Stone associate to ask Supreme Court to take up challenge to Mueller’s appointment

An associate of Roger Stone who is refusing to comply with a subpoena to appear before special counsel Robert Mueller’s grand jury said in a court filing Monday that he intends to ask the Supreme Court to take up his case challenging Mueller’s appointment.

Andrew Miller requested in a court filing on Monday that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issue a stay on a previous ruling finding that he is in contempt for not complying with the subpoena while he makes his case to the high court.

“There can be no doubt that the questions Appellant wishes to present to the Supreme Court in his petition are not only ‘substantial’ but ones of exceptional importance,” the filing reads.

{mosads}Miller has been held in civil contempt for refusing to comply with a subpoena for his testimony before Mueller’s grand jury. He has been fighting that subpoena since it was issued in 2018.

Miller argues that Mueller’s appointment was in violation of the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. That clause requires individuals for certain positions to either be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, authorized by Congress under law or tapped by the head of a federal department.

Mueller was appointed as special counsel by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein after then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

A federal appeals court unanimously rejected Miller’s argument earlier this year and upheld the court order finding him in contempt.

Stone — an ally of President Trump’s — was indicted earlier this year on several charges stemming from Mueller’s probe, including making false statements to Congress, impeding a congressional investigation and witness tampering. He has denied any wrongdoing and will go to trial on the charges in November.

Miller’s filing on Monday also points to Stone’s indictment as rendering Miller’s testimony unnecessary.

“In short, either the government apparently has no genuine need for Mr. Miller’s grand jury testimony or it will be not be prejudiced during a short stay of the mandate,” it states.

Miller_Stay_05062019 by on Scribd