House Rules Committee to weigh in on Garland’s snub next week

The House Rules Committee will consider a resolution to hold Attorney General Merrick Garland liable for contempt of Congress next week, potentially paving the way for a full House vote on the remaining legislation.

Tuesday’s meeting could signal a shift in GOP dynamics after at least two Republicans said privately they planned to vote against the resolution.

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.) said this week that lawmakers were encouraged by the recent guilty verdict handed down by a New York jury in former President Trump’s case.

The contempt vote has been in limbo since last month, when two separate committees advanced legislation to censure Garland, a move that was overshadowed by a raucous House Oversight Committee meeting.

Their scheduled appointment was postponed to allow members to travel to former President Trump’s trial in New York, and in the evening session, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) started a fight by commenting on Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D -Texas). ) use of false eyelashes.

But another barrier has been the content of the resolution itself.

Republicans have struggled to link Garland’s subpoena to their own impeachment investigation of President Biden.

House and Judiciary oversight Republicans have demanded the audio recording of Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur, conducted as part of his classified documents investigation.

Garland resisted, noting that Republicans already have a transcript of the interview that makes clear that none of the issues related to the GOP impeachment investigation were discussed.

And Biden gave Garland more legal cover, claiming executive privilege over the recordings. Democrats reflected that Republicans want the recording to be used only in campaign commercials.

Garland, during an appearance before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, defended his decision, noting that GOP lawmakers provided no legislative purpose for the need for the tapes, giving little justification for him to take an action that he said , could diminish the Justice Department’s ability to secure future interviews.

Garland noted that lawmakers already had five hours of testimony from Hur himself, while calling the effort to censure him “just the latest in a long series of attacks on the work of the Justice Department.”

“I see contempt as a serious matter. But I will not jeopardize the ability of our prosecutors and agents to do their jobs effectively in future investigations,” he told the panel.

If the resolution passes the Rules Committee, it will go to the House floor for a vote.

But the legislation essentially serves as a referral to the Justice Department, which would then be tasked with determining whether it believes a crime has been committed and whether charges should be filed.

It’s unlikely that Justice Department officials would reach a different conclusion than Garland when weighing whether he should be prosecuted.

This story originally appeared on thehill.com read the full story