“What punitive powers does Congress have and who’s going to execute any punishment?”
If they vote on Inherent Contempt, the House Sargaent of Arms can arrest Garland and there are jail cells in the basement of the Capitol building.
This has not been done since the 1920s (I think), but can be done under existing law.
“What punitive powers does Congress have and who’s going to execute any punishment?”
If they vote on Inherent Contempt, the House Sargaent of Arms can arrest Garland and there are jail cells in the basement of the Capitol building.
This has not been done since the 1920s (I think), but can be done under existing law.”
The Sergeant at Arms has no staff outside of the Capitol Police, who won’t be arresting the AG anytime soon.
RE: If they vote on Inherent Contempt, the House Sargaent of Arms can arrest Garland
Can you please explain to me the difference between Inherent Contempt and just plain contempt of Congress? My understanding is all contempts are inherent. If not, what’s the difference?
Thanks.
There once were, but IIRC there no longer are any. The subject of inherent contempt comes up periodically as a theoretical option. It once was common but hasn't been so since pre-Civil War times. I think last actually successfully used in 1920s. I don't know whether it's even gone to a vote since then. I'm skeptical GOP has enough votes to win on it, but it would be nice to make folks stand and be counted. In an election year with a country full of pissed off GOP voters the results might surprise folks.