GOP warns of 'drawn out' executive privilege battle over Bolton testimony 

Republicans are using the threat of a protracted executive privilege battle as a cudgel to dissuade their colleagues from calling former national security adviser John BoltonJohn BoltonTrump offered North Korea's Kim a ride home on Air Force One: report Key impeachment figure Pence sticks to sidelines Bolton lawyer: Trump impeachment trial is constitutional MORE to testify at President TrumpDonald TrumpDonald Trump Jr. calls Bruce Springsteen's dropped charges 'liberal privilege' Schiff sees challenges for intel committee, community in Trump's shadow McConnell says he'd back Trump as 2024 GOP nominee MORE’s impeachment trial. 

As the Senate barrels toward a make-or-break moment on witnesses next week, Trump allies and members of leadership are warning that calling Bolton, or any current or former administration officials, to testify could draw out the impeachment fight for weeks, if not months. 

GOP senators expect Trump to make good on his suggestion that he could invoke executive privilege to avoid complying with subpoenas stemming from the trial. Legal experts are divided over exactly how the dispute would unfold, and under what time frame, but some believe it could lead to a lengthy court battle involving largely untested legal questions. 


Sen. Ron JohnsonRonald (Ron) Harold JohnsonCruz hires Trump campaign press aide as communications director Pelosi: Dems want commission focused on Capitol mob attack Pelosi jokes about Sen. 'Don' Johnson MORE (R-Wis.) said the fight would force lawmakers to pause the impeachment trial and keep Congress in a “state of limbo” as the court battle plays out. 

“Do we want to elongate this thing even further? I don’t believe we should,” Johnson told The Hill. 

Sen. Roy BluntRoy Dean BluntPassage of the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act is the first step to heal our democracy Microsoft, FireEye push for breach reporting rules after SolarWinds hack Biden's unity effort falters MORE (Mo.), the No. 4 Republican senator, added that Trump “should” invoke the legal protection after the House skipped resolving their own legal fights with the administration before voting on the impeachment articles. 

“It will have to go to the courts and absolutely it will be drawn out,” he said. 

Constitutional scholars say guidance from previous Supreme Court decisions may be of limited use to clear the thicket surrounding a possible assertion of executive privilege, the legal doctrine that shields certain presidential and executive communications from disclosure.

The most relevant case involves President Nixon’s privilege claim over the Watergate tapes. Ruling against Nixon in 1974, the justices said a president cannot withhold important evidence from an ongoing criminal investigation.


But while the Nixon case asked the justices to draw a line between executive privilege and law enforcement, Trump’s privilege assertion would present a novel separation of powers question the high court did not address in 1974.

The prospect of a legal battle has been simmering since Bolton opened the door earlier this month to testifying in the Senate impeachment trial if subpoenaed. 

Bolton is one of four witnesses Democrats are hoping to call to testify. They also want Michael Duffey, an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) staffer; Mick MulvaneyMick MulvaneyOMB nominee gets hearing on Feb. 9 Republicans now 'shocked, shocked' that there's a deficit Financial firms brace for Biden's consumer agency chief MORE, the acting White House chief of staff; and Robert Blair, a Mulvaney aide. 

Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerHillicon Valley: Biden signs order on chips | Hearing on media misinformation | Facebook's deal with Australia | CIA nominee on SolarWinds House Rules release new text of COVID-19 relief bill Budowsky: Cruz goes to Cancun, AOC goes to Texas MORE (D-N.Y.) signaled this week that he is willing to accept a court battle in order to get witness testimony or documents. 

“Look, if the White House tries to exert executive privilege on an order that passes by definition in a bipartisan way and is signed by the chief justice of the Supreme Court on a subpoena, I think that the courts would look very favorably on that,” he told reporters. 

Rep. Zoe LofgrenZoe Ellen LofgrenCurator estimates Capitol art damage from mob totals K Architect of the Capitol considering display on Jan. 6 riot Lawmakers say they are 'targets,' ask to boost security MORE (D-Calif.), one of the House impeachment managers, said Bolton “has a right to testify if he wants to.” 

“Executive privilege cannot be used to prevent a witness who is willing to testify from appearing, and certainly not one who no longer works in government. It’s not a gag order. And witnesses testify on national security all the time,” she tweeted. 

Democrats would need four Republicans to vote with them to successfully call a witness, and GOP senators are expressing confidence the votes are not there. 

