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

To: Ray76; sergeantdave
I'll stipulate that the House has the power to impose a Contempt of Congress charge and that the Sergeant at Arms of the House has the power to arrest a transgressor.

But where was Mr. McCracken located when Mr. Jurney arrested him? That doesn't seem to be specified.

At any rate, this case is dated 1935, when there actually was a detention facility in the capitol which the Sergeant at Arms could use to lodge detainees. The jail is still there -- but is no longer capable of handling overnight "guests".

Consequently, the Congress must now rely on the DOJ to provide detention facilities. And I believe they must also rely on the DOJ to enforce their arrests away from Capitol Hill. See McDougal, Susan of Whitewater fame for a demonstration.

65 posted on 12/07/2013 6:27:08 PM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]


To: okie01
Despite voting to hold Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. in contempt of Congress, there’s little House Republicans can do in the short term to compel him to turn over documents — unless it wanted to revisit a long-dormant power and arrest him.

The thought is shocking, and conjures up a Hollywood-ready standoff scene between House police and the FBI agents who protect the attorney general. It’s a dramatic and unlikely possibility not least because Congress doesn’t even have a jail any longer. But in theory it could happen.

Republicans say it’s not even under consideration, with House Speaker John A. Boehner’s spokesman flatly ruling it out.

But the process, known as inherent contempt, is well-established by precedent, has been confirmed by multiple Supreme Court rulings, and is available to any Congress willing to force such a confrontation.

“The House is scared to death to use the inherent contempt power,” said Mort Rosenberg, a fellow at the Constitution Project...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/28/house-could-arrest-holder-with-inherent-contempt-p/

"Inherent contempt, is well-established by precedent, has been confirmed by multiple Supreme Court rulings, and is available to any Congress willing to force such a confrontation" - in other words, count on a dog & pony show from the Vichy Republicans
68 posted on 12/07/2013 7:04:25 PM PST by Ray76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | 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