Congress could hold AG William Barr in contempt. How often does that happen?
WASHINGTON – The House Judiciary Committee is considering taking a rare step to enforce a subpoena for the unredacted report by Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller by holding Attorney General William Barr in contempt.
The effort reflects an impasse over how much information must be shared between the executive and legislative branches of government. But contempt citations are issued rarely, with only three major cases in the last 35 years. Contempt can lead to criminal or civil penalties, but the Justice Department declined to prosecute in each of the three cases.
“Congress has only rarely resorted to either criminal contempt or civil enforcement to combat non-compliance with subpoenas,” according to a March 27 report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service.
In the latest case, Barr released a redacted version of the Mueller’s report on April 18. But the House panel subpoenaed the unredacted version and now could vote as early as Wednesday on whether to hold Barr in contempt for refusing to provide it.
More: Democrats may hold AG Barr in contempt of Congress. What is that and can it actually be used?
Here is a synopsis about how each of three recent cases played out, according to CRS reports:
?In 2007, a House Judiciary Committee investigation of the resignations of nine U.S. attorneys sparked the first civil case in decades, when Congress filed a lawsuit for subpoenaed documents and testimony.
Former White House counsel Harriet Miers, who had left office by the time the subpoena was issued, refused to provide documents or testify under a claim of executive privilege, which ensures the confidentiality of advice given the president from his advisers so that they may speak candidly.
The House adopted a pair of resolutions on a vote of 223-32 in February 2008 to refer her for prosecution and to authorize a civil lawsuit to enforce the subpoenas. But the Justice Department declined to prosecute.
A U.S. district court affirmed Congress’s right to information in July 2008 and said Miers didn’t have absolute immunity from testifying, but she could assert executive privilege in response to specific questions. The court made no explicit comment about punishing executive-branch officials for contempt.
The administration appealed the ruling but no decision was reached before the Congress ended in January 2009. At that point, the subpoena and contempt citation each expired.
Lawmakers and the White House reached a settlement in March 2009 for some of the documents requested and for Miers to testify at a closed hearing.
?In November 2011, former Attorney General Eric Holder conceded to the Senate Judiciary Committee that the Justice Department provided inaccurate information about a gun-running investigation called Operation Fast and Furious, which resulted in thousands of guns being smuggled to drug cartels in Mexico.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee later subpoenaed documents about the program and Holder refused to fully comply. The House voted 255-67 in June 2012 to find him in contempt and refer him for prosecution. A second resolution approved by a vote of 258-95 authorized a civil lawsuit to enforce the subpoena.
Then-Deputy Attorney General James Cole notified the House the same day as the votes that the department wouldn’t prosecute Holder because his response to the subpoena “does not constitute a crime.”
The committee then filed a federal lawsuit in August 2012 to enforce the subpoena, in a case that dragged on more than six years.
?In 2013 and 2014, an Internal Revenue Service official refused to answer questions at the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Lois Lerner, then director of exempt organizations, had publicly acknowledged that the IRS inappropriately targeted conservative groups for scrutiny. But when the committee asked and then subpoenaed her to testify, Lerner declined under the Fifth Amendment.
The House voted 231-87 in May 2014 to hold Lerner in contempt and refer her case for prosecution. But in contrast to the other cases, the House didn’t pursue a civil lawsuit.
Ronald Machen, who was then the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, notified the House in March 2015 that he declined to prosecute because Lerner had invoked the Fifth Amendment.
More about battles between Congress and the Trump administration:
'We're fighting all the subpoenas.' Congress and Trump prepare to battle over wide-ranging probes
House Judiciary Committee sets Wednesday contempt vote for Attorney General William Barr
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Congress could hold AG William Barr in contempt. How often does that happen?
