Antifascism

781 readers

1 users here now

A community to post acts of antifascism and other left-wing activism. Please message a mod if you would like something posted and we can tag you in the post as well.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

seahorse@midwest.social

exposingfash@midwest.social

316

"and then they came for the socialists" (midwest.social)

submitted 1 month ago by seahorse@midwest.social to c/antifascism@midwest.social

47 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (15 children)

I dont think it requires a full formal subpoena for something to be considered a legal order, so non-compliance with the terms in this letter could easily be held as contempt of congress. (the record preservation part, at least. The rest is a 1st amendment SCOTUS case just waiting to happen).

Edit:

Although arguably any action that directly obstructs the effort of Congress to exercise its constitutional powers may constitute a contempt, in recent times the contempt power has most often been employed in response to non- compliance with a duly issued congressional subpoena—whether in the form of a refusal to appear before a committee for purposes of providing testimony, or a refusal to produce requested documents.

So, kinda yeah...?

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago (6 children)

I'm fairly certain you need something more official than a signed letter, but I'm not a lawyer.

So consult a lawyer and then if legal destroy those records

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

What is a subpoena, if not a signed letter from an agent of congress directing either testimony or production of information? Its possible this letter in itself could be considered a subpoena, since it was delivered in an official capacity. The only formalisms I'm aware of are guidelines and convention, which don't really mean anything anymore, and this letter seems to fit all the definitions I can find. I know it's a dumb question to get hung up on since obviously "talk to a lawyer" is the #1 thing to do here, but still it's an interesting question as to how legally binding an order in a form like this actually is.

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

So I did a bit of a dive and this is what I found:

Committee rules may provide for the full committee to issue a subpoena, or permit subcommittees or the chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas..

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress

So clarify with a lawyer and ensure that this action was taken under full legal authority and it likely was. I will edit my main comment to prevent the spread of misinformation

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

No need, subpoenas are obvious and in fact of they aren't obvious they aren't a subpoena. Almost every subpoena from Congress the Senate or otherwise will have some variation of "subpoena duces tecum" in the header or the phrase you are "ordered" or "commanded" to appear or provide whatever.

To Nixon https://www.justsecurity.org/61535/congress-subpoena-trump-testify/

Charles Mitchell https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/investigations/image/Pecora_MitchellSubpoena_display.htm

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (11 replies)