Connect with us

Accountability

Secret Pence ruling breaks new ground

Published

on

A federal judge’s secret order on Tuesday requiring Mike Pence to testify about aspects of Donald Trump’s bid to subvert the 2020 election was also an unprecedented ruling about the vice presidency itself.

It is the first time in U.S. history that a federal judge has concluded that vice presidents are entitled from immunity from investigators.

Vice Presidents differ from Presidents a little as Presidents draw all their power from the executive branch, whereas vice presidents get their immunity from Congress, Chief U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg ruled. That’s because vice presidents are constitutionally required to serve as president of the Senate. And officers of Congress, such as lawmakers and their aides, enjoy immunity rooted in a provision of the Constitution known as the “speech or debate” clause, meant to safeguard Congress from law enforcement inquiries related to their official duties.

The vice president’s role as Senate president has largely become ceremonial, with the occasional exception of casting tie-breaking votes, and every four years, presiding over the count of electoral votes after a presidential election. Vice presidents have long suggested they should enjoy the legal protections afforded to Congress, but Boasberg’s ruling is the first time a court has extended so-called speech-or-debate immunity to the vice presidency.

Experts have said that the ruling, which remains sealed but was described to POLITICO by a person familiar with its contours, is an important insight into Vice Presidential power.

Advertisement

“Any such movement is significant, as it sets a precedent that potentially can expand at a later time, in a different circumstance,” said Mark Rozell, a George Mason University political scientist who specializes in executive power. “The vice president is now acknowledged to possess a form of privilege by virtue of his or her legislative role, something that a president cannot claim.”

The immunity question arose from special counsel Jack Smith’s bid to force Pence to testify before a Washington D.C. grand jury investigating the January 6th, 2021, attack on the Capitol. Trump opposed the subpoena on executive-privilege grounds, a position Boasberg rejected.

Pence did not fight in Trump’s corner, but mounted his own, stating that his role presiding over Congress on January 6th, should grant him speech-or-debate immunity.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
CATEGORY:Accountability
Advertisement
1 Comment
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Donald R. Laster, Jr

President Trump was trying to “un-fix” the rigged election. There is actual video of CNN broadcasting a State Senate race where one candidate’s vote when up by 250 votes and the other candidates went down by 250 votes. 250 is the value I remember. The CNN hosts worked to have the vote display removed. Then look at the what happened in certain Republican dominated areas in 2022 – all sorts of machine problems that prevented voting. People have covered and discussed a lot of evidence related to the vote fraud.

And Mrs Harris invalidates the Biden/Harris selection by the Electoral College. She is at best a naturalized citizen since Amendment 14 did not even give her US citizenship. And she is not a natural born Citizen of the US since neither of her parents are US citizens when she was born. Remember, a natural born Citizen of a country is a person born in the country of a mother who is a citizen of the country and a father who is a citizen of the country. And she was not even alive when the US Constitution was adopted.

Trending

1
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x