Judge Rules Search of Jefferson’s Office Constitutional
In a stinging defeat for William Jefferson and a resounding victory for the Executive Branch, Chief U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan ruled that the search warrant he signed for Representative William Jefferson’s office is constitutional. Jefferson’s lawyers signaled that they (a) weren’t surprised and (b) planned on appealing the ruling. Here’s the heart of the AP’s article:
In a 28-page opinion, Hogan dismissed arguments that the first-ever raid on a congressman’s office violated the Constitution’s protections against intimidation of elected officials. “Congress’ capacity to function effectively is not threatened by permitting congressional offices to be searched pursuant to validly issued search warrants,” said Hogan, who had approved the FBI’s request to conduct the overnight search of Jefferson’s office.
—————
At issue was a constitutional provision known as the speech and debate clause, which protects elected officials from being questioned by the president, a prosecutor or a plaintiff in a lawsuit about their legislative work. “No one argues that the warrant executed upon Congressman Jefferson’s office was not properly administered,” Hogan wrote. “Therefore, there was no impermissible intrusion on the Legislature. The fact that some privileged material was incidentally captured by the search does not constitute an unlawful intrusion.”
Far be it from me to suggest that the AP’s account is slanted, though characterizing the search of Jefferson’s office as “the first-ever raid on a congressman’s office” seems a bit melodramatic to me.
I’d also suggest that this was a relatively easy ruling if, in fact, Jefferson’s attorneys didn’t question the administration of the search warrant. If Jefferson’s attorneys simply argued that the Executive Branch couldn’t search the offices of the Legislative Branch, then they’d essentially be saying that the House office building was a sanctuary to congressmen wishing to hide evidence of wrong-doing. That’s so convoluted that it’s hard imagining a congressman or attorney thinking that way.
The raid on Jefferson’s office angered members of Congress, some of whom threatened to retaliate by tinkering with the FBI and Justice Department budgets.
For which they would’ve paid a political price this fall.
Hogan said a search warrant seeking material is very different than a subpoena seeking testimony. “Jefferson may never be questioned regarding his legitimate legislative activities, is immune from civil or criminal liability for those activities, and no privileged material may ever be used against him in court,” the judge wrote.
Judge Hogan’s essentially saying that Jefferson can only be questioned regarding his illegitimate activities that fall outside the scope of his legislative responsibilities. What’s so difficult to figure out about that?
Technorati Tags: William Jefferson, Corruption, Separation of Powers
Cross-post at LetFreedomRingBlog
July 10th, 2006 at 2:23 pm
[...] Cross-posted at California Conservative Categories: The Constitution, Liberals, House of Representatives, Corruption, Crime | [...]
July 10th, 2006 at 4:42 pm
[...] California Conservative [...]
July 10th, 2006 at 5:51 pm
Judge Rules Congressman’s Office Seizure Legal
Because the members of congress did not like that one of their own member’s office has gotten searched LEGALLY, with a WARRANT, they threaten to intefere and mess with the budget of the FBI and Justice Department?!?!?
Are you freakin’ nuts?
July 10th, 2006 at 5:57 pm
Judicial Activism!
Ruling from the bench, Judge Hogan has re-written the Constitution, and trashed over 200 years of precedent. No lawmaker’s office has ever been searched in this fashion. This is the most clear-cut case of judges inmposing their will over the Congressional law-making process, ever.
Now, I’m surprised that this is not your response, CalCon… Seemingly, this would be your argument. Afterall, you have argued judicial activism so many times, you’ve described judges with rulings like these as:
And changing the way that Congress governs itself is not unlike any of these decisions? How interesting.
So, let’s see: when a judge rules that the Liberals are right, it’s judicial activism; when a judge rules in favor of CONservatives, its a “resounding victory for the Executive Branch.”
I wonder how you’ll feel when its a democrat in the WH, and they start searching replublicon House members’ offices.
Although, I did like the touch of irony in the ruling, saying that barring searches of lawmakers’ offices would turn Capitol Hill into “a taxpayer-subsidized sanctuary for crime.” What, Judge Hogan doesn’t watch the news? At least we know he has a sense of humor!
July 10th, 2006 at 7:33 pm
Court: Raid on Jefferson legal
If it wasn’t for Judge Hogan, Pelosi and crew would still be posturing with arrogance about this raid on one of their own. In fact, I find it odd that CNN is avoiding this story right now like the plague. You can only imagine the coverage had this be…
July 11th, 2006 at 6:33 am
[...] Others Blogging: California Conservative [...]
July 11th, 2006 at 7:22 pm
Hogan (for once in his life) has not rewritten 200 seconds, let alone 200 years, of constitutional law. He came to the only conclusion he possibly could, that being that the offices of our elected officials are not sanctuaries for criminal conduct. Don’t that jest beat all, bucko?
Not like the idiots who ruled in favor of Roe v. Wade, overturning nearly 200 years of precedent. Or in Kelo v. New London, overturning not only more than two hundred years of precedent but centuries of English common law before that. Or the one that just happened, last week, with 5 Supreme Idiots overturning not only two centuries of constitutional precedent but rewriting the whole book on the rules of engagement in war. ‘Course, since that was a decision that was favored by the All Communist Lovers Union, stare decisis don’t mean diddly.
The only conclusion I can find for that sorry excuse of a decision is that the French must have been putting something in their drinking water to make those five immune to any sort of common sense at all. It certainly sounded like French “thinking” to me.