Dr Anthony Fauci has been held in contempt of Congress after invoking his Fifth Amendment right more than 100 times during a Senate hearing, with Republican senator Rand Paul now seeking to refer the former top US infectious disease official to the Department of Justice for potential prosecution.
Dr Anthony Fauci has been found in contempt of Congress and could face referral to the Department of Justice for prosecution, following a party-line vote by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. The vote came after Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), refused to answer more than 100 questions during a Capitol Hill hearing last week, invoking his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination throughout. Republican senator Rand Paul, who chaired the hearing, has said he intends to refer Fauci to the Department of Justice for potential legal action.
What happened at the hearing
Fauci served as NIAID director from 1984 to 2022, advising seven US presidents on infectious disease policy during his tenure. During last week’s hearing, Republican lawmakers questioned him extensively about his role as the nation’s leading infectious disease specialist and the public health guidance he recommended throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. In response to more than 100 questions, Fauci repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment, which protects individuals from being compelled to provide testimony that could incriminate them.
The night before the contempt vote, the Senate committee also obtained Fauci’s COVID-era mobile phone, which lawmakers believe could prove significant in understanding how public health officials made decisions during the pandemic.
The pardon dispute
Central to the committee’s case was the question of a pardon issued to Fauci by former President Joe Biden covering certain COVID-era matters. Senator Paul argued that this pardon meant Fauci could no longer rely on Fifth Amendment protection when answering questions on those issues. Legal experts have differing views on how a presidential pardon affects the privilege against self-incrimination, particularly where testimony might expose someone to other forms of legal liability.
Paul said: “I ordered him to answer and warned him about contempt, yet he still refused. That is obstruction of a congressional investigation. The Committee will act accordingly.” He added on Thursday that all Fauci had needed to do “was tell the truth,” and the contempt vote would not have been necessary.
What the contempt vote means
The committee voted along party lines to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress and recommend the matter be referred to the Department of Justice. It is worth noting that a congressional contempt vote does not itself create criminal liability; the Department of Justice would need to decide independently whether to pursue prosecution, and any resulting criminal case would ultimately be determined in federal court. Congress has several mechanisms available for contempt, including criminal contempt, civil enforcement and inherent contempt, though criminal referrals of this kind remain the most commonly used route in modern practice. Should the Department of Justice decline to prosecute, Congress has no automatic mechanism to compel criminal proceedings, though it retains other oversight and enforcement options.
Republicans on the committee said their questioning was aimed at obtaining answers about COVID-19 restrictions, vaccine guidance, the origins of the pandemic, gain-of-function research, and communications between public health officials during the crisis.
Political reaction
The proceedings drew sharp criticism from Democrats on the committee. Senator Gary Peters described the contempt vote as a “witch hunt” and an unnecessary escalation, noting that Fauci had already appeared before Congress numerous times over several years.
The hearing also produced heated exchanges. During his opening statement, Fauci accused Paul of having an “unhinged obsession” with him, a reflection of tensions between the two men that have persisted since 2021, particularly over the origins of COVID-19 and US funding for coronavirus research. In a separate exchange, Republican senator Bernie Moreno called Fauci a “total disgrace,” saying he had been compelled to run for office six years earlier after seeing a news story about a mother being arrested while watching a football game outdoors with her family, for breaching government guidelines based on Fauci’s advice.
