« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
But, The Law Protects Congressmen From The Law
Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) takes his case before a Washington, D.C. appeals court panel today, in a move to get back documents the congressman’s lawyers say were wrongfully snatched from his office by the FBI in a raid.
Jefferson has been the brunt of FBI searches and a battery of allegations after he accepted $100,000 from an undercover FBI informant last year, and then stashed the money meant to bribe the Vice President of Nigeria, in his freezer, wrapped in frozen food packaging and aluminum foil.*
The freezer cash isn’t at issue today, though.
Jefferson’s lawyers are going to argue that the Constitution’s “Speech or Debate” clause should have shielded their client from the search of his Congressional office. Politicians on both sides of the aisle rallied around Jefferson last year in support of his argument.
The clause, found here in Article 1, Section 6, reads:
They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
*Update: This post originally stated that Jefferson has been charged. He has not.
Comments (22)
David Eoll wrote on May 15, 2007 12:19 PM:"in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace"
Indeed.
Guilty. Baliff, bring in the next defendent.
klyde wrote on May 15, 2007 12:25 PM:Has Jefferson been charged with a crime? If he has why does he still have committee assignments?
Crust wrote on May 15, 2007 12:37 PM:Jefferson is an embarrassment. When the Republican leadership (both Hastert and Frist) protested the raid on Jefferson's office, Reid did the right thing and supported the raid. Pelosi, for shame, hemmed and hawed for a bit and eventually agreed with Hastert and Frist.
As best I can tell, every possible precaution to respect the separation of powers was taken short of not doing the raid at all. It is appropriate to show a special deference, but ultimately there has to be some standard by which the FBI can raid a Congressman's office, otherwise it becomes a de facto law-free zone.
EH wrote on May 15, 2007 12:47 PM:Someone boot this moron already.
ES wrote on May 15, 2007 1:08 PM:Jefferson has to go. He hinders the Dems credibility in pursuing the many corrupt Repugs that need to be pursued and strung up (or sent to Gitmo - I can live with that, since they like the place so much).
JTL wrote on May 15, 2007 1:09 PM:"Has Jefferson been charged with a crime? If he has why does he still have committee assignments?"
I don't believe he has been charged yet. That's the main reason that he hasn't been booted. Remember, after all of this was revealed he still got re-elected in his home district.
molly wrote on May 15, 2007 1:12 PM:Think Jefferson has been bribed by same people who have bribed prominent republicans. Why he isn't doin serious jail time. being a democrat and all.
Sholom wrote on May 15, 2007 1:22 PM:He'll be doing serious time, but, Jefferson's gonna drag this out. And then the MSM when they talk about corruption, in the name of "balance", will bring up Jefferson's case.
He's not only an embarrassment to the Dems, but he significantly undermines attacks on the GOP culture of corruption.
Anonymous wrote on May 15, 2007 1:28 PM:Lame. Accepting a bribe is not "Speech or Debate".
anon wrote on May 15, 2007 1:29 PM:...he significantly undermines attacks on the GOP...
And so, yeah, this will probably drag on and on. Argh.
parrot wrote on May 15, 2007 1:44 PM:Maybe they're not charging him til the next election. You know, delaying justice for political partisan purposes. Oh, and did I mention that they might be doing this to draw attention away from their own malfeasances?
Anonymous wrote on May 15, 2007 1:47 PM:It was just announced that Jerry Falwell just died. Surely there is a conspiracy here-remember Vince Foster?
Well, just kidding, but if we liberals liked to weave stories like conservatives do, we could come up with a doozy. All those connections to Regent University. Surely Pat was involved.
Anonymous wrote on May 15, 2007 2:41 PM:Throw the book at him, pronto.
Anonymous wrote on May 15, 2007 2:43 PM:Yea, there's just the exception for "felony" he should worry about. The Dems would be smart by washing their dirty linen now and keeping it clean.
grumbles wrote on May 15, 2007 3:04 PM:Nancy never should have allowed him to keep his committee appt. While he should be granted every right in court, a shadow like this should be determinate of ,at least, suspension, while the investigation resumes and he can defend himself. Why the people of his district re-elected him is beyond me, unless there is something about all this I do not know. The only other thing they could have found that would have been worse would have been a body. One can only wonder if his committee seat would have been protected.....
Diverik wrote on May 15, 2007 3:28 PM:"Has Jefferson been charged with a crime? If he has why does he still have committee assignments?"
I thought the Democratic Caucus had removed him from the Ways and Means Committee, (and rightly so). What other committees is he on?
If he is on any other important committees, he should be removed (at least until the investigation is concluded). The appearance of impropriety is so significant in this case, it warrants his removal.
Dan D wrote on May 15, 2007 3:33 PM:Forget Jefferson, he's really unimportant: The importance of this case is the precedents it sets for claims of Branch Privilege from oversight by other branches.
Jefferson is essentially claiming "Legislative Privilege" from Executive Oversight, and the District Court shot him down hard.
Well, guess which branch seems to be claiming privilege all over the place as a protection from legitimate oversight by another?
That's right - this case could shed some more important light on the limits of Executive privilege.
We may thank Jefferson one day for taking this to court and losing badly.
jdw wrote on May 15, 2007 4:51 PM:I really hate Jefferson's attempt in this one. One just wished he tapped out last year, gave up the seat, and copped a plea for getting caught read handed with the cash on ice.
Anonymous wrote on May 15, 2007 7:01 PM:Throw the book at him, pronto.
Posted by:
Date: May 15, 2007 02:41 PM
Agree. He's the guy folks are gonna point to when they say, "See, both sides are a bunch of crooks." What a douchebag.
mikefromtexas wrote on May 15, 2007 8:20 PM:The FBI claims it has him on video and audio accepting the $$$. If so, why raid his office?? My theory, just a thought, is that maybe the money in the freezer wasn't the money he took on tape. The FBI records all serial numbers and photo copies the cash before these sting ops. That would explain why he hasn't been charged.
As far as the search of his office, it's my understanding this is the first time a congressman's office has been raided. If that's correct then the judge that sighed off on the warrant had zero precedent to work with. Probably one of those non-activist judges we hear so much about.
Paul F wrote on May 23, 2007 12:04 PM:I'm sorry...
Am I missing something here? Why isn't this guy in jail instead of being in office? Will somebody please explain that part???
Geeze, we put up with WAY too much &^%$ in this country!
Sharon A wrote on June 4, 2007 1:54 PM:Charges, please.