Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DannyTN
Contempt of Congress 1938 law

If Congress has the authority to physically compel people to appear before it at any time for any reason, such a statute would be an exercise of its authority. A mere statute, however, could not confer upon Congress any authority which it did not already have.

In any case, I would suggest that whether or not Congress has the authority to compel people to testify, it should have the authority to regard the giving of testimony as an essential job requirement for federal employees.

74 posted on 12/21/2011 5:38:04 PM PST by supercat (Renounce Covetousness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]


To: supercat
"If Congress has the authority to physically compel people to appear before it at any time for any reason, such a statute would be an exercise of its authority. A mere statute, however, could not confer upon Congress any authority which it did not already have."

Congress has the clear constitutional authority to impeach federal judges. Gingrich's rationale was to subpoena a judge to explain his rationale prior to initiating an impeachment hearing. The Subpoena is a courtesy to the judge.

Congress has the power to subpoena a judge the same as they can subpoena members of the executive. But if a judge wants to ignore a congressional subpoena, then they can answer to the impeachment trial.

75 posted on 12/21/2011 10:20:00 PM PST by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson