Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/19-715_febh.pdf
Page Number: 49

Cite as:  591 U. S. ____ (2020) 

3 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

erations outlined by the Court can be properly satisfied un-
less the House is required to show more than it has put for-
ward to date. 

Specifically, the House should provide a description of the
type of legislation being considered, and while great speci-
ficity is not necessary, the description should be sufficient 
to permit a court to assess whether the particular records
sought  are  of  any  special  importance.    The  House  should 
also spell out its constitutional authority to enact the type
of legislation that it is contemplating, and it should justify 
the scope of the subpoenas in relation to the articulated leg-
islative needs.  In addition, it should explain why the sub-
poenaed  information,  as  opposed  to  information  available 
from other sources, is needed.  Unless the House is required 
to make a showing along these lines, I would hold that en-
forcement of the subpoenas cannot be ordered.  Because I 
find the terms of the Court’s remand inadequate, I must re-
spectfully dissent.