Jonathan Turley Warns Democrats Have ‘Grounds’ to ‘Challenge’ Dr. Fauci Contempt Vote

Fox News legal analyst Jonathan Turley warned that Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) did something that could possibly open up “grounds” for Democrats to “challenge” Thursday’s contempt vote against Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Turley joined Fox News’ Bill Hemmer and Aishah Hasnie on America’s Newsroom after the Senate Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs committee, led by Paul, votied to hold Fauci in contempt.

Paul had warned the vote was coming last week after Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times, refusing to answer questions about the Covid-19 pandemic and his leadership of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Turley called the vote “very significant,” but warned Paul and Republicans opened up room for a “challenge” by referring the contempt recommendation straight to the Department of Justice, instead of going to a full vote in the Senate where it would need 60 votes to move forward.

The legal analyst and law professor noted that the laws around these sorts of contempt charges and pardons are “murky” because cases have been “sparse.” A complication here, he added, is that Paul’s final question to Fauci was not related to the time covered by Fauci’s pardon by former President Joe Biden.

Turley said:

It’s very significant. This is not a small step for any committee in holding an official, particularly a high ranking official, in contempt. We have the added wrinkle that just occurred, where the committee will do a direct referral to the Department of Justice, rather than allow this to go to the floor, where it would face a filibuster and a higher requirement of 60 votes in order to be referred to DOJ. That’s going to add a complexity. That’s gonna add grounds for a challenge from the other side. The law behind this this controversy is rather murky. People may be surprised that the cases in this area are relatively sparse. And so what Fauci is saying is that I’m really not protected without the privilege because there may be questions in ongoing state investigations or new questions that would put me at risk. What the committee is saying is that you have this sweeping pardon going back to 2014. And Chairman Paul specifically framed his final set of questions as only addressing matters within the confines of that pardon. So that’s going to put into sharp relief for the court whether he truly has a to invoke the privilege.

Watch above via Fox News.

Jason Cohen contributed to this report.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!