Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg Sues GOP Legislator Jim Jordan Over Trump Prosecution

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has filed a lawsuit against Republican legislator Jim Jordan, accusing him of attempting to interfere with the ongoing criminal prosecution of former President Donald Trump. The lawsuit seeks to invalidate subpoenas issued by Jordan as part of a probe into Bragg's handling of the case, which involves hush-money payments made to an adult-film actress.
Bragg alleges that Jordan's actions are part of a "transparent campaign to intimidate and attack" him in retaliation for the indictment of Trump on 34 felony charges of falsifying business documents. The lawsuit asserts that Congress lacks any valid legislative purpose to engage in a "free-ranging campaign of harassment" against the New York district attorney.
The legal battle between Bragg and Republican lawmakers has been intensifying in recent weeks. Jordan, a former close ally of Trump, has issued subpoenas to individuals involved in the case against the former president, including former prosecutor Mark Pomerantz. Pomerantz had previously overseen the Trump investigation and publicly detailed his disagreements with Bragg over the direction of the probe before leaving the office last year.
In response, Bragg accused Republicans of an "unlawful incursion" into his jurisdiction and dismissed claims that the prosecution of Trump is politically motivated. Last week, Trump appeared in court for the first time, where he was arraigned on charges related to the hush-money payment made to adult-film performer Stormy Daniels through his lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen.
Bragg's office has accused Trump of violating state and federal election laws, and mischaracterizing the payments to Cohen as being for "tax purposes." A statement of facts released alongside the indictment accuses Trump of conducting "a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit [Trump's] electoral prospects."
The legal battle between Bragg and Jordan is being closely watched by legal experts and political observers. Jordan's response to the lawsuit on Twitter has only added fuel to the fire, with many accusing him of attempting to obstruct justice and interfere with the legal process.
The case has been assigned to US District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, a Trump appointee who previously served as a federal bankruptcy court judge. The lawsuit came after the House Judiciary Committee announced plans to hold a hearing in Manhattan on crime in New York City and what it has called Bragg's "pro-crime, anti-victim" policies.

Subscribe for more content like this.

Bragg's office responded by pointing to statistics showing that violent crime in Manhattan has dropped since he took over the post in January 2022. In a statement, Bragg called the hearing "a political stunt" and criticized Jordan for focusing on crime in New York City instead of addressing issues in his home state of Ohio. The legal battle between Bragg and Jordan is likely to continue in the coming weeks and months, with both sides digging in for what could be a protracted legal battle.
The investigation into Trump's actions has been ongoing for several years, but it has gained new momentum under Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who took office in January 2022. Bragg has been working to build a case against the former president, and the recent indictment marks a significant step forward in the investigation.
However, Bragg's efforts have not gone unnoticed by Republican lawmakers, who have been trying to discredit the investigation and undermine the district attorney's authority. Representative Jim Jordan, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, has been particularly vocal in his criticism of Bragg and his investigation.
In response to Jordan's attacks, Bragg has filed a lawsuit accusing the Republican lawmaker of attempting to intimidate and attack him. The lawsuit asks a judge to invalidate subpoenas issued by Jordan as part of a probe into Bragg's handling of the case.