Under fire from congressional Republicans for potentially perjuring herself, a federal judge ruled Friday that Hillary Clinton owes the American people more answers on her lingering email scandal.

In another blow for the Democratic presidential nominee, a federal judge ruled on Friday that Clinton must respond in writing to questions from the conservative legal watchdog group Judicial Watch concerning her use of a private server during her tenure as Secretary of State. Judicial Watch initially filed a lawsuit in September 2013, and although the group requested the chance to interrogate Clinton in person, the judge opted for a written questionnaire to be administered to Clinton, instead.

“The decision is a reminder that Hillary Clinton is not above the law.”

Close

Nevertheless, Judicial Watch praised the judge’s decision to order Clinton to respond in writing to the group’s questions under oath, claiming it as a victory.

“We are pleased that this federal court ordered Hillary Clinton to provide written answers under oath to some key questions about her email scandal,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “We will move quickly to get these answers. The decision is a reminder that Hillary Clinton is not above the law.”

Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled that Judicial Watch could submit its questions to Clinton no later than October 14, 2016, and ordered the former Secretary of State to submit her responses no later than 30 days after receiving them.

[lz_jwplayer video=”vLswwZQG” ads=”true”]

“The Court is persuaded that Secretary Clinton’s testimony is necessary to enable her to explain on the record the purpose for the creation and operation of the clintonemail.com system for State Department business,” Sullivan wrote in his opinion.

[lz_related_box id=”190102″]

Although Sullivan ruled that it was unnecessary for Judicial Watch to interrogate Clinton in person, he added this caveat: “Given the extensive public record related to the clintonemail.com system, a record which Judicial Watch has acknowledged, Judicial Watch will be able to anticipate many follow-up questions. For those follow-up questions that Judicial Watch is unable to anticipate, it can move this Court for permission to serve additional interrogatories.”

The Clinton campaign, as could be expected, was not particularly thrilled with the entirety of the judge’s decision.

Who do you think would win the Presidency?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from LifeZette, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

“This is just another lawsuit intended to try to hurt Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and so we are glad that the judge has accepted our offer to answer these questions in writing rather than grant Judicial Watch’s request,” Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon said in a statement to Fox News.

No matter how hard she has tried, Clinton cannot successfully rid herself of the public stain her use of a private email server has given her and her reputation. Even her own Party finds her dishonest, according to a recent NBC News/SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking poll that showed only 12 percent of Democrats found Clinton to be “honest” and “trustworthy.” And with rumblings of perjury charges threatening her, as well, Clinton has her work cut out for her in winning over the American people before Election Day.