Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

IDemo

(16,926 posts)
Fri Jul 4, 2014, 07:56 PM Jul 2014

U.S. House Says Staff Absolutely Immune in Answer to SEC

Source: Business Week

The U.S. House Ways and Means Committee and a top staff member say the panel and its employees are “absolutely immune” from having to comply with subpoenas from a federal regulator in an insider-trading probe.

The committee today responded to U.S. District Court Judge Paul Gardephe’s order to explain why it hadn’t complied with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s requests for documents, phone records and testimony of aide Brian Sutter for more than a year. Gardephe gave the House until today to answer.

Kerry W. Kircher, the top lawyer for the House, said the SEC’s request should be dismissed because the information it seeks concerns legislative activities protected by the Constitution, which can’t be reviewed by federal judges. If Gardephe won’t dismiss the SEC’s case, it should be transferred to federal court in Washington, Kircher said.

“What the SEC has done is embark on a remarkable fishing expedition for congressional records -- core legislative records,” Kircher said in a court filing. “The SEC invites the federal judiciary to enforce those administrative subpoenas as against the Legislative Brach of the federal government. This court should decline that invitation.”

Read more: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-07-04/house-says-staff-absolutely-immune-in-answer-to-sec

24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
U.S. House Says Staff Absolutely Immune in Answer to SEC (Original Post) IDemo Jul 2014 OP
To paraphrase Nixon: "When House staffers do it, that means it's not illegal." Scuba Jul 2014 #1
Or, when anyone inside the Beltway or on Wall Street does it. n/t IDemo Jul 2014 #2
But if you or I did it... R. Daneel Olivaw Jul 2014 #17
They lock us up. Octafish Jul 2014 #24
Betting, having done no research, 'staff' loses, elleng Jul 2014 #3
A felony would seem to include a lot of stuff, I would say, for members also. Fred Sanders Jul 2014 #10
Yep, talk to Martha Stewart. She can tell you about insider trading felonies /nt dballance Jul 2014 #16
I Think Mr. Kircher Is Pushing It, Sir The Magistrate Jul 2014 #4
Gotta watch them fishing expeditions. Rod Beauvex Jul 2014 #5
But others got Spiro Agnew & Richard Nixon rickyhall Jul 2014 #15
But he slipped the hook and the Republicans got reeled in by voters. alfredo Jul 2014 #20
They're employees on a taxpayer pay check... Historic NY Jul 2014 #6
this is insider trading wilt the stilt Jul 2014 #7
They may or may not be immune, but the optics are sure appalling. nt silvershadow Jul 2014 #8
There is no such thing as absolute immunity in law, even the President, even a Congressman. Fred Sanders Jul 2014 #9
Only immune for GOP staff Iliyah Jul 2014 #11
Why do I get the feeling that if a Democrat tried this we'd get 24/7 screeching winter is coming Jul 2014 #12
Hence Boner suing Obama Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jul 2014 #13
We do have a precedent. And when the FBI cearched Representative William Jefferson's Congressional 24601 Jul 2014 #23
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Jul 2014 #14
They are supposed to hold a House committee hearing and give themselves immunity for testifying. McCamy Taylor Jul 2014 #18
If so, the SEC should make public all evidence. Let us become the judge and jury. alfredo Jul 2014 #21
, blkmusclmachine Jul 2014 #19
A miracle: A poor politician arrives in Washington a pauper and leaves a millionaire. Octafish Jul 2014 #22

elleng

(130,865 posts)
3. Betting, having done no research, 'staff' loses,
Fri Jul 4, 2014, 08:05 PM
Jul 2014

MEMBERS, maybe not.

The Speech or Debate Clause is a clause in the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 6, Clause 1). The clause states that members of both Houses of Congress

...shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony, and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their attendance at the Session of their Respective Houses, and in going to and from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

wiki

The Magistrate

(95,244 posts)
4. I Think Mr. Kircher Is Pushing It, Sir
Fri Jul 4, 2014, 08:06 PM
Jul 2014

What is being investigated has noting to do with the legislative process or debate.

The courts should continue to rule in favor of the S.E.C., though Heaven knows what the wretches dominating the High Court will do....

winter is coming

(11,785 posts)
12. Why do I get the feeling that if a Democrat tried this we'd get 24/7 screeching
Fri Jul 4, 2014, 09:09 PM
Jul 2014

from the GOP that "no one is above the law"?

24601

(3,959 posts)
23. We do have a precedent. And when the FBI cearched Representative William Jefferson's Congressional
Sat Jul 5, 2014, 11:26 AM
Jul 2014

office, as the Washington Post Reported on August 4th, 2007.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080300696.html

"A federal appeals court ruled yesterday that FBI agents violated the Constitution during their search of Rep. William J. Jefferson's Capitol Hill office last year, and ordered the agency to return all privileged materials."

"In a 3 to 0 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit did not block future FBI searches of congressional offices. But it ruled that FBI agents went too far during the May 2006 search when they viewed paper documents before giving the Louisiana Democrat an opportunity to say whether the material was connected to legislative activity and thus protected under the Constitution's "speech or debate" clause."

"But a bipartisan uproar on Capitol Hill over the constitutionality of the raid -- the first by the FBI on a congressional office -- prompted President Bush to seal the seized materials so all parties could reach an accord."

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said in a news conference that the ruling "restates the central role of the separation of powers, and separation of checks and balances in our system. Having said that, I look forward to working with the Justice Department on an appropriate protocol for access to members' offices when that is necessary."

So the answer is that the reaction to the search was bipartisan.

It's not for the Executive or Judicial Branches to search anything before Congress first screens out anything that would be covered by the search & debate clause.

"In Gravel v. United States, 408 U.S. 606 (1972), the Supreme Court held (5-4) that the privileges of the Speech or Debate Clause extend to Congressional aides. Rejecting the reasoning of the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court held, "...the privilege available to the aide is confined to those services that would be immune legislative conduct if performed by the Senator himself,..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_or_Debate_Clause

McCamy Taylor

(19,240 posts)
18. They are supposed to hold a House committee hearing and give themselves immunity for testifying.
Sat Jul 5, 2014, 02:26 AM
Jul 2014

That is how Congress usually handles these things. It must be some pretty nasty dirt if they do not want it made public.

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
22. A miracle: A poor politician arrives in Washington a pauper and leaves a millionaire.
Sat Jul 5, 2014, 11:18 AM
Jul 2014

Last edited Sun Jul 6, 2014, 12:28 PM - Edit history (1)

The wonder comes in when adding up the salary, even with the franking thrown in, should never be enough to make one rich. Yet, it does.

Thank heavens for the American Dream. And a good staff.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»U.S. House Says Staff Abs...