[House Report 110-847]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
House Calendar No. 263
110th Congress HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Report
2d Session 110-847
_______________________________________________________________________
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FIND KARL
ROVE IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH A SUBPOENA DULY
ISSUED BY THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
----------
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS AND MINORITY VIEWS
September 15, 2008.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered
to be printed
House Calendar No. 263
110th Congress
2d Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Report
110-847
_______________________________________________________________________
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FIND KARL
ROVE IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH A SUBPOENA DULY
ISSUED BY THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS AND MINORITY VIEWS
September 15, 2008.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered
to be printed
-------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
69-006 WASHINGTON : 2008
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
(202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
110th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 110-847
======================================================================
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FIND KARL
ROVE IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH A SUBPOENA DULY
ISSUED BY THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
_______
September 15, 2008.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be
printed
_______
Mr. Conyers, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS AND MINORITY VIEWS
[Including Committee Cost Estimate]
The Committee on the Judiciary, having considered this
Report, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the
Report be approved.
The form of Resolution that the Committee on the Judiciary
would recommend to the House of Representatives for citing
former White House Adviser Karl Rove for contempt of Congress
pursuant to this Report is as follows:
Resolved, That former White House Adviser Karl Rove is in
contempt of Congress for failure to comply with the subpoena
issued to him on May 22, 2008; and it is further
Resolved, That pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 192 and 194, the
Speaker of the House of Representatives shall certify the
Report of the Committee on the Judiciary, detailing the refusal
of former White House Adviser Karl Rove to appear before the
Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law as directed
by subpoena, to the United States Attorney for the District of
Columbia, to the end that Mr. Rove be proceeded against in the
manner and form provided by law; and it is further
Resolved, That the House of Representatives should pursue
enforcing the subpoena through other legal remedies as
appropriate.
BACKGROUND AND EXPLANATION
I. BACKGROUND OF COMMITTEE INVESTIGATION AND REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION
FROM KARL ROVE
A. LHouse Judiciary Committee Hearings
Beginning in March 2007, the House Judiciary Committee and
its Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law (CAL
Subcommittee) have held a number of hearings on the alleged
politicization of the Justice Department, including the
termination of U.S. Attorneys in 2006, allegations of selective
prosecution, and related issues. These have included:
U.S. Attorneys & William Moschella. On March 6, 2007, six
of the terminated U.S. Attorneys \1\ and William E. Moschella,
Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General, U.S. Department of
Justice, among others, testified before the CAL
Subcommittee.\2\ At this hearing (and in private briefings on
February 28 and March 5 to CAL Subcommittee members and staff
that preceded it), Mr. Moschella testified, inter alia, as to
the Justice Department's then- claimed reasons for firing these
U.S. Attorneys. The terminated U.S. Attorneys testified, inter
alia, that they had not been given reasons for their firing
and, among other matters, responded to some of the Department's
asserted reasons for their firing, and discussed potentially
improper political and other factors that may have been related
to their firing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ H.R. 580, Restoring Checks and Balances in the Confirmation
Process of U.S. Attorneys: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial
and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007).
The six former U.S. Attorneys who testified were Ms. Lam, Mr. Iglesias,
Mr. Cummins, Mr. McKay, Mr. Bogden, and Mr. Charlton.
\2\ The other witnesses included the following: Representative
Darrell E. Issa (R-CA); former Representative Asa Hutchinson (R-AR);
John A. Smietanka, a former United States Attorney for the Western
District of Michigan; George J. Terwilliger, III, former Deputy
Attorney General of the U.S. Department of Justice; T.J. Halstead,
Legislative Attorney, American Law Division, Congressional Research
Service; and Atlee W. Wampler, III, President of the National
Association of Former United States Attorneys.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ensuring Executive Branch Accountability. On March 29,
2007, the CAL Subcommittee heard testimony assessing the
validity of White House assertions concerning executive
privilege in the U.S. Attorney controversy.\3\ Beth Nolan,
former White House Counsel under President Clinton, indicated
that she had testified four times before congressional
committees on matters directly related to her White House
duties, including three times while she was serving in that
position.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Ensuring Executive Branch Accountability: Hearing Before the
Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary,
110th Cong. (2007). The witnesses at the hearing included John Podesta,
former White House Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton; Beth
Nolan, former White House Counsel to President Bill Clinton; Frederick
A.O. Schwarz, Jr., Senior Counsel, Brennan Center for Justice; and Noel
J. Francisco, former Associate Counsel to President George W. Bush.
\4\ Id. (testimony of Beth Nolan, former White House Counsel to
President Bill Clinton).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
James Comey. On May 3, 2007, former Deputy Attorney General
James Comey testified before the CAL Subcommittee.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Continuing Investigation into the U.S. Attorneys Controversy:
Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law of the H.
Comm. on the Judiciary,110th Cong. (2007) (testimony of James Comey,
former Deputy Attorney General).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alberto Gonzales. On May 10, 2007, Attorney General
Gonzales appeared before the full Judiciary Committee for an
oversight hearing that focused on the U.S. Attorneys
controversy.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ United States Department of Justice: Hearing Before the H.
Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007) (testimony of Attorney
General Alberto Gonzales).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monica Goodling. After a grant of limited use immunity,
Monica Goodling, former Senior Counsel to Attorney General
Alberto Gonzales and the Department's White House Liaison,
appeared before the full Committee on May 23, 2007.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Continuing Investigation into the U.S. Attorneys Controversy
and Related Matters: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on the Judiciary,
110th Cong. (2007) (testimony of Monica Goodling, former Senior Counsel
to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and White House Liaison, U.S.
Department of Justice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul McNulty. On June 21, 2007, Deputy Attorney General
Paul McNulty testified before the CAL Subcommittee.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Continuing Investigation into the U.S. Attorneys Controversy
and Related Matters: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and
Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007)
(testimony of Paul McNulty, Deputy Attorney General).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Harriet Miers. Former White House Counsel Harriet Miers
refused to comply with a subpoena requiring her appearance
before the CAL Subcommittee on July 12, 2007.\9\ Ms. Miers not
only failed to provide testimony or documents; she failed even
to appear for the hearing. CAL Subcommittee Chair Linda Sanchez
proceeded to overrule the White House's claims of immunity and
privilege with respect to Ms. Miers, and the ruling was
sustained by CAL Subcommittee Members in a recorded vote of 7-
5.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Continuing Investigation into the U.S. Attorneys Controversy
and Related Matters: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and
Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007).
\10\ Id. On July 25, 2007, the Committee met in open session and
adopted a resolution ``recommending that the House of Representatives
find that former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House
Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten be cited for contempt of Congress for
refusal to comply with subpoenas issued by the Committee.'' The
Committee voted 22-17 to report a resolution recommending finding them
in contempt to the full House. On February 14, 2008, the House voted
223-32 to hold Ms. Miers and Mr. Bolten in contempt of Congress and to
grant the Chairman of the Committee the power to file a civil suit to
seek declaratory and injunctive relief for the failure to comply with
the subpoenas. Attorney General Michael Mukasey declined to refer the
contempt citations to a grand jury, and the Chairman of the Committee
initiated a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia. That case is currently pending.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations of Selective Prosecution: The Erosion of Public
Confidence in our Federal Justice System. On October 23, 2007,
the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security and
the CAL Subcommittee held a joint hearing exploring several
cases of alleged selective prosecution, including the
prosecutions of former Democratic Alabama Governor Don
Siegelman, Wisconsin state employee Georgia Thompson, and
prominent Democrat Cyril Wecht in Pittsburgh. Testimony was
received from former Attorney General Richard Thornburgh,
Professor Donald C. Shields, and former Alabama U.S. Attorney
Doug Jones.\11\ Part II of the hearing was held on May 14,
2008, at which testimony was received from the Hon. Paul W.
Hodes (D-N.H.), consultant Allen Raymond, Attorney Paul Twomey,
and Professor Mark C. Miller.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Allegations of Selective Prosecution: The Erosion of Public
Confidence in our Federal Justice System: Joint Hearing Before the
Subcomm. on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security and the Subcomm. on
Commercial and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong.
(2007).
\12\ Allegations of Selective Prosecution Part II: The Erosion of
Public Confidence in our Federal Justice System: Joint Hearing Before
the Subcomm. on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security and the
Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary,
110th Cong. (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Rove. Former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl
Rove refused to comply with a subpoena requiring his appearance
before the CAL Subcommittee on July 10, 2008, failing to appear
for the hearing to answer questions.\13\ CAL Subcommittee Chair
Sanchez proceeded to overrule the claims of immunity and
privilege with respect to Mr. Rove, and the ruling was
sustained by CAL Subcommittee Members in a recorded vote of 7-
1.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The Politicization of the Justice Department and Allegations
of Selective Prosecution: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and
Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2008).
