I guess Congressional subpoena power is no power at all

In a two-to-one ruling, a panel of federal appeals court judges on Friday ordered the dismissal of House Democrats’ case seeking the testimony of Donald McGahn -- meaning the former White House counsel would not have to appear before a congressional committee.

[...]

The Justice Department, arguing on the president's behalf, has contended that "the constitution forbids federal courts from resolving this kind of interbranch information dispute."

“We agree and dismiss this case,” the judges wrote in their 88-page opinion.

[...]

In November, a federal district judge ruled that McGahn must comply with a congressional subpoena.

But the Justice Department appealed that ruling and, on Friday, won out in the higher court.

  ABC

And no point asking the Supreme Court to take it up.

U.S. Appeals Court Judge Thomas Griffith, in his majority opinion, warned that enforcing the committee’s subpoena would amount to an overreach by "unelected judges" -- and risk politicizing the judicial branch.

As if it's not too late to worry about that. And under that reasoning, why is the Supreme Court considering the cases where various entities are trying to subpoena Trump's tax returns? Hm?

"If federal courts were to swoop in to rescue Congress whenever its constitutional tools failed, it would not just supplement the political process; it would replace that process with one in which unelected judges become the perpetual 'overseer[s]' of our elected officials," Griffith wrote.

In her dissenting opinion, Judge Judith Rogers argued that the majority's finding may set the stage for future presidents to block oversight requests from the legislative branch with impunity.

Will. If Trump can get away with it, then subsequent presidents can.

"The court removes any incentive for the Executive Branch to engage in the negotiation process seeking accommodation, all but assures future Presidential stonewalling of Congress, and further impairs the House’s ability to perform its constitutional duties," Rogers wrote.

Exactly.

When the impeachment power and public opinion options fail to produce results - as they will in any case where the majority is in the same party as the subpoenaed party - what's left is the power of the purse, which will also fail if the same party controls the House.  And if it doesn't, what exactly are they going to withhold?

Bingo.  So the courts have just declared that SOME people are indeed above the law when it comes to being held accountable.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE: