A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has rejected an effort by a Russian company to get charges brought by special counsel Robert MuellerRobert (Bob) MuellerSenate Democrats urge Garland not to fight court order to release Trump obstruction memo Why a special counsel is guaranteed if Biden chooses Yates, Cuomo or Jones as AG Barr taps attorney investigating Russia probe origins as special counsel MORE dismissed.
U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich, who was appointed by President TrumpDonald TrumpUkraine's president compares UN to 'a retired superhero' Collins to endorse LePage in Maine governor comeback bid Heller won't say if Biden won election MORE, on Monday denied a motion by Concord Management and Consulting LLC to dismiss an indictment on the grounds that Mueller was appointed unlawfully by Deputy Attorney General Rod RosensteinRod RosensteinWashington still needs more transparency House Judiciary to probe DOJ's seizure of data from lawmakers, journalists The Hill's Morning Report - Biden-Putin meeting to dominate the week MORE, who is overseeing the Russia investigation.
The company — which allegedly has ties to Yevgeniy Viktorovich Prigozhin, a Russian businessman better known as “Putin’s chef” because of his ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin — is accused of funding a Russian troll farm that used social media to sow discord among the American public in a broader plot to interfere in the election.
A U.S.-based attorney filed a motion in June asking the court to dismiss the charges, arguing that Rosenstein violated the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution when he tapped Mueller to spearhead the Russia investigation in May 2017.
The clause allows the president to appoint “principal officers” who are then confirmed by the Senate and permits courts or departments to appoint “inferior officers” with the permission of Congress.
Lawyers for Concord Management and Consulting argued that Mueller’s appointment is unconstitutional because he does not qualify as either under the clause. They wrote that he was not appointed by the president to be a “principal officer” and there was “no statutory authorization” allowing Rosenstein to appoint Mueller as an inferior officer.
Friedrich struck down that argument on Monday.
“The Special Counsel is an inferior officer because he is directed and supervised by the Acting Attorney General,” Friedrich wrote, referring to Rosenstein, who took over the Russia investigation after Attorney General Jeff SessionsJefferson (Jeff) Beauregard SessionsOvernight Hillicon Valley — Apple issues security update against spyware vulnerability Stanford professors ask DOJ to stop looking for Chinese spies at universities in US Overnight Energy & Environment — Democrats detail clean electricity program MORE recused himself.
“Although the Special Counsel regulations may not permit the Acting Attorney General to counterdemand certain decisions made by the Special Counsel, the Special Counsel remains subject to the Acting Attorney General’s plenary supervision,” the judge wrote.
“Second, Congress vested the Acting Attorney General with the power to appoint the Special Counsel,: Friedrich continued, citing past legal precedents that “make clear” Rosenstein, acting as attorney general with respect to the investigation, has the “necessary statutory authority” to appoint Mueller.
Attorneys for Concord and Mueller’s team have sparred over access to evidence and other matters since the company was indicted in February as part of the case against the St. Petersburg troll farm, called the Internet Research Agency.
The company, said to be controlled by Prigozhin, has pleaded not guilty to the charges through its attorneys.