Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Questioner at House Judiciary proceeding presses official on May 2023 subpoenas for senators' toll records
Loading...
Summary
At a House Committee on the Judiciary proceeding, an unidentified questioner confronted an unidentified respondent over May 2023 subpoenas for toll records of nine U.S. senators and one representative and the use of nondisclosure orders, saying the department risked violating the Speech or Debate Clause.
During questioning at a meeting of the House Committee on the Judiciary, an unidentified questioner pressed an unidentified respondent about subpoenas the respondent said were issued in May 2023 for toll records of nine U.S. senators and an additional U.S. representative.
The questioner cited nondisclosure orders tied to those subpoenas and said the public and the members targeted "wouldn't know what you were doing." The respondent replied that the toll-record subpoenas and the nondisclosure orders were "consistent with department policy and law."
The questioner pressed further on whether the department recognized a risk under the Speech or Debate Clause, asking directly whether the respondent knew there was a risk of violating that constitutional protection. The respondent answered that "the toll record subpoenas that we secured were with the concurrence" (response interrupted) and emphasized consistency with policy.
The questioner produced an email he attributed to John Keller at the Public Integrity Section, reading that "there is some litigation risk regarding whether compelled disclosure of toll records of a member's legislative calls violates the Speech or Debate Clause in the DC Circuit." The questioner said the committee's own analysis likewise noted litigation risk and accused the department of relying on a novel legal theory and nondisclosure orders to avoid litigation and public scrutiny.
As the exchange continued, the questioner characterized the conduct as disregarding constitutional limits, stating, "We walked all over the Constitution throughout this entire process" and calling the behavior "absolutely disgraceful." The transcript does not record a formal response beyond the respondent reiterating the investigation's consistency with policy and law, nor does it record a vote or formal action on the matter.
No formal outcome or departmental action was recorded in the provided transcript excerpts. The committee's next procedural step was not specified in the excerpts provided.
