WASHINGTON (AP) — The House Judiciary Committee held open the possibility Monday of recommending additional articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump as it pressed anew for the testimony of former White House counsel Don McGahn.

Washington (CNN)The House still seeks former White House counsel Don McGahn's testimony and secrets from former special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, saying that Mueller's work is relevant in a Senate trial of President Donald Trump and that the President could face more articles of impeachment in the future because he is still under investigation

House Democrats are looking to add to their two articles of impeachment if the White House continues to refuse to cooperate with the impeachment process.

New court filings released Monday showed the House Judiciary Committee is still trying to enforce a subpoena for Don McGahn, the former White House counsel. The filings said McGahn needs to testify so the House can determine whether to add impeachment articles for conduct not covered in those approved last week.

CNN legal contributor Paul Callan said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is "grasping" by not sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate and holding onto them in the House. Callan said Pelosi is "coming to the end of the road" of holding onto the articles in hopes of getting Senate Republicans to deliver concessions on an impeachment trial.

The Democrats' partisan impeachment push is getting even more interesting. It was revealed on Monday that House Democrats are considering adding additional articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump, Fox News reported. The revelation came about when a lawyer for the House Judiciary Committee Democrats filed a brief with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that they must have former White House Counsel Don McGahn testify before the Committee as part of their impeachment proceedings.

Former Trump White House counsel Donald McGahn must comply with a House subpoena, a federal court ruled Monday, finding that “no one is above the law” and that top presidential advisers cannot ignore congressional demands for information. The ruling raises the possibility that McGahn could be forced to testify as part of the impeachment inquiry.

Top White House adviser Kellyanne Conway said Tuesday that a judge’s ruling to force former White House Counsel Don McGahn to testify in the House impeachment inquiry “may not be sustainable.”

Mrs. Conway told reporters at the White House that “nobody was surprised” by the ruling Monday from U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, and that the Justice Department will appeal.

“This is one judge, an Obama-appointed judge,” she said, adding that the ruling “may not be sustainable.”

Former White House counsel Donald McGahn, a key figure with firsthand knowledge of President Donald Trump's alleged efforts to short-circuit the Mueller investigation, must testify before Congress, a federal judge ruled Monday.

The ruling, which the Justice Department said it will appeal, affirms Congress' role as a check on executive power. If upheld, it could open the door for testimony by some of the president's closest aides, including former national security adviser John Bolton and acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge on Monday ordered former White House counsel Donald McGahn to appear before Congress in a setback to President Donald Trump’s effort to keep his top aides from testifying.

The outcome could lead to renewed efforts by House Democrats to compel testimony from other high-ranking officials, including former national security adviser John Bolton.

Former White House counsel Don McGahn must appear before Congress pursuant to a subpoena issued earlier this year, a Washington, D.C. federal judge ruled late Monday, in a major setback to President Trump's effort to keep aides from testifying before House impeachment investigators.

If McGahn wanted to assert executive privilege to avoid testifying, U.S. District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson ruled, he would need to appear before Congress and do it himself, likely on a question-by-question basis.