Justice Department to review Fauci contempt referral after Fifth Amendment clash

WASHINGTON —

The Justice Department (DOJ) confirmed it is reviewing a referral involving Dr. Anthony Fauci after Republicans on a Senate committee voted to hold him in contempt of Congress for refusing to answer questions about the COVID-19 pandemic.

A DOJ spokesperson said, “We have received the document, we are reviewing it, and will work with the Senate accordingly.”

Sen. Rand Paul, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said he delivered the referral directly to the department after the committee approved the contempt resolution along party lines.

However, the full Senate did not vote on the resolution. Democrats have questioned the legal validity of Paul’s referral, and argued that contempt referrals must be approved by the full Senate before being formally transmitted to the DOJ.

The committee vote followed a hearing during which Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times.

Paul also said, “A million Americans died and I think they deserve to know the truth.”

During the hearing, Fauci stated, “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.”

Fauci’s legal team described the contempt vote as a “crude political stunt.” His attorney argued that Fauci is being punished for exercising his constitutional rights.

Before leaving office, President Joe Biden issued Fauci a preemptive pardon in January 2025. Biden said the pardon was intended to protect Fauci from what he called “unjustified and politically motivated prosecutions.”

The pardon covered possible federal offenses connected to Fauci’s government service from Jan. 1, 2014, through Jan. 19, 2025. