A federal judge ruled on May 1 that a subpoena that the House panel investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol breach issued to a Republican National Committee (RNC) vendor for reams of data is legitimate.
The subpoena was for documents and testimony from Salesforce, which the RNC and former President Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign used to send hundreds of emails, including delivery metrics dating as far back as Nov. 3, 2020.
The subpoena was sent as part of an effort to see whether the campaign “used Salesforce’s platform to disseminate false statements about the 2020 election in the weeks leading up to the Jan. 6 attack,” Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) said in February when it was issued.
Kelly dismissed the claims against members of the House, saying they were immune under the Constitution’s speech or debate clause. He also tossed claims against Salesforce, ruling that the claims “came up short ... given the highly deferential review the court must give Congress’s investigative power and the nature of the materials at issue.”
There are only nine members at present. Seven are Democrats. Pelosi rejected members picked by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and chose the only two Republicans on the committee.
While the RNC raised important First Amendment issues, some of the information the panel seeks is already in the public realm, while for the confidential data, “the strength of the select committee’s interest in this information outweighs any actual burdens imposed by its disclosure to the select committee,” Kelly said.
The judge said the panel may make the RNC data public, which could “reveal some of its strategic decisions,” but also said any harm that may befall the RNC was too speculative to outweigh the panel’s interest.
The only area Kelly was poised to rule in favor of the plaintiff, the allegation that the subpoena violated the Stored Communications Act, was settled when the panel agreed to not seek communications covered by the act.
The RNC and the panel didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Republicans had argued that the subpoena was unconstitutional.
“The select committee’s fishing expedition would only serve to chill the RNC’s and its supporters’ First Amendment rights, while providing their political opponents with an all-access pass to confidential RNC political strategies and the personal information of millions of its supporters. Worryingly, the information targeted is universally for persons opposed to the political party in control of the U.S. House of Representatives and the select committee,” the RNC said in its complaint.
Some of the data being sought by the Democrat-dominated panel was confidential and sensitive, the RNC noted, before arguing that the subpoena wasn’t limited to information related to the events of Jan. 6.
“To be sure, this lawsuit is not intended to circumscribe Congress’ legislative power to address the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Rather, the RNC has been forced to bring this lawsuit in order to ensure that the events of that day are not used as a pretense to indiscriminately rifle through the internal affairs and deliberations of one of the country’s two major political parties by an irregularly composed select committee dominated by members of the other,” the complaint reads.
In their opposition brief, the defendants said the details they sought didn’t include “individual-specific information” and that going back to as early as November 2020 was crucial for their “thorough investigation of the January 6th attack.”
Kelly, the judge, temporarily blocked the subpoena from being enforced, so the RNC can seek an injunction pending appeal.
