A Republican-led committee is preparing to vote on holding Dr. Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress and referring the matter to the Justice Department following his decision to invoke the Fifth Amendment during a recent hearing. The vote tees up a legal debate over whether Fauci had a constitutional right against self-incrimination.
Senator Rand Paul, who subpoenaed Fauci and leads the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, argues that a pardon Fauci received from President Biden renders him ineligible for Fifth Amendment protections. A Senate resolution asserts that Paul found Fauci's claims of privilege "unsupported."
However, some legal experts suggest Fauci had valid reasons to invoke the Fifth Amendment. These reasons include the potential for state prosecutions and questions surrounding the validity of Biden's pardons, particularly given the Trump administration's past focus on false-statement investigations against political adversaries. Any testimony Fauci provided could have potentially led to such investigations.
Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, left federal service in 2022. He was among individuals pardoned by President Biden in one of his final acts in office. The clemency covered actions from 2014 up to January 2025. Republicans on Paul's committee contend that the pardon eliminated the threat of criminal prosecution, thereby removing Fauci's basis for invoking the Fifth Amendment. Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment rights more than 100 times during the hearing.
Fauci had stated prior to the hearing that Paul, as committee chairman, had an "obvious obsession with calling for my prosecution." He believed the hearing's purpose was to elicit a statement that would vindicate Paul's public assertions that Fauci should be "behind bars."
Legal scholars note that while a pardon theoretically negates prosecution risks, Fauci maintained a good-faith basis to fear criminal charges. Factors potentially supporting Fauci's strategy include the fact that the pardon might not shield him from potential state prosecutions or federal charges related to false statements. The validity of Biden's pardons has also been questioned by former Trump administration officials, though legal experts generally consider them valid.
Paul indicated that his committee intends to send the contempt referral directly to the Justice Department, bypassing a full Senate vote. This expedited process avoids the need for 60 votes in the Senate, a threshold Republicans likely cannot meet. The contempt resolution directs the Vice President to certify the referral and accompanying report to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia.