Decision Pending on Release of Testimony
By Jack Smith on Trump Investigation
The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee is still trying to decide whether to release testimony of former special prosecutor Jack Smith about his investigation of President Donald Trump.
Smith asked the committee last week to release a full transcript and videotape of his nearly nine-hour closed door testimony on Dec. 17.
Smith led the Department of Justice’s investigations into Trump’s alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his retention of classified documents after leaving office.
Judiciary Committee Republicans subpoenaed Smith after the president accused him of lying as part of politically “weaponized” allegations by his Democratic foes. He also said Smith should be prosecuted, prompting a Justice Department investigation.
Smith defended the integrity of his effort in an opening statement that was released to the media.
“I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump’s political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy,” Smith said. “We took actions based on what the facts and the law required.”
He also said that his team developed evidence that could prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that there was criminal conduct in both the election interference and classified documents cases. Any potential charges against Trump from Smith’s report were dismissed.
Shortly after Smith’s closed-door testimony, Smith’s lawyers — Lanny Breuer and Peter Koski — wrote to the House Judiciary chairman urging that the full videotape and transcript of the deposition be released to the public. They argued that transparency is essential so the American people can hear Smith’s account directly, instead of relying on second-hand summaries and selective excerpts.
The letter said Smith’s legal team “steadfastly followed Justice Department policies, observed all legal requirements, and took actions based on the facts and the law.”
Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin, D-Md., told reporters Smith’s testimony was “absolutely devastating” to accusations the prosecutions were politically motivated. He suggested Republicans kept the hearing private to prevent the public from hearing Smith’s point-by-point rebuttal.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, has not yet indicated whether he would release a full transcript of Smith's deposition, only that the committee "learned some interesting things" during the interview.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Justice Dept. Sues D.C. to Overturn
Local Gun Restriction Laws
The Justice Department sued the city of Washington, D.C., last week seeking a court order to ease restrictions on gun ownership.
The lawsuit calls local laws that limit the kinds of guns that can legally be owned and carried outside the owners’ homes a violation of Second Amendment rights to bear arms.
“The United States of America brings this lawsuit to protect the rights that have been guaranteed for 234 years and which the Supreme Court has explicitly reaffirmed several times over the last two decades,” the lawsuit says.
The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court is part of a larger dispute over how much control the federal government can exert over Washington. The District of Columbia has some of the nation’s strictest gun laws.
It also is the second gun rights lawsuit the Trump administration filed this month. The first was against the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Democrats are warning about risks of increased gun violence, particularly with Trump’s effort to roll back restrictions on untraceable “ghost guns” and high-capacity magazines. Deadly AR-15 rifles that have been used in mass shootings are among the guns that would have restrictions relaxed under the plea in the Justice Department lawsuit.
The lawsuit challenges the District of Columbia’s extensive registration procedure that requires police department approval for gun purchases and ownership. Applications are decided on a case-by-case basis.
Violations of the registration requirements can result in fines and criminal prosecution for a misdemeanor offense.
The Justice Department lawsuit says D.C. laws are too arbitrary to avoid a constitutional violation.
Police are allowed to decide which guns are legal “based on little more than cosmetics, appearance, or the ability to attach accessories,” the lawsuit says.
It quotes the 2008 Supreme Court Heller case that struck down Washington’s ban on residents owning handguns.
The lawsuit says D.C. laws fail “to take into account whether the prohibited weapon is ‘in common use today.’” Common use would indicate the guns are generally acceptable under Second Amendment rights.
After the Heller ruling, D.C. officials changed their laws to allow most handgun ownership but they continue to ban the most dangerous semiautomatic rifles and pistols. AR-15’s are one of the banned rifles.
D.C. officials are giving early indications they plan to argue they merely regulate but do not ban gun ownership in a way that would violate the Second Amendment.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Justice Dept. Tries Again to Prosecute
High-Profile Critics of Trump’s Ethics
The Justice Department plans to try again to prosecute two critics of President Donald Trump despite previous failed attempts.
Government attorneys on last month appealed the disqualification of their lead prosecutor who indicted former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.
New charges against them have not yet been filed but the appeal indicates they would be soon.
Comey investigated allegations of Russian influence in the 2016 Trump campaign for president. James led the successful lawsuit against Trump for falsifying business records.
In previous attempts to prosecute them, a judge dismissed charges against Comey and a grand jury refused to indict James. In both cases, evidence of their criminal wrongdoing was weak, according to judges who oversaw the cases.
In addition, a federal judge ruled the prosecutor in charge of both cases was improperly appointed and thereby disqualified.
The prosecutor was Lindsey Halligan, a 36-year-old former insurance lawyer with no prosecutorial experience.
President Donald Trump hurriedly appointed her after he fired her predecessor, Erik Siebert. He had refused to prosecute Comey after concluding there was no evidence of criminal wrongdoing.
The charges filed by Halligan accused the former FBI director of lying to Congress when he testified that there had been questionable contacts between Russian officials and top Trump campaign managers.
James was charged with mortgage fraud on a second home she owned in Norfolk, Va. She rented the home to a family that included her great-niece.
