Relating to the Consideration of House Report and An Accompanying Resolution

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend and fellow Rules Committee member, Representative Fischbach, for allowing me the time.

Mr. Speaker, I really believe that the issue before us today comes down to a very simple question, and that is, what is the legislative purpose of the Select Committee subpoena on a private citizen. This is a very narrow legal issue.

And what the courts have held is that Congress has the power to secure information ``in order to legislate.'' So in other words, Congress's subpoena authority is valid only if it relates to the furtherance of a legitimate task of Congress.

Now, according to the Select Committee's own press release, the committee is attempting to tell a story and to find out what happened that day. But the courts have already determined that that is not a valid legislative purpose.

In the 1957 decision, Watkins v. The United States, the Court held that Congress has ``no general authority to expose the private affairs of individuals without justification in terms of the functions of Congress.'' Additionally, the quote went on in that case to say Congress cannot investigate private citizens for ``the sake of exposure.''

So then what is the legislative purpose before us today? What is the legislative purpose of a subpoena on a private citizen, including 11 individuals who merely filed and were granted permits to exercise their First Amendment rights to assemble and to petition the government? This cannot be perceived as an investigation and still fit within the framework of case law.

Again, let's be clear, the law is crystal clear here. If Congress does not have a legitimate legislative function, they simply cannot subpoena a private individual.

Now, the Constitution gives those powers to the executive and the judiciary branch. They don't give that power to Congress. So I can, therefore, only conclude that the purpose of the resolution before us today is to fulfill a partisan agenda.

If the Select Committee was actually serious about conducting a legitimate oversight, they would subpoena the former House Sergeant at Arms and the former head of the D.C. National Guard. That would be an investigation within the clear purpose of Congress and within the delegated power that we have in the Constitution.

Instead, we are here voting on a resolution with absolutely no legislative purpose. We are also setting a dangerous precedent that will have a chilling effect on the rights of private citizens in the future.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source