Fight over White House subpoenas heads to court

WASHINGTON -- Congress issued its demands. The White House refused. Now it's up to a federal judge to settle a dispute over documents and testimony regarding fired federal prosecutors.

Lawyers for the White House and Congress were in federal court Monday arguing the scope of the president's power to ignore legislative subpoenas. Court fights on this topic are rare and are normally reserved for questions of whether the White House has to cooperate with a criminal investigation, not with a congressional inquiry.

The Democratic-led House Judiciary Committee is demanding documents and testimony from the president's chief of staff, Josh Bolten, and former counsel Harriet Miers about the firing of U.S. attorneys. The scandal helped force the resignation of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The White House says Miers and Bolten do not need to comply with the subpoenas, citing executive privilege, the principle that one branch of government can't make another branch do something.

At the hearing before U.S. District Judge John Bates, Justice Department attorney Carl Nichols said: "The relief sought by the committee is unprecedented and would fundamentally alter the separation of powers."

Judges normally try to stay out of disputes between the executive and legislative branches. The Bush administration wants the court to avoid this fight, too. Lawmakers say the court is obligated to help enforce a congressional subpoena.

House counsel Irv Nathan said Congress wants to figure out whether the Bush administration politicized the Justice Department. To do so, the committee needs the documents and testimony.

"Not only doesn't it have the facts from the White House, it has false and misleading facts from former members of the Department of Justice," Nathan told the hearing.

Nathan said only the court could settle the dispute.

"We need the courts to lay down what the rules are and what the parameters," he said.