The Justice Department argued that she falsified mortgage documents by claiming the house as a personal home to obtain a favorable loan rate. The truth is she was using it as an investment property, according to prosecutors.
Both Comey and James said they were victims of “vindictive and selective prosecution" because of their criticisms of Trump.
If true, selective prosecution would be a violation of Fourteenth Amendment rights to equal protection under the law. Selective prosecution also is a basis for dismissing criminal charges.
U.S. District Judge Cameron McGowan Currie wrote in her ruling dismissing charges against Comey and James that Halligan’s hasty appointment without the normal review for U.S. attorneys meant she had no lawful authority.
"All actions flowing from Ms. Halligan's defective appointment … constitute unlawful exercises of executive power and must be set aside," Currie wrote in her ruling dismissing charges against Comey and James.
Trump said in a post on his social media site Truth Social that they were “guilty as hell.”
The Justice Department notice of appeal filed said the federal government “appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit from the order of the District Court, issued on November 24, 2025.” Halligan listed herself as a “United States attorney and special attorney” when she signed the notice of appeal.
The notice mentioned the indictment of Comey and dismissal of charges against him as issues the Justice Department plans to raise on appeal.
The Trump administration is moving ahead with its effort to win Senate confirmation of Halligan as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. It sent a pre-hearing questionnaire on Dec. 10 to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The cases that led to the appeal are U.S. v. Letitia A. James and U.S. v. James B. Comey Jr. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
Hogan Lovells to Become World’s 5th Biggest
After Merger with Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft
Hogan Lovells plans to add dozens of attorneys to its Washington, D.C., staff as it moves toward a merger with Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft.
The combined firm would be the world’s fifth largest by revenue, which is projected to exceed $3.6 billion per year. It would operate with about 3,100 attorneys concentrated in the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany with smaller numbers in France, Italy and Spain.
The firm’s revenue would be derived heavily from securities, capital markets and fund management.
"This combination fulfills our shared ambition to create a global firm with a strong transatlantic platform anchored in the most important financial centers around the world," Wes Misson, Cadwalader’s co-managing partner, said in a statement.
The merger is scheduled to close in mid-2026.
New York-based Cadwalader is one of the oldest continuously operating legal practices in the United States. It was founded in 1792. Its roughly 400 attorneys work mostly in corporate law.
It was badly hurt this year after it agreed to a settlement with the Trump administration to do $100 million of pro bono work on behalf of conservative causes. It was one of several big firms sued by the Trump administration after it represented causes unpopular with the president.
The settlement was followed by mass resignations of lawyers. Some of them were Cadwalader’s top partners.
Under the merger, Miguel Zaldivar, Hogan Lovells’ current chief executive, also would serve as chief executive of the combined firm. About 500 attorneys would be located in Washington. The merged firm would be called Hogan Lovells Cadwalader.
The merger is part of a larger trend in recent years among law firms seeking transatlantic presences. So far this year, they have included a merger of Taylor Wessing with Winston & Strawn as well as Ashurst LLP merging with Perkins Coie LLP.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.
New DMV Laws for 2026
Will Have Broad Impact
As 2026 begins, residents and businesses across the Washington region should prepare for new laws that provide stronger labor protections and higher wages in D.C., Maryland and Virginia, housing stability measures in Maryland and new climate and energy efficiency standards in D.C.
The consumer and health protections would include mandatory screenings, simplified hospital transfers for children and new digital safeguards for young people.
Maryland’s housing stability measures are designed to help low-income families retain their homes. D.C.’s climate and energy efficiency standards are expected to shape building projects for many years.
In D.C.,
The minimum wage — tied to inflation — is slated to rise again in July 2026, maintaining its status among the highest in the nation. The current minimum is $17.95 per hour. The new rate has not yet been announced;
Under the Clean Energy DC Building Code Amendment Act, the city must develop new net-zero energy building codes for most new construction and major renovations;
Medicaid eligibility changes beginning January 1, 2026, will transition some residents to the District’s Basic Health Plan, shifting how coverage is administered for low-income adults;
The city has extended its youth curfew through April 2026 in parts of the District in an ongoing crime-fighting effort.
In Maryland,
Under House Bill 59, counties will be required to withhold certain owner-occupied homes and heir properties from tax sale and create a registry to help families protect properties at risk of being lost over unpaid taxes;
New insurance requirements will prohibit prior authorization for pediatric hospital transfers, mandate preventive cancer screenings for firefighters at no cost, and expand coverage for coronary heart testing and insulin medication, thereby reducing out-of-pocket costs for patients;
Rideshare companies must provide weekly earnings summaries to drivers, and barber/cosmetology licensees will require domestic violence awareness training as a condition of licensing.
In Virginia,
The state will raise its minimum wage to $12.77 per hour, up from $12.41, and increase unemployment benefits;
Senate Bill 854 will require social media platforms to limit users under 16 to one hour per day unless they obtain parental approval and implement age-verification steps;
Insurers will be required to fully cover breast and prostate cancer screenings;
New standards for food testing and restrictions on unwanted marketing texts aim to strengthen consumer protections.
For more information, contact The Legal Forum (www.legal-forum.net) at email: tramstack@gmail.com or phone: 202-479-7240.