselves become subjects of congressional scrutiny. 

On August 6, 2026, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee voted along party lines to hold Dr. Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress.  The vote followed Dr. Fauci’s refusal to answer questions during a July 29, 2026, hearing regarding the federal government’s COVID-19 response.  The Committee referred the matter to the Department of Justice, which will decide whether to pursue prosecution.  The vote highlights an increasingly aggressive posture toward congressional subpoena enforcement and raises immediate, practical questions for witnesses who may face similar demands.

In recent years, investigators in Congress have ramped up scrutiny of government contractors and other recipients of federal funds. This trend has only accelerated in the current Congress, with Republican-led committees pursuing expansive inquiries targeting a wide variety of federal contractors and grantees. Along with familiar allegations of waste or…

With fewer than 180 days until the midterm elections, Democratic Members of Congress are laying the groundwork for future congressional investigations in the event the party regains control of one or both chambers next year. Even as Democratic Members prepare for the possibility of winning the majority, developments such as…

With the midterm elections rapidly approaching, Democratic lawmakers in both the House and Senate have begun to return to an increasingly familiar tactic of the minority: firing off a flurry of document preservation letters that are a harbinger for the subpoenas to come.  These early letters signal that key Democrats intend to hold potential investigative targets accountable if they regain power, and that they will not look fondly on parties that dismiss their requests.  By urging federal agencies and private entities to secure records in advance, Democratic Ranking Members are making clear that they won’t wait idly to ensure relevant evidence is preserved.