Earlier this week, a federal appeals court ruled that Congress cannot sue to enforce outstanding subpoenas against the Trump administration and executive branch. The ruling basically means former White House counsel Don McGahn will not have to testify before Congress.

Breaking News: A U.S. federal appeals court ruled that Congress cannot sue to enforce subpoenas against the executive branch, dealing a blow to Congress's oversight power https://t.co/OtTxX4HN9Y — The New York Times (@nytimes) February 28, 2020

The ruling did not sit well with House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff, who complains that Trump’s lawyers “convinced” two judges to make an “unprecedented” ruling.

Trump’s lawyers convinced two judges of their unprecedented legal theory that courts CANNOT enforce congressional subpoenas. This was after they argued during the impeachment trial that the House was REQUIRED to enforce subpoenas in court. Such duplicity can't survive appeal. https://t.co/3oC6QXVCUA — Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) February 29, 2020

But isn’t that what happens in a court of law? The lawyers are supposed to try to convince a judge that their argument is correct.

In other words, the Separation of Powers still exists and the second Article of Impeachment against President Trump didn’t actually allege any wrongdoing. https://t.co/CvpKgOnr7r — Dan O'Donnell (@DanODonnellShow) February 28, 2020

Considering the kind of impeachment trial Rep. Schiff featured in his committee, it’s a bit much for him to complain about the Trump administration’s legal team making winning arguments.

***

RELATED:

Katie Pavlich suggests someone check on Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler after Trump scores ANOTHER legal victory