Sen. Lisa MurkowskiLisa Ann MurkowskiWashington Post denounces abuse of reporter Grassley to vote against Tanden nomination Mean tweets may take down Biden nominee MORE (R-Alaska), who has been seen as a swing vote, appeared wary of a legal fight, characterizing House Democrats as trying to get the Senate to go through a legal battle they bypassed. 

“It’s kind of like the House made a decision that they didn’t want to slow things down by having to go through the courts,” she said. “And yet now they’re basically saying you guys need to go through the courts. We didn’t but we need you to. That’s kind of where we are.” 

Trump, speaking in Davos this week, didn’t specifically say he would invoke executive privilege if Bolton was called to testify. But he hinted at concerns that Bolton could be asked, or could testify about, Trump’s thoughts or conversations they had on national security measures. 

“But when you have a national security — where you could call it ‘presidential prerogative.’ You could just call it — the way I look at it, I call it ‘national security’ — for national security reasons. ‘Executive privilege,’ they say. So that would — John would certainly fit into that. When you're a national security adviser ... I just think it's very hard,” he said. 


Jay SekulowJay Alan SekulowThe Hill's Morning Report - Presented by TikTok - New video of riot unnerves many senators Trump legal switch hints at larger problems Trump, House GOP relationship suddenly deteriorates MORE, Trump’s personal attorney and a member of the impeachment team, told Fox News that executive privilege dates back to the country’s founding and has been “overwhelmingly recognized by the Supreme Court.” 

But other schools of thought say the senators could resolve the privilege issue themselves, obviating the need to go to court but putting senators in the middle of a murky battle at the intersection of law and politics. 

While the Constitution grants the Senate the “sole” power to try impeachments and calls on the chief justice to preside, the founding document is silent on evidentiary matters in impeachment trials. 

James Robenalt, an attorney with the firm Thompson Hine and an expert on Watergate, said the Constitution and Senate rules empower the upper chamber to decide questions of evidence admissibility.

“I think the Senate has the right to make its own rules and rulings,” Robenalt said. “That should keep the courts out of privilege decisions.”

Some Republicans have warned that if the Senate rules against Trump’s privilege claim it could permanently erode crucial presidential protections.


“Here’s what I'm going to tell future Houses: If you blow through these privileges because you want to impeach a president before the election and you come to the Senate and you ask me to destroy the privilege, forget it,” Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamJohn Boehner tells Cruz to 'go f--- yourself' in unscripted audiobook asides: report Parliamentarian nixes minimum wage hike in coronavirus bill McConnell says he'd back Trump as 2024 GOP nominee MORE (R-S.C.) told reporters. 

He added that, aside from a court battle, “the only option available to the Senate now is to recognize the privilege, and that's the end of Bolton's testimony.” 

Rep. Mark MeadowsMark MeadowsHow scientists saved Trump's FDA from politics Liberals howl after Democrats cave on witnesses Kinzinger calls for people with info on Trump to come forward MORE (R-N.C.) also appeared to indicate to reporters that he thought the fight over privilege could be decided by the Senate. 

“It's going to ultimately be determined by that Senate trial in terms of this particular case. I think jurisprudence and other judicial renderings will take long after this,” he said, but added that talk of a drawn-out court battle was a “false narrative.”

But asked about the notion that senators should decide the privilege issue, some Republicans appeared to balk, raising questions about whether the caucus would throw itself into the center of the battle. 

“That would not be my view,” Blunt said. 


Johnson also appeared visibly perplexed and noted it could blur the separation of powers. 

“The Senate may take that position. I’m not sure the president would,” he said. “I actually want to make sure the Article II branch maintains its separation.” 

In addition to bogging down the impeachment trial in a lengthy court fight, Democrats’ pursuit of witnesses risks backfiring in other ways, warned a member of Trump’s defense team. Attorney Alan DershowitzAlan Morton DershowitzA victory for the Constitution, not so much for Trump Sunday shows preview: Lawmakers weigh in on Trump impeachment trial; Biden administration eyes timeline for mass vaccinations The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by TikTok - Dems rest their case; verdict on Trump this weekend MORE said Democrats risk opening the door to witnesses sought by some Republicans, including the son of former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenBiden 'disappointed' in Senate parliamentarian ruling but 'respects' decision Taylor Swift celebrates House passage of Equality Act Donald Trump Jr. calls Bruce Springsteen's dropped charges 'liberal privilege' MORE.

“I think Democrats will rue the day they sought witnesses because their witnesses will probably be blocked by executive privilege or by court proceedings involving executive privilege,” Dershowitz said Wednesday in a Fox News interview. “But the Republican witnesses, like Hunter Biden, there would be no basis for blocking their testimony.”