[Polybius]

In 1972 there was a court ruling(because of a similar case) that specifically states that the congress can be searched and the debate clause is not an immunity clause. If this has never happened before why is there a court ruling that speicfically addresses the problem?

Here is other case law that shoots down the "we Congresscritters are constitutionally above criminal law" argument:

Williamson v. United States, 207 U.S. 425, 446 (1908)..............The constitutional question relied on thus arose: On February 11, 1905, Williamson, plaintiff in error, while a member of the House of Representatives of the United States, was indicted, with two other persons, for alleged violations of U. S. Rev. Stat. 5440, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 3676, in conspiring to commit the crime of subornation of perjury in proceedings for the purchase of public land under the authority of the law commonly known as the timber and stone act. The defendants were ound guilty in the month of September, 1905. On October 14, 1905, when the court was about to pronounce sentence, Williamson-whose term of office as a member of the House of Representatives did not expire until March 4, 1907-protested against the court passing sentence upon him, and especially to any sentence of imprisonment, on the ground that thereby [207 U.S. 425, 433] he would be deprived of his constitutional right to go to, attend at, and return from the ensuing session of Congress. The objection was overruled, and Williamson was sentenced to pay a fine and to imprisonment for ten months. Exceptions were taken both to the overruling of the preliminary objection and to the sentence of imprisonment. Upon these exceptions, assignments of error are based, which, it is asserted, present a question as to the scope and meaning of that portion of article 1, 6, clause 1, of the Constitution, relating to the privilege of senators and representatives from arrest during their attendance on the session of their respective houses, and in going to and returning from the same. .....................Mr. Justice Harlan is of opinion that no substantial error was committed, and the judgment should be affirmed.

[AndyJackson]

To quote: "They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place."

Last I recalled accepting bribes of a magnitude that shock the conscience of all normal taxpayers, in return for conferring political favors, was a felony, but I stand to be corrected by my betters in this matter.