A federal New York judge declined Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's restraining order request against the House Committee Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) chairman.
Earlier this month, Bragg filed a complaint and a motion for a Temporary Restraining Order against Jordan to prevent the House from issuing a subpoena so that they could investigate the handling of former President Trump's indictment.
Instead, the judge ordered Bragg to send material to Jordan by 9 p.m. Tuesday so the court could have a hearing on the situation on April 19.
According to court documents, Bragg said this was in "response to an unprecedentedly brazen and unconstitutional attack by members of Congress."
The Democrat's lawyers want to block the subpoena of Mark Pomerantz, who led the investigation into Trump for the woke DA before he resigned over disagreements with Bragg. They claim that "Congress has no power to supervise state criminal prosecution" and that Jordan's investigation was unconstitutional and outside his congressional duties.
"Chairman Jordan's demands, including his subpoena to Mr. Pomerantz, seek highly sensitive and confidential local prosecutorial information that belongs to the Office of the District Attorney and the People of New York," the lawsuit read. "Basic principles of federalism and common sense, as well as binding Supreme Court precedent, forbid Congress from demanding it."
The lawsuit also seeks to prevent future subpoenas from Jordan and other House Republicans.
According to the judge, Bragg did not meet the standard for a preliminary injunction, and the balance of harms weighed against granting the request. The judge also voted in favor of Jordan, arguing that he had a legitimate legislative purpose for wanting the documents.
The committee has been investigating Bragg's office, sending requests and subpoenas for documents and testimony from people who are connected to Bragg as his political persecution of Trump continues.