Ted Lieu: must pass inherent contempt legislation now. Or subpoenas remain meaningless

[Laura PourMeADrink]

Link to tweet

?s=20

[NewHendoLib]

1. But...but our powder is still not dry enough

[Peregrine Took]

14. Agreed it needs to be so much dryer! n/t

[KPN]

2. K&R. Patience be damned.

[calimary]

43. With a side of "Fuck that shit!"

[grumpyduck]

3. Anytime now, Democrats.

How much longer are you going to wait?

[Snoopy 7]

48. history

The republicans don't care after all don't forget it was snot nose carl rove who thumbed his nose at the subpoena and the Democratic Party did nothing about it. He was also held in contempt and nothing was done the Democratic Party can only blame themselves.

[leftieNanner]

4. Questions -

If this is legislation, does that mean it has to pass the House and the Senate for Biden's signature?

Does this inherent contempt only apply to House subpoenas or does it apply to the Senate as well?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

8. Dennings/Lieu bill

https://demings.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-demings-cosponsors-inherent-contempt-bill

[leftieNanner]

9. Thank you for sharing that

Apparently my answer is - BOTH!

This bill would apply to both House and Senate Subpoenas.

One would hope that there are 10 Senators who would see the benefit in passing this. Door swings both ways.

[Eyeball_Kid]

25. Eliminate the filibuster FIRST,

then there’s a chance that it might pass.

[PTWB]

29. That doesn't make much sense to me.

We know we don’t have the votes to eliminate the filibuster. We do not know (though we may suspect) that we don’t have the votes to pass this legislation.

[appmanga]

45. Inherent contempt...

...is the province of the individual chambers. The House does not need Senate agreement to use its inherent contempt power; a power that's been upheld by the Supreme Court.

It makes no sense to continue to fecklessly flail in getting to the bottom of the 1/6 conspiracy because of a fear of what the future may bring. If the Democrats fail in their pursuit of the truth and accountability, there will be no future as legislators to worry about because the Republican extremists will finish their work of turning this country into an autocracy.

If 1/6 is what we believe it to have been: an attempted coup, how do you not act with a sense of urgency? How can you not feel you can bring the American people along with you? The Democrats have the majority in the House, so passing the ability to use inherent contempt shouldn't be an issue.

[KPN]

50. THIS x 1000!

[SoCalDavidS]

5. They've Given ZERO Indication They Would Be Willing To Pursue Inherent Contempt

I'm not holding my breath.

[Bev54]

6. I would like them to explain to us why they are not pursuing it.

I know it hasn't been used for a long time but does it need more than a majority vote? What is stopping them? Are they worried about it being used on them? I am at a loss of why.

[hay rick]

7. Jamie Raskin posted this in August, 2020...

"The appeals court panel's decision is stunningly wrong," Rep. Lieu said. "At the same time, this protracted legal battle over subpoena enforcement tells us that the House needs to create procedures to enforce subpoenas itself. The Supreme Court already has said that Congress has that power through inherent contempt. It's well past time to use it. The House needs to pass our inherent contempt resolution, which enables the House to levy penalties directly against those refusing to comply with Congressional subpoenas. This can be done without needing the approval of either the Senate or the Executive Branch."

Emphasis added.

[leftieNanner]

10. And you provided us with a bit more information

Thank you.

[KS Toronado]

11. If the House can do this w/o Senate approval

Then get Nancy to do it ASAP, $1,000,000 penalty sounds about right to me.
Million bucks should get their attention.

[FBaggins]

23. They can't assign a penalty

If the inherent contempt power remains (and there's some debate), then all it can do is detain a recalcitrant witness until either they testify or the end of the hearings or congressional session. They have no ability to find someone guilty or assign a penalty. The detention is compulsory, not puntative.


On edit - Re-reading the statement advocating new legislation. It does indeed appear to include additional punishment options. I doubt that it would be found constitutional. Congress lacks the power to arrogate judicial powers to itself beyond the constitutional language re: impeachment. The House absolutely can't do so by resolution.

[FBaggins]

54. I think they're worried that they can't

It would certainly be challenged. There’s probably a reason why it hasn’t been used in decades.

IMO - the better option would be to ask a court to enforce the subpoena. Failure to comply would be a quicker path to detention

I’m also not entirely sure that we would have the votes necessary. Imprisoning a political opponent without allowing any form of judicial due process could be electorally dangerous.

[FBaggins]

56. That's an argument to try

It doesn’t answer the question of whether they still can or whether the votes exist to do so.

[Bayard]

16. Isn't Raskin an expert on Constitutional law?

If I remember right. So.....why haven't they done this already? There is already enough things we don't have the power to do, so seize the opportunity. Wonder if there would be an appeal process? How do they enforce the penalties?