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. LRequests for Information from the White House and Subpoena Issued
to Karl Rove
Because Mr. Rove was considered a central witness who could
provide information that is unavailable through any other
source, in March 2007 Chairman John Conyers, Jr. and CAL
Subcommittee Chair Linda Sanchez sought Mr. Rove's voluntary
compliance with the Committee's investigation, along with that
of other witnesses, by letter to White House Counsel Fred
Fielding.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin.
Law, to Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President (Mar. 9, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response, Mr. Fielding explained that he was prepared to
make Mr. Rove and other White House officials available for
interviews with the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on a
joint basis; but his offer was conditioned on various
preconditions and scope restrictions.\16\ Mr. Fielding's offer
required that the interviews be confined to ``the subject of
(a) communications between the White House and persons outside
the White House concerning the request for resignations of the
U.S. Attorneys in question; and (b) communications between the
White House and Members of Congress concerning those
requests.'' \17\ Questioning on internal White House
discussions of any kind, by personnel at any level, would not
be allowed. In addition, Mr. Fielding required that the
interviews ``be private and conducted without the need for an
oath, transcript, subsequent testimony, or the subsequent
issuance of subpoenas.'' \18\ In other words, no matter what
might be revealed, no other testimony or documents could be
requested from the White House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Letter from Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President, to
Patrick Leahy, Chairman, S. Comm. on the Judiciary, John Conyers, Jr.,
Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, Lamar Smith, Ranking Member, H.
Comm. on the Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on
Commercial and Admin. Law (Mar. 20, 2007).
\17\ Id.
\18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 21, 2007, the CAL Subcommittee authorized Chairman
Conyers to issue subpoenas to Karl Rove and other present and
former White House officials to obtain testimony and
documents.\19\ Both before and after March 21, letters were
exchanged between the Committee and the White House to seek to
resolve voluntarily the Committee's requests for information
from the White House; but those efforts were not successful.
Committee letters (one of which was sent jointly with Senate
Judiciary Committee Chairman Leahy) included letters of March
9, March 22, March 28, and May 21, 2007.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Meeting to Consider Subpoena Authorization Concerning the
Recent Termination of United States Attorneys and Related Subjects
Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007). In addition, the Subcommittee authorized
Chairman Conyers to issue a subpoena for D. Kyle Sampson, former Chief
of Staff to the Attorney General. Mr. Sampson has thus far voluntarily
cooperated with the Committee's investigation.
\20\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin.
Law, to Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President (Mar. 9, 2007); Letter
from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Linda
Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law, to Fred
Fielding, Counsel to the President (Mar. 22, 2007); Letter from John
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Patrick Leahy,
Chairman, S. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Fred Fielding, Counsel to the
President (Mar. 28, 2007); and Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman,
H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on
Commercial and Admin. Law, to Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President
(May 21, 2007). All of these letters are on file with the House
Committee on the Judiciary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the Committee's investigation proceeded and as
additional allegations and information emerged, Chairman
Conyers, CAL Subcommittee Chair Sanchez, and Committee Members
Artur Davis and Tammy Baldwin wrote to Mr. Rove on April 17,
2008, asking that he voluntarily testify on the alleged
politicization of the Justice Department, including the
termination of U.S. Attorneys in 2006, allegations of selective
prosecution, and related issues.\21\ On April 29, 2008, Robert
Luskin, who represents Karl Rove, offered to make Mr. Rove
available for an interview only on the Siegelman matter, which
would neither be under oath nor transcribed.\22\ Committee
Members responded on May 1 by rejecting Mr. Luskin's offer and
requesting that Mr. Rove reconsider his decision not to testify
voluntarily.\23\ On May 9, Mr. Luskin offered that Mr. Rove
respond to written questions and only with respect to the
Siegelman prosecution.\24\ Committee Members responded in a May
14 letter rejecting Mr. Luskin's offer and reiterating that Mr.
Rove should testify on the politicization in the Department,
including such matters as the U.S. Attorney firings as well as
the Siegelman case.\25\ On May 21, Mr. Luskin restated the two
offers in his April 29 and May 9 letters.\26\ Because of Mr.
Rove's refusal to testify voluntarily about the politicization
of the Department, Chairman Conyers issued a subpoena to Mr.
