[Redcloak]

Just to clarify, this subpoena (that is what it is) is being used not to prosecute a crime, but to provide evidence of need for legislation.

OBJECTION!!

(Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

If what you're saying is true, then the DOJ is acting as a lobbying group. That would be a grossly inappropriate activity for a government agency. That the judge hasn't thrown the subpoena out for this very reason leads me to suspect that they are looking for evidence of a crime. If that is the case, then the DOJ is involved in a fishing expedition; and the subpoena should be disallowed for being too broad.

[ndt]

"DOJ is acting as a lobbying group"

They are.

"That would be a grossly inappropriate activity for a government agency."

It is.

"That the judge hasn't thrown the subpoena out for this very reason leads me to suspect that they are looking for evidence of a crime."

If they are looking for evidence of a crime, then they are lying about it. It is contrary to their stated purpose.

"the subpoena should be disallowed for being too broad."

IMO it should.