Skip to main content

Former special counsel Robert Mueller testifies on Capitol Hill, in Washington, in a July 24, 2019, file photo.The Associated Press

The Justice Department must give Congress secret grand jury testimony from special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday, giving the House a significant win in a separation-of-powers clash with the Trump administration.

The three-judge panel said in a 2-1 opinion that the House Judiciary Committee’s need for the material in its investigations of President Donald Trump outweighed the Justice Department’s interests in keeping the testimony secret. The opinion authorizes access to information that Democrats have sought since the conclusion of Mr. Mueller’s investigation, giving lawmakers previously-undisclosed details from the two-year Russia probe.

Writing for the majority, Justice Judith Rogers said that because Mr. Mueller himself “stopped short” of reaching conclusions about Mr. Trump’s conduct to avoid stepping on the House’s impeachment power, the committee had established that it could not make a final determination about Mr. Trump’s conduct without access to the underlying grand jury material.

“The Committee’s request for the grand jury materials in the Mueller Report is directly linked to its need to evaluate the conclusions reached and not reached by the Special Counsel,” wrote Justice Rogers, a Clinton appointee.

Judge Thomas Griffith issued a separate concurring opinion. Justice Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented, suggesting that the need for the testimony could have waned after Mr. Trump’s acquittal at a Senate impeachment trial last month.

“After all, the Committee sought these materials preliminary to an impeachment proceeding and the Senate impeachment trial has concluded. Why is this controversy not moot?” Justice Rao wrote.

It is unclear when the materials might actually be turned over. The Trump administration can ask the full appeals court to rehear the case, and can appeal to the Supreme Court.

The ruling softens the blow of a loss the House endured two weeks ago when judges on the same court said they would not force former White House counsel Don McGahn to testify before Congress. The split decisions leave neither the administration nor Congress with a clear upper hand in an continuing interbranch dispute.

The ruling is a major win for Democrats who have fought the Justice Department for nearly a year, but it’s unclear what the House will actually do with the material. Lawyers for the Democrats have said the grand jury material could potentially be used for additional articles of impeachment, though the Senate impeachment trial over the president’s interactions with Ukraine ended weeks ago in an acquittal.

The case is one of several disputes between the Trump administration and Congress that courts have grappled with in recent months.

The two sides had been similarly at odds on the question of whether Mr. McGahn could be forced to testify about Mr. Trump’s behaviour during the Russia investigation. The appeals court ruled in a recent 2-1 decision that judges had no role to play in that dispute and dismissed the case.

Mr. Mueller issued a 448-page report last April that detailed multiple interactions between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia and that examined several episodes involving the president for potential obstruction of justice. Mr. Mueller said his team did not find sufficient evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy between the campaign and the Kremlin to tip the election, though pointedly noted that he could not exonerate the president for obstruction.

Portions of the report were blacked out, including grand jury testimony and material that Mr. Mueller said could harm continuing investigations or infringe on the privacy of third parties.

Grand jury testimony is typically treated as secret, in part to protect the privacy of people who are not charged or are considered peripheral to a criminal investigation. But several exceptions allow for the material to be turned over, including if it is in connection with a judicial proceeding.

The House argued that the impeachment inquiry met that definition, and it sought copies of testimony referenced in Mr. Mueller’s report. Chief U.S. District Justice Beryl Howell sided with the House last October in ordering that the material be turned over.

The Justice Department appealed that decision, with lawyers arguing that the material sought by the House had no relevance to the impeachment inquiry and that the House already had ample information about the investigation.

Several dozen witnesses appeared before Mr. Mueller’s grand jury, including former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.