Paul Kiel August 20, 2007, 4:02 PM

During a press conference this afternoon, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) announced that the White House had still not responded to the committee’s subpoena for documents relating to the legal basis for the warrantless surveillance program. “Time is up,” Leahy said, “we’ve waited long enough.” He went on to say, however, that he remained open to cooperating with the White House for the production of the documents: “I prefer cooperation to contempt.” But if the administration has still not responded to the subpoena by September when Congress returns from recess, he said that he would pursue contempt proceedings in the committee “if that’s what it takes.”

You can see video here:

Leahy made clear that contempt proceedings would be a measure of last resort and that he’d prefer getting the documents through cooperation to a long court battle. On the other hand, he signaled that there’s a limit to what that cooperation might mean. Asked by a reporter about noise from the White House that it would need certain “accommodations” in turning over documents relating to the surveillance program, Leahy said “the only accommodations we tend to get from the White House are ‘do it our way and we’ll be happy with you.’” That said, he clearly remained open to negotiating, saying that it was a choice between a court battle and “find out what happened.”

It was doubly important to find out, Leahy said, for Congress to craft legislation regarding FISA. The administration’s law which passed just before the recess has a 6 month sunset provision, and Leahy said that Congress “should not legislate in the dark while the administration hides behind a fictitious veil of secrecy.”

Leahy said that he had received a letter from the Office of the Vice President which identified certain documents that might be turned over. The letter was a “good first step,” he said, but that the letter should be followed by actually turning over the documents. You can read that letter here.

As we noted this morning, the subpoena was originally issued June 27th to the White House Office, the Office of the Vice President, the National Security Council, and the Department of Justice, and the White House has twice requested extensions for responding.

Congressional Subpoenas, Surveillance