Truth Detector (01-17-2020)
Members banned from this thread: evince, domer76, ThatOwlWoman, katzgar, Jack and Charoite |
Truth Detector (01-17-2020)
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
Truth Detector (01-17-2020)
Truth Detector (01-17-2020)
TRUMP WILL TAKE FORTY STATES...UNLESS THE SAME IDIOTS WHO BROUGHT US THE 2020 DUNCE-O-CRAT IOWA CLUSTERFUCK CONTINUE THEIR SEDITIOUS ACTIVITIES...THEN HE WILL WIN EVEN MORE ..UNLESS THE RED CHINESE AND DNC COLLUDE, USE A PANDEMIC, AND THEN THE DEMOCRATS VIOLATE ARTICLE II OF THE CONSTITUTION, TO FACILLITATE MILLIONS OF ILLEGAL, UNVETTED, MAIL IN BALLOTS IN THE DARK OF NIGHT..
De Oppresso Liber
Truth Detector (01-17-2020), USFREEDOM911 (01-17-2020)
There are, however, very narrow structural limitations on Congress' subpoena power, that, if exceeded, may provide a party with grounds to challenge a Congressional subpoena. Those limitations involve the jurisdiction of the committee, the pertinence of the request, and the committee's compliance with procedural rules.
A. Proper Jurisdiction and Legislative Purpose The first limitation is that the subpoena must fall within the proper jurisdiction of the issuing committee or subcommittee and have a legislative purpose. That is, a subpoena can only be issued where: (1)Congress has the power to investigate; (2)The Committee or Subcommittee has a proper grant of authority to conduct the investigation; and (3)The materials sought are pertinent to the investigation and within the scope of the grant of authority.
Generally, the first requirement above is easily satisfied, because there is a presumption in the courts that Congressional committees will act properly and within their authority. However, the third requirement, that the testimony or materials sought should be pertinent to the inquiry, has served as a basis for invalidating Congressional subpoenas.
For example, in Bergman the Court held that a subpoena calling for "'any' and 'all' financial records from 1969 to date [which] might include records relating to plaintiffs' purely personal financial affairs," was invalid in part, where the issuing sub-committee only had general authority to inquire into housing for the elderly. The court reasoned that while the subcommittee may properly investigate nursing home profits, "a general inquiry designed to ascertain plaintiffs' personal wealth ... is not pertinent to the investigation .... "
As the Court stated in Exxon: The principle is important that disclosure of information can only be compelled by authority of Congress, its committees or subcommittees, not solely by individual members; and only for investigations and congressional activities. Election to the Congress does not give an individual subpoena power over whatever information he may happen to be interested in, and particularly not over trade secrets, whose oftentimes enormous value may be forfeited by disclosure to the public.
II. CONGRESSIONAL CONTEMPT POWER
It is well-established that failure to obey a subpoena or subpoena duces tecum issued by a House of Congress in furtherance of its legitimate activity-by failure to appear, respond or answer questions after appearance-constitutes a contempt of that House of Congress. A prima facie case for a contempt offense is established when evidence is introduced that a witness was validly served with a subpoena and deliberately fails to comply. Case law indicates that contempt of Congress is punishable both criminally and civilly. With respect to criminal penalties, Congress drafted a contempt statute in order to provide or proceedings in a judicial forum.
This statute provides:
Every person who having been summoned as a witness by the authority of either House of Congress to give testimony or to produce papers upon any matter under inquiry before either House, or any Joint Committee established by a joint or con-current resolution of two Houses of Congress, or any commit-tee of either House of Congress, willfully makes default, or who, having appeared, refuses to answer any question pertinent to the question under inquiry, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000 nor less than $100 and imprisonment in a common jail for not less than one month nor more than twelve months.
The rules provide that the Senate or House, or when not in session the President Pro Temp or Speaker, must consider the facts and transmit them to the U.S. attorney for prosecution. This further review of a committee's decision to prosecute for contempt was drafted as a "check against hasty action of the Commit-tee."39 For the same reasons, only a grand jury, rather than a prosecutor, can decide whether to issue a contempt indictment. The House Rules also expressly provide that a House committee or subcommittee is required to seek authorization of the full House prior to enforcing a subpoena.
C. Privilege
The third and most important protection for subpoenaed witnesses is constitutional and common law privilege. While it is recognized that a Congressional committee's power to investigate is limited by a witness' constitutional rights, as a general rule, Congressional committees have refused to recognize that their investigative authority is limited by traditional common law privileges.
The Bill of Rights is applicable to investigations as to all forms of governmental action. Witnesses cannot be compelled to give evidence against themselves. They cannot be subjected to unreasonable search and seizure. Nor can the First Amendment freedoms of speech, press, religion or political belief and association be abridged.
Fifth Amendment privilege. Of the constitutional protections identified by the Watkins court, the most frequently invoked in testimony before Congress is the Fifth Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination. The relevant clause of the Fifth Amendment provides: "Nor shall [any person] be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.
https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/c...95&context=jpl
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
"When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
Author: Booker T. Washington
Bookmarks