On Tuesday, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg requested to enter a restraining order against Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH). This request was rejected later that same day by Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil.

Bragg filed a lawsuit against Jordan for allegedly infringing on state sovereignty by his “brazen and unconstitutional attack by members of Congress on an ongoing New York State criminal prosecution and investigation of former President Donald J. Trump.”

Alvin Bragg, Manhattan District Attorney

Bragg’s intent with this lawsuit is to quash the subpoenas from Jordan, which are part of his investigation into Bragg’s handling of the case against Trump. Jordan has subpoenaed a former Bragg deputy and requested documents from Bragg’s office pertaining to the prosecution of Trump.

The suit stated that Jordan “has no power under the Constitution to oversee state and local criminal matters.”

“Chairman Jordan’s subpoena is an unconstitutional attempt to undermine an ongoing New York felony criminal prosecution and investigation,” said Bragg. “As our complaint details, this is an unprecedented, illegitimate interference by Congress that lacks any legal merit and defies basic principles of federalism.”

“The Manhattan D.A.’s Office focuses on the law and the evidence, not political gamesmanship or threats,” Bragg continued. “We look forward to presenting our case in court to enjoin enforcement of the subpoena.”

Included in this lawsuit was an emergency request for a Temporary Restraining Order against Jordan, which was swiftly denied by Vyskocil.

“The Court declines to enter the proposed Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause,” Vyskocil ruled, adding that she was missing documents that were referenced in Bragg’s filings.

Vyskocil scheduled a hearing for April 19 and ordered Jordan and the other defendants named in the lawsuit to respond.

Speaking on Fox News, Jordan bashed Bragg’s lawsuit, claiming that it is obstructing a legitimate congressional investigation.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH)

“They’re obstructing our investigation,” said Jordan. “We have a constitutional duty to get to the facts, particularly when you have a district attorney interfering with the most important election we have, which is the election of the commander-in-chief; the president of the United States.”

Jordan also posted a message to Twitter stating his frustration with the lawsuit, saying, “First, they indict a president for no crime. Then, they sue to block congressional oversight when we ask questions about the federal funds they say they used to do it.”

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.