Ok, let’s say Congress finds Garland in contempt— THEN WHAT?
Is he going to jail like Peter Navarro or Steve Bannon?
What punitive powers does Congress have and who’s going to execute any punishment?
Ok, let’s say Congress finds Garland in contempt— THEN WHAT?
Is he going to jail like Peter Navarro or Steve Bannon?
What punitive powers does Congress have and who’s going to execute any punishment?
Garland has already been found in contempt, and the DOJ has refused to prosecute. There is a rare method however called inherent contempt that hasn’t been used in a century, which my understanding is the House itself can vote to find him guilty and order the Sargent at Arms to arrest him directly on the House floor and hold him until he complies.
The Speaker can send the Capitol police to arrest Garland. With Senate acquiescence, the House can use the power of the purse. The best measure would be to suspend or sharply reduce the DoJ travel budget and ground their use of executive aircraft. In the past, that quickly brings an agency to heel without being so excessive as to seem unfair to the public.
“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.
They ACTUALLY have the right to arrest him. And put him in the Capital jail (or whatever its called.). This was done about 100 years ago. I don’t know if the Republicans have the guts or votes to do that.
I think there is a more compelling reason to hear those tapes today than there was last week.