Attorney General Bill Barr has gotten entirely too comfortable making up new rules to justify trampling all over the Constitution, and Monday was no exception. Grousing that Democrats had been "scolding and insulting" during Barr’s last appearance before the House Judiciary Committee, the Justice Department is now declining to make witnesses available from the department’s Civil Division, the Bureau of Prisons, and the U.S. Marshals Service.
"Rather than attempt to obtain information from the Department that would assist the Committee in recommending legislation to the House, many Members of the majority devoted their time entirely towards scolding and insulting the Attorney General," Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd wrote in response to a request from House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerry Nadler.
"In what can only be viewed as a coordinated effort to muzzle the Attorney General the Members repeatedly invoked the phrase, ‘reclaiming my time,’ which they employed more than 30 times when the Attorney General tried to respond. All told, when the Attorney General tried to address the Committee's questions, he was interrupted and silenced in excess of 70 times."
Gasp—interrupted in excess of 70 times! Horrors. The all-too mild-mannered and exceedingly reasonable GOP minority would never interrupt a witness in order to simply "air grievances," as Boyd put it.
The House Judiciary panel was seeking to interview the head of the Civil Rights Division, Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband, Bureau of Prisons Director Michael Carvajal, and U.S. Marshals Service Director Donald Washington.
But Boyd proceeded to fabricate a new imaginary standard that lawmaker questions, not simply the investigation itself, must serve a "legitimate legislative purpose."
"As the Supreme Court recently reiterated, the purpose of a hearing by the House is to obtain the information necessary to legislate 'wisely and effectively,' and the questioning is required to serve a legitimate legislative purpose," Boyd wrote. That's ludicrous. There's no such “legitimate” purpose standard applied to individual lawmakers' questions. And who the hell is Barr to decide whether questions are serving a legitimate purpose, especially when he was the witness. According to Barr's new standard, witnesses going forward get to determine which questions are and aren't legitimate in the course of a lawmakers' inquiry. Unless, of course, those witnesses don't even show up at all, which is the case here.
After making up a new standard to deny the panel witnesses, Boyd then helpfully offered that the Justice Department might be willing to work with the committee to make future witnesses available "should the Committee commit to doing so in an appropriate and productive manner."
To reiterate, Barr is now the subjective arbiter of what's legitimate, appropriate, and productive conduct for congressional lawmakers seeking to perform their constitutionally prescribed oversight duties.