Rove on May 22, pursuant to the previous authorization,
directing him to appear before the CAL Subcommittee on July 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law,
Artur Davis, member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Tammy Baldwin,
member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Karl Rove (Apr. 17, 2008).
\22\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (Apr. 29, 2008).
\23\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law,
Artur Davis, member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Tammy Baldwin,
member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl
Rove (May 1, 2008).
\24\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (May 9, 2008).
\25\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law,
Artur Davis, member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Tammy Baldwin,
member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl
Rove (May 14, 2008).
\26\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (May 21, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsequently, Committee staff had several discussions with
Mr. Luskin in which he offered to have Mr. Rove interviewed
without a transcript or oath, but without prejudice to the
Committee's right to pursue its subpoena for sworn testimony.
However, such an interview would be limited to questions
concerning the Siegelman matter. Chairman Conyers and CAL
Subcommittee Chair Sanchez wrote to Mr. Luskin to express their
encouragement about the offer that Mr. Rove be interviewed
without prejudice, but reiterated that Mr. Rove should be
prepared to answer questions about the entire issue of
politicization as described above and would be expected to
appear on July 10 to do so.\27\ On July 1, Mr. Luskin indicated
that Mr. Rove would decline to appear before the CAL
Subcommittee.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin.
Law, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove (June 16, 2008).
\28\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (May 21, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 3, Chairman Conyers and CAL Subcommittee Chair
Sanchez wrote to Mr. Luskin urging Mr. Rove to reconsider his
position and to appear pursuant to his legal obligations.\29\
On July 9, Mr. Luskin confirmed that Mr. Rove would not appear,
and attached a July 9 letter from White House Counsel Fred
Fielding, an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) letter regarding Mr.
Rove dated August 1, 2007, and an OLC letter regarding Ms.
Miers dated July 10, 2007.\30\ According to Mr. Fielding's
letter, Mr. Rove has ``constitutional immunity . . . because
Mr. Rove was an immediate presidential adviser and because the
Committee seeks to question him regarding matters that arose
during his tenure and that relate to his official duties in
that capacity.'' \31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin.
Law, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove (July 3, 2008).
\30\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (July 9, 2008).
\31\ Letter from Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President, to Robert
Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove (July 9, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 10, 2008, the CAL Subcommittee met as scheduled,
and Mr. Rove in fact failed to appear. At that meeting, CAL
Subcommittee Chair Sanchez issued a ruling that rejected the
immunity claims with respect to Mr. Rove, and the CAL
Subcommittee, by a vote of 7 to 1, sustained that ruling.\32\
The ruling specifically covered Mr. Rove's refusal to appear as
required by the subpoena issued to him. Chairman Conyers and
CAL Subcommittee Chair Sanchez sent Mr. Rove's counsel a letter
enclosing a copy of the ruling, and again urging compliance and
warning of the possibility of contempt.\33\ The letter also
requested that Mr. Rove's counsel notify the Committee by July
16 as to whether Mr. Rove would comply with the subpoena.\34\
On July 29, 2008, Mr. Rove's attorney wrote to Chairman Conyers
, indicating that Mr. Rove would not comply with the subpoena
but urging the Committee not to proceed with contempt.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ The Politicization of the Justice Department and Allegations
of Selective Prosecution: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and
Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2008).
\33\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin.
Law, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove (July 10, 2008).
\34\ Id.
\35\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (July 29, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 15, 2008, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Lamar
Smith sent a letter and a set of questions regarding the
Siegelman matter to Mr. Rove's counsel.\36\ Mr. Rove's counsel
provided Ranking Member Smith with written answers to those
questions on July 22.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Letter from Lamar Smith, Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the
Judiciary, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove (July 15, 2008).
\37\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to Lamar
Smith, Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (July 22, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. AUTHORITY AND LEGISLATIVE PURPOSE
The Committee on the Judiciary is a standing Committee of
the House of Representatives, duly established pursuant to the
Rules of the House of Representatives, which are adopted
pursuant to the Rulemaking Clause of the Constitution.\38\
House Rule X grants to the Committee legislative and oversight
jurisdiction over, inter alia, ``judicial proceedings, civil
and criminal,'' and ``criminal law enforcement''; the
``application, administration, execution, and effectiveness of
laws and programs addressing subjects within its
jurisdiction''; the ``organization and operation of Federal
agencies and entities having responsibilities for the
administration and execution of laws and programs addressing
subjects within its jurisdiction''; and ``any conditions or
circumstances that may indicate the necessity or desirability
of enacting new or additional legislation addressing subjects
within its jurisdiction.'' \39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 5, cl. 2.
