The guess to start, one of fundamental jobs of congress is to do oversight over the executive branch, to make sure that the democracy, people are happy with the work of the executive is doing. From time to time, congress is to satisfied with the cooperation it gets from the executive ranch, so one of the things we have seen, particularly in the last decade or so is Congress Going to court on occasion to try and get help enforcing subpoenas. Why not hold a formal contempt vote . Why take this route . Guest they are not mutually exclusive. Civiles where the enforcement has been pursued in the courts, it has been preceded by contempt vote by the house. The notion is that the house has a number of options when someone violates a subpoena and refuses to appear. The house could actually arrest the individual, it could send out the sergeant at arms, aided by capitol police, and put them somewhere in the capital. I think it would be cruel and unusual punishment to put them in the snack bar, bu
Guest they are not mutually exclusive. In the cases where Civil Enforcement has been pursued in courts, its been preceded by contempt votes in the house. The house has a number of options when someone violates a subpoena and refuses to appear. The house could arrest the individual, could send out a sergeant in arms and put them somewhere in the capital. They could arrest them. That was used in the 19th and early 20th century. It hasnt been used since the early 20th century. The second option is to refer the matter to the department of justice for prosecution, which is what happens when a private citizen is in contempt of the ongress. If its part of the administration, they are being advised by the department of justice, they are not likely to prosecute. They have the option of holding them in contempt. They can be arrested by the u. S. Marshal, which is a serious matter, but one that would have been approved by a court. In these matters where the administration has refused to comply wi
To try to get help enforcing subpoenas. Host nathan, why not hold a formal contempt vote . Why take this route. I think they are not mutually exclusive. In cases where several enforcement has been pursued in the courts, it has been proceeded by contempt votes in the house. The notion is that the house has a number of options when someone violates a subpoena or refuses to appear. Guest they are not mutually exclusive. In the cases where Civil Enforcement has been pursued in courts, its been preceded by contempt votes in the house. The house has a number of options when someone violates a subpoena and refuses to appear. The house could arrest the individual, could send out a sergeant in arms and put them somewhere in the capital. They could arrest them. That was used in the 19th and early 20th century. It hasnt been used since the early 20th century. The second option is to refer the matter to the department of justice for prosecution, which is what happens when a private citizen is in c
Charles allen wri Stephen Vladek holds the charles rent university of texas published in the New York Times Los Angeles Times he has argued before the Circuit Court that speaks in and of itself and the Supreme Court analystt in 2013 and steven livs in austin texas. I will hand it over to them. [applause] good evening. Stephen vladek a hero in his own town and its great to be here. The first thing i want to ask is will move this conversation. There is still time. I think 20 minutes of silence is about right for a book about the supremed court decisions. It has gone better than last night actually. Are you sure you dont want to just talk about ken paxton . [applause] for an hour. I [applause] yeah. If you have not seen her for the book its terrific and thats up to it andth the book itself is e right book for this moment when its so much in the news and on our minds and well talk a lot about the Supreme Court today in the context of this book lets begin by talking about the book in defini
on the questioning graeme could face. georgia investigators want to get to the bottom of grams of georgia secretary of state brad raffensperger. raffensperger claims graham asked him if he had the power to reject a certain absentee ballots. in raffensperger s view, that was to toss out votes in a free and fair election. quote we re going to ask joyce matt vance about all this in just a minute. here s the broader context when it comes to these various investigations into trump s attacks on democracy. a clear majority of americans want investigations like the one in georgia to move forward despite whatever resistance there may be from trump allies. a new nbc news poll out just today claims 57% of voters saying investigations into trump should continue. joining me now to discuss senior legal affairs reporter for politico, child cheney msnbc contributor, joy s former u.s. attorney and professor at the university of alabama school of law. and vera investigative correspon