Editing Contempt of Congress (section)

== History ==
In the late 1790s, declaring contempt of Congress was considered an "implied power" of the [[legislature]], in a similar manner as the British Parliament could make findings of [[contempt of Parliament]]—early Congresses issued contempt citations against numerous individuals for a variety of actions. Some instances of contempt of Congress included citations against:  
* [[Robert Randal]], for an attempt to bribe Representative [[William Smith (South Carolina representative)|William Smith]] of [[South Carolina]] in 1795.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-16-02-0092|title=Founders Online: The Case of Robert Randall and Charles Whitney, 28 December 17 …|website=founders.archives.gov}}</ref>
* William Duane, a newspaper editor who refused to answer Senate questions in 1800.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Senate_Holds_Editor_in_Contempt.htm|title=U.S. Senate: Senate Holds Editor in Contempt|website=www.senate.gov}}</ref>
* [[Nathaniel Rounsavell]], another newspaper editor, for releasing sensitive information to the press in 1812.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-HPREC-HINDS-V3/html/GPO-HPREC-HINDS-V3-2.htm|title=Hinds' Precedents, Volume 3 – Chapter 53 – Punishment of Witnesses for Contempt|website=www.govinfo.gov}}</ref>

In ''[[Anderson v. Dunn]]'' (1821),<ref name="auto">{{cite web|url=http://supreme.justia.com/us/19/204/case.html|title=Anderson v. Dunn 19 U.S. 204 (1821)|website=justia.com|access-date=May 18, 2017}}</ref> the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] held that Congress's power to hold someone in contempt was essential to ensure that Congress was "... not exposed to every indignity and interruption that rudeness, caprice, or even conspiracy, may mediate against it."<ref name="auto" />
The historical interpretation that bribery of a senator or representative was considered contempt of Congress has long since been abandoned in favor of criminal statutes. In 1857, Congress enacted a law that made "contempt of Congress" a [[criminal offense]] against the United States.<ref>Act of January 24, 1857, Ch. 19, sec. 1, 11 Stat. 155.</ref>

In the [[Air Mail Scandal]] of 1934, [[William MacCracken]], former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for [[Aeronautics]], was sentenced to ten days of detention for destroying evidence under subpoena. MacCracken appealed his sentence to the Supreme Court in ''[[Jurney v. MacCracken]]''. After losing his case, he surrendered to Chesley Jurney, [[Sergeant at Arms of the United States Senate|Senate sergeant at arms]], who detained him in a room at the [[Willard Hotel]].

While it has been said that "Congress is handcuffed in getting obstinate witnesses to comply",<ref>{{cite news|last1=Wright|first1=Austin|title=Why Flynn could easily beat his Senate subpoena|url=http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/15/flynn-senate-subpoena-russia-trump-238404|access-date=17 May 2017|work=[[Politico]]|date=15 May 2017}}</ref> cases have been referred to the [[United States Department of Justice]].<ref name="fas.org">[[Congressional Research Service]] Report RL34097, [https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34097.pdf ''Congress's Contempt Power and the Enforcement of Congressional Subpoenas: Law, History, Practice, and Procedure''], Todd Garvey (May 12, 2017).</ref> The [[Office of Legal Counsel]] has asserted that the [[President of the United States]] is protected from contempt by [[executive privilege]].<ref>Memorandum for the Attorney General from [[Theodore Olson]], Re: [https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/1984/05/31/op-olc-v008-p0101_0.pdf ''Prosecution for the Contempt of Congress of an Executive Branch Official Who Has Asserted a Claim of Executive Privilege''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170225034358/https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/1984/05/31/op-olc-v008-p0101_0.pdf |date=February 25, 2017 }}, 8 Op. Off. Legal Counsel 101 (1984)</ref><ref>Memorandum for the Attorney General from [[Charles J. Cooper]], Re: [https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/1986/04/31/op-olc-v010-p0068_0.pdf ''Response to Congressional Requests for Information Regarding Decisions Made Under the Independent Counsel Act''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191208071159/https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/1986/04/31/op-olc-v010-p0068_0.pdf |date=December 8, 2019 }}, 10 Op. Off. Legal Counsel 68 (1986)</ref>

In March 2024, it was reported that [[Peter Navarro]] would be the first former [[Federal government of the United States#Executive branch|White House official]] to be imprisoned for a contempt of Congress criminal conviction.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/19/peter-navarro-prison-miami-00147790|title='I'm pissed': Ex-Trump aide Peter Navarro blasts justice system before heading to federal prison|first1=Kimberly|last1=Leonard|first2=Kyle|last2=Cheney|publisher=Politico|date=March 19, 2024|accessdate=July 1, 2024}}</ref> [[Steve Bannon]] would then follow in July 2024.<ref name=twoimprisoned>{{cite news|url=https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/01/politics/steve-bannon-report-to-prison/index.html|title=Steve Bannon begins serving 4-month sentence in federal prison for defying congressional subpoena|first1=Sara|last1=Murray|first2=Katelyn|last2=Polantz|first3=Devan|last3=Cole|publisher=CNN|date=July 1, 2024|accessdate=July 1, 2024}}</ref> Both Navarro and Bannon's contempt of Congress convictions and prison sentences were connected with their refusals to comply with subpoenas which required them testify before the now-defunct [[United States House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack|House Select Committee that investigated January 6, 2021]].<ref name=twoimprisoned />