\39\ House Rule X(1)(k)(1) and (7); House Rule X(2)(b)(1)(A)-(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Rule XI specifically authorizes the Committee and its
subcommittees to ``require, by subpoena or otherwise, the
attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the production
of such books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, and
documents as it considers necessary.'' \40\ The Rule also
provides that the ``power to authorize and issue subpoenas''
may be delegated to the Committee chairman.\41\ The subpoenas
discussed in this report were issued pursuant to this
authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ House Rule XI(2)(m)(1)(B).
\41\ House Rule XI(2)(m)(3)(A)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The investigation into the alleged politicization of the
Justice Department, including the termination of U.S. Attorneys
in 2006, allegations of selective prosecution, and related
issues, is being undertaken pursuant to the authority delegated
to the Committee under Rule X as described above. The oversight
and legislative purposes of this investigation fall into two
related categories: 1) investigating and exposing any possible
malfeasance, abuse of authority, or violation of existing law
on the part of the Executive Branch related to these concerns,
and 2) considering whether the conduct uncovered may warrant
additions or modifications to existing Federal law, such as
more clearly prohibiting the kinds of improper political
interference with prosecutorial decisions as have been alleged
here.
Hearings
In its investigation into the alleged politicization of the
Justice Department, including the termination of U.S. Attorneys
in 2006, allegations of selective prosecution, and related
issues, the CAL Subcommittee held 6 days of hearings, on March
6, March 29, May 3, June 21, July 12, 2007, and July 10, 2008.
In addition, the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland
Security and the CAL Subcommittee held 2 days of joint hearings
on October 23, 2007 and May 14, 2008. The full Committee held 2
days of hearings, on May 10 and May 23, 2007. More discussion
of these hearings is contained in the background section of
this Report.
Committee Consideration
On July 30, 2008, the Committee met in open session and
ordered this Report favorably reported, without amendment, by a
vote of 20 to 14, a quorum being present.
Committee Votes
In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the
following recorded votes took place:
1. On ordering this Report favorably reported, without
amendment.
ROLLCALL NO. 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ayes Nays Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman...................................... X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher..................................................... X
Mr. Nadler...................................................... X
Mr. Scott....................................................... X
Mr. Watt........................................................ X
Ms. Lofgren..................................................... X
Ms. Jackson Lee................................................. X
Ms. Waters...................................................... X
Mr. Delahunt.................................................... X
Mr. Wexler......................................................
Ms. Sanchez..................................................... X
Mr. Cohen....................................................... X
Mr. Johnson..................................................... X
Ms. Sutton...................................................... X
Mr. Gutierrez................................................... X
Mr. Sherman.....................................................
Ms. Baldwin..................................................... X
Mr. Weiner...................................................... X
Mr. Schiff...................................................... X
Mr. Davis....................................................... X
Ms. Wasserman Schultz........................................... X
Mr. Ellison..................................................... X
Mr. Smith (Texas)............................................... X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr........................................... X
Mr. Coble....................................................... X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte................................................... X
Mr. Chabot......................................................
Mr. Lungren..................................................... X
Mr. Cannon...................................................... X
Mr. Keller...................................................... X
Mr. Issa........................................................ X
Mr. Pence.......................................................
Mr. Forbes...................................................... X
Mr. King........................................................ X
Mr. Feeney...................................................... X
Mr. Franks...................................................... X
Mr. Gohmert..................................................... X
Mr. Jordan...................................................... X
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 20 14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this Report.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives is inapplicable because this Report does not
provide new budgetary authority or increased tax expenditures.
Committee Cost Estimate
In compliance with clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the Committee believes that
the cost incurred in carrying out the Report will be
negligible.
Performance Goals and Objectives
The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Report will assist the Committee and the House of
Representatives in vindicating Congress's responsibility to
conduct appropriate oversight of the Executive Branch and
vindicating the rule of law.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for
this Report in article 1, section 1 of the Constitution.
Advisory on Earmarks
In accordance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, this Report does not contain any
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff
benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of Rule XXI.
Additional Views of Chairman Conyers and
Subcommittee Chair Sanchez
Minority Views
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E