Michael Flynn served up a lawsuit in Ft. Myers Florida, in US District Court, against all of the members of the US House Committee on January 6th to stop a subpoena that is clearly meant to further harass him and his family.
“Without intervention by this Court, General Flynn faces the harm of being irreparably and illegally coerced to produce information and testimony in violation of the law and his constitutional rights. He will also be illegally and irreparably harmed by the Select Committee’s unlawful and secret seizure of his and his family’s personal information from their telecommunications and/or electronic mail service providers,” the lawsuit, Flynn V. Pelosi, reads.
Former national security adviser Michael Flynn filed a lawsuit Tuesday morning requesting a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Jan. 6 House committee.
The former Trump official’s suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, alleges that the committee engaged in “outrageous intrusion” by subpoenaing him and his family and takes issue with a “secret seizure of his and his family’s personal information from their telecommunications and/or electronic mail service providers.”
“The subpoena demands records of General Flynn’s communications about the 2020 election, and seeks to identify the basis for his beliefs and the persons with whom he associated, in addition to contacts with government officials. It thus constitutes a frontal assault on his 1st Amendment rights to freedom of speech, association, and petition,” the motion stated.
Flynn also contends that the committee has engaged in “partisan harassment” and has overstepped its authority in the investigation while arguing that, along with violating his First Amendment rights, his Fifth Amendment rights would be violated by complying with the subpoenas.
The lawsuit is very clear, the US House plans to harass the Flynn family, who are all private citizens.
“Plaintiff, Lieutenant General Michael Flynn (Ret.) (“General Flynn”), a private citizen, brings this complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief to invalidate and prohibit the enforcement of a subpoena from the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol (the “Select Committee”) issued in whole or in part without legal authority and demanding information from General Flynn and testimony by him in violation of his Constitutional rights and the laws of the United States on November 8, 2021, the Select Committee mailed its subpoena to General Flynn (the “Subpoena”).
The Subpoena commanded General Flynn produce documents in response to twenty sweeping and vague demands covering a year and a half time frame—by November 23, 2021. Further, it commanded General Flynn to appear for a deposition on December 6, 2021. As discussions with Committee counsel made clear, these demands were addressed to discovering General Flynn’s political beliefs, and demanded he produce evidence for those beliefs and identify those to whom he communicated and with whom he associated about those beliefs, as well as any communication of those beliefs to the President.
5. General Flynn has raised significant Constitutional and practical concerns that preclude his compliance with the subpoena without clarification of its scope and terms by the Select Committee, and reconciliation of the Subpoena’s commands with his rights under the 5th Amendment to not be a witness against himself due to an active criminal investigation into the same issues, as well as his 1st Amendment rights to freedom of speech and association, and to petition the government to redress grievances.
Upon information and belief, the Select Committee has sought or intends to seek records pertaining to General Flynn and his family by issuing one or more subpoenas to their telecommunications and electronic mail providers—as it has done with other witnesses.
NO LEGAL AUTHORITY
Chairman Thompson derives the authority to issue subpoenas solely from § 5(c)(6) of the Select Committee’s authorizing resolution, but this authority is qualified, not absolute. The Select Committee chairman may not order the taking of depositions without consultation with the ranking minority member of the Select
73. The Select Committee has no ranking minority member. Therefore, Chairman Thompson failed to make the requisite consultation before issuing the Case 2:21-cv-00946-JES-NPM Document 1 Filed 12/21/21 Page 29 of 42 PageID 29
30 subpoena that compelled General Flynn to appear for a deposition. Indeed, such consultation was impossible because no properly appointed ranking minority member exists. The ordering of General Flynn’s deposition runs afoul of the Select Committee’s authorizing resolution, making it invalid and unenforceable
This story is still developing…