[OnDoutside]

17. Yes he is, which makes it weird that it hasn't been done already.

[mountain grammy]

20. Then do it.. dammit.

[ColinC]

12. Anything that depends on the senate passing something is doomed from the start.

Could we get 60 senators to support an inherent contempt law? Probably not.

[librechik]

24. Time to fuck the fillibuster FIRST

The fillibuster chicken game is all about Dems not playing to win. Instead they are playing not to lose by protecting their potential minority status. "Oh one day we'll be in the minority and we will then want the fillibuster." Except we never do. Schumer is a big fat oh we must play not to lose guy. He needs a spine.

Dump the fillibuster and play to win now. We won't get another opportunity.

[PTWB]

30. We don't have the votes to eliminate the filibuster.

[librechik]

42. I suspect there are procedural methods that leadership hesitates to use.

For sure because they just did it with the debt ceiling. Again, we won't play hardball as the PUKKKes bombard us with flaming shit cannonballs.

Trump would just do it and dare people to hold him accountable, all for his own pleasure. The Dems have democracy to protect.

Cheers! I'm just grumpy this morning.

[calimary]

44. I am, too, this morning!

The Orange Plague wouldn’t hesitate for a nanosecond.

I find myself watching the republi-CONS work their evil, lying, cheating, sneaky-ass, devious magic, and constantly asking myself “WHY CAN’T WE DO THAT?”

Seriously! What are we afraid of? Not being nice???

[librechik]

46. grrr!

[Grasswire2]

39. go back to comment #7.

House can pass this by itself.

No Senate needed.

[ColinC]

41. Beautiful.

Thank you!

[bluestarone]

13. if we DON'T need the Senate, then

DO IT NOW!

[DLevine]

15. K&R. nt

[gab13by13]

18. Laura, you are one of the voices of reason here,

your opinion carries weight.

Want to know another delay tactic I just heard about coming from Mark Meadows? Now he is claiming he will respond to questions in writing, give me a break. I think back to Hillary sitting for 11 hours answering every question.

I hope people realize that Congress is going on Christmas vacation.

[Ohioboy]

19. You know damn well

If it had been Biden supporters attacking the Capitol republicans wouldn't be allowing the clock to run out.

[Evolve Dammit]

21. You got that right.

[dalton99a]

22. Kick

[usaf-vet]

26. They have lost me and my checkbook. No one would get rich on my monthly donations BUT....

.... add us up, add up all the small donations, and it would make a difference. AT LEAST THAT IS WHAT THEIR ADs SAY.

I'm sure I'm not the only one fed up with the LACK of perceptible action.

In fact, now I feel insulted when the pleas for money come across my desk every day via email and snail-mail.

I feel like the "mark" any grifter looks for.

It seems like the meme the party in control ALWAYS loses seats in the midterm election.

Throw some of the treasonous bastards that assaulted the capital in jail and get the AG off his a$$ or replace him.

It seems to me we have progressive women in the party with legal experience that have more cojones than the current AG.

Sorry to say, Garland and Mueller might have been giants in the past, but their "use by date" also seems to have passed.

[usaf-vet]

27. Like I said I am sure I'm not the only one who is dishearted. Here is another current OP.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216126389

[Laura PourMeADrink]

28. I think it's really easy to blame the media or blame the legal maneuverings

for why we can't do something or why poll numbers go down. And it's easy to say there is nothing that can be done. Surely there are savvy minds that can figure out ways around problems that are legal and don't betray our values.

Time for a week long retreat of the greatest minds in the Democratic party, pollsters, admen, lawyers, constitution experts, creative types.

[NurseJackie]

31. Rea-a-a-aly, Ted. Seriously? Just like that? We can *snap* and make it happen?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

36. Funny

[KPN]

51. ...

[ffr]

32. I only need to ask what TFG and McConnell would do to know what else we should be doing

Exercise all options.

[UTUSN]

33. K&R

[tritsofme]

34. Tweets like this might be good for Ted's fundraising haul

Not sure for what else, though.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

35. Interesting take. The politics of it all. Wonder

why, I mean truly why, this bill hasn't passed.

[Orrex]

37. Maybe one of our local message police can scold Lieu for his outraged ranting

While they're at it, they can tell him that he's "embarrassing" himself, since a front-page article here today declared the same about anyone who expresses impatience with "The System."

[Laura PourMeADrink]

38. Think you're trying to say something. But it's veiled.

[oasis]

40. Kick and Rec.

[Silent3]

47. Is this something the House can do all by itself?

This will never get past the Senate if they need the Senate.

And since the inherent contempt power has been used before, why is new legislation needed?

[CrispyQ]

49. Post #7 says they don't need the senate or the executive branch. --nt