Republican Senate committee moves to hold Dr. Fauci in contempt over Fifth Amendment claim
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee led by Rand Paul will vote on a contempt referral against Dr. Anthony Fauci after he invoked the Fifth Amendment during a COVID-19 hearing, raising questions about the scope of presidential pardons.
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee is set to vote on a contempt resolution against Dr. Anthony Fauci, who invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times during a recent hearing on his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. Republicans on the panel argue that a pardon granted to Fauci by Joe Biden in early 2025 removes any risk of federal prosecution, and therefore he cannot claim Fifth Amendment protection.
Committee Chairman Rand Paul, who issued the subpoena, said the vote will be taken on Thursday and that the referral will be sent directly to the Justice Department, bypassing a full Senate vote. The resolution states that Vice President JD Vance, as president of the Senate, will certify the referral to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia.
Legal scholars are divided on the issue. Mark Osler, a law professor and pardon-power expert, said the case could set a precedent for future congressional investigations of pardoned officials. Michael Gerhardt, a professor at the University of North Carolina, noted that invoking the Fifth Amendment can be a prudent strategy when a witness believes there is a “reasonable basis” for fearing prosecution.
"This is an important case because I think a lot of people anticipate that President Trump is going to issue similar pardons to many people in his administration who will end up being called before Congress, and the precedent here is important," said Mark Osler.
"I think his invoking the Fifth makes sense because he was invited into a situation where everyone in the country understood that Rand Paul was trying to set him up for a criminal prosecution," said Michael Gerhardt.
"The question is do you have a reasonable fear of prosecution, and Fauci’s argument would be — yes, I received a pardon, yes, I believe that pardon covers and prevents prosecution but there have been statements from lots of people including Trump and other administration officials ... raising questions about the validity of that pardon," said Ross Garber.
While a presidential pardon generally shields an individual from federal prosecution for covered offenses, experts note that it does not protect against state charges or potential prosecutions arising from false statements made under oath. The outcome of the contempt vote could influence how Congress compels testimony from pardoned witnesses in the future.