In the late hours Tuesday, Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., delivered a blunt warning to potential targets of congressional investigations. The expected chair of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee posted two words in capital letters on X: “LAWYER UP.”

The message suggested that attorneys should be kept close as the House prepares for the 120th Congress under speaker in waiting Hakeem Jeffries. It also highlighted the House’s own need for a formidable lawyer capable of handling looming legal battles.

As members consider oversight investigations and possible impeachment inquiries, the House will need skilled counsel to confront the White House and executive agencies. That makes Jeffries’ choice for the next general counsel of the House potentially as consequential as Democratic votes on his leadership team.

The House general counsel is a nonpartisan official who leads a team providing legal advice and assistance to House members, committees, officers and employees. Yet that dry description barely captures the politically explosive disputes that can land on the office’s desk.

The general counsel handles questions involving constitutional authority, privileges and demands for information involving executive agencies. The office also manages litigation in which the House is a party, whether bringing a case or responding to one.

With Donald Trump in the White House for two more years, experts say the House must be prepared to litigate proactively and aggressively to enforce subpoenas and protect its statutory and constitutional rights. Those confrontations could unfold both in courthouses and before the public.

The disputes will determine who must testify, which documents must be produced and when compliance must occur. For Jeffries, the central question is who can manage those fights while Democrats pursue ambitious legislative and investigative agendas midway through Trump 2.0.

A former senior Justice Department official, speaking anonymously because of fears of reprisal, said the House needs an accomplished appellate litigator. Because one or more disputes could reach the Supreme Court, the official said, “You’ve got to go to court knowing where it ends.”

Others involved in the discussion emphasized political instincts alongside courtroom ability. A lawyer familiar with the search noted that the House is a legislative institution rather than a prosecutor’s office.

The investigations, the lawyer said, “are fact-finding missions but also political. And you need someone who understands the communications and theater aspects.” The lawyer also expressed hope that Jeffries chooses “someone who will put their name out there to fight.”

Timothy Heaphy, a former U.S. attorney in Virginia and former chief investigative counsel for the House Jan. 6 committee, said lists of lawyers interested in working for a Congress controlled by Democrats are already being assembled. Many people under consideration are former Justice Department prosecutors, including some fired or forced out during the past two years.

Heaphy recalled that congressional requests for information once prompted “horse trading” with an administration. That kind of negotiation now appears less likely, meaning the next general counsel may need a greater appetite and ability for litigation.

A major confrontation is likely to involve the Trump administration’s broad assertions of executive privilege. In August, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel concluded that the privilege could extend to communications with outside advisers under specified circumstances involving official presidential decision making, presidential communications and confidentiality.

That policy could shield conversations involving figures such as Stephen Miller and Elon Musk when they relate to presidential decision making. In litigation over Trump’s intent to transform a Washington, D.C., golf course, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward even refused to discuss his understanding of a Trump social media post, asserting executive privilege.

The former senior Justice Department official predicted a “fundamental battle over executive privilege.” Such interpretations could obstruct the investigations contemplated by the House, placing the general counsel squarely at the center of the struggle.

The model from the last period of Democratic House control under Trump is Douglas Letter, whom Nancy Pelosi selected after his retirement from decades of Justice Department service. Letter had presented over 200 oral arguments and served as an associate White House counsel during the Clinton administration.

Letter represented the House in major disputes involving John Eastman, former White House counsel Don McGahn and Trump’s tax returns. He ultimately prevailed in the yearslong tax return battle, which reached the Supreme Court and involved access expressly granted to the House Ways and Means Committee by federal statute.