no it's not - I thought we were in agreement on that
No, we agree that if the
only argument they have is that a court has never enforced a Congressional subpoena against the executive branch, then that's a weak argument.
On the other hand, I believe the fact no court has ever done this is significant, particularly for this case. They're not even investigating a crime. And as the next two sentences in the article say: "That makes for a murky area of law and the Bush administration is urging U.S. District Judge John D. Bates not to tidy it up. The ambiguity fosters compromise, political solutions and the kind of give and take that the Founding Father envisioned, attorneys said."
In other words, the fact that no court has ever done this makes it less likely the court will want to do it now.