Congress right to investigate ?

H

Hu_Fan

Guest
Pardon if this has been tossed around on this forum.. I can't recall and don't come here all that often. A "search" did not show anything.

I've run some Google searches to find discussions on rights of Congress to investigate. I've found little.

Congress is a co-equal branch but also a limited branch with it's own powers and limitations that do not, as I understand it, overlap with the other two branches.

So why wouldn't the Justice Department.... Federal and State... be the only branches of government with the right to question a citizen over some matter?

Frankly I find it disturbing that elected ordinary citizens are in position to sit on a panel and question fellow citizens about anything. Why doesn't that strike the public as out of line with an orderly society that has full separation of powers?

In my opinion, no citizen should be questioned about either legal or moral behavior by elected officials. The only questioning should come under the Judicial Branch of government, in complete compliance with all protections of due process.

I'm really at a loss why we tolerate Congress hauling people into the Capital to question them -- on anything. On whether or not you are a Communist. On whether or not you paid taxes. On whether or not you have the "right" lifestyle.

My point is this: If it's a question of obeying laws, it's a matter for the justice system. If it's a question of morality, it's no business of any government.

I'm thinking that in the past 100 or so years, this country has given back a lot of power to government that it's founders made a stand to deny rulers in the late 18th century. We've done that with the Legislative Branch, and we've done that with the Executive Branch.

I'd like to read where Congress actually has a Constitutional right to investigate or question anyone about anything other than matters pertaining to bills of legislation. Congress writes laws, the executive branch executes them into law, and the judicial branch rules on matters pertaining to those laws.

And that's it. But for now, Congress is behaving as investigative attorney, as jury and presumptively as judge. I'm perplexed that is not challenged.
 
The clause that was referenced seems Constitutionally questionable to me. I will assume that House rules fall under the power of the Constitution. Not that anyone has tried it, but couldn't someone appeal the jurisdication of the House's inquiries to The Supreme Court? Who else would you appeal to? Surely it would have to be the federal court system, but not locally?
 
Good thread.

I've wondered this too, but not enough to do any research. What gives Congress the subpoena power? Do they give it to themselves by a congressional rule?

I wonder if anyone's ever walked into a federal district court to quash a congressional subpoena.
 
I agree, they spend a lot of money and time wastefully on crap that really shouldn't matter to most Americans.
 
The Constitution vests all legislative authority in Congress. U.S. Const., art. I, § 1. Although the Constitution does not expressly authorize Congress to issue subpoenas, the Supreme Court has stated that the authority to subpoena is an "indispensable ingredient" of Congress' legislative power. Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund, 421 U.S. 491, 505 (1975). In McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 174 (1927), the Court declared that "the power of inquiry-with process to enforce it-is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function." According to the Court:


A legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to affect or change; and where the legislative body does not itself possess the requisite information-which not infrequently is true-recourse must be had to others who do possess it. Experience has taught that mere requests for such information often are unavailing, and also that information which is volunteered is not always accurate or complete; so some means of compulsion are essential to obtain what is needed.

Id. at 175. Similarly, in Eastland, the Court said:


The power to investigate and to do so through compulsory process plainly falls within [the definition of Congress' legislative function]. This Court has often noted that the power to investigate is inherent in the power to make laws.

Eastland, 421 U.S. at 504.2
The Link
 
I have to admit this is a very interesting topic. If anybody is interested in the Commerce Clause of the Contitution - and why Congress uses it in some rediculously odd way should check out some of these cases
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbons_v._OgdenThe Link

Of Couse, investigated Steriod users seems like a complete waste of time and money to me as well.
 
I'm not sure why we're talking about the commerce clause or the necessary and proper clause. Is there a statute that gives Congress the subpoena power?
 
I find it odd that anyone would even doubt Congress's power to investigate. How could you possibly give them the power to pass laws but bar them from investigating the issues those laws will govern? You'd be making for an even more ignorant Congress than we already have.
 
You can go back to the common law in Great Britain before this country had a constitution and find the courts already considered the issue and acknowledged that a legislature can't be expected to do squat unless it has access to information and will often be required to compel people to come forward with information.

For a 80 year old case that recites a litany of old cases and principles going back to Great Britain, see McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 174–175 (1927), where the Supreme Court said,

In reply to:
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

Predict TEXAS-ARIZONA STATE

CFP Round 2 • Peach Bowl
Wed, Jan 1 • 12:00 PM on ESPN
AZ State game and preview thread


Chick-fil-A Peach Bowl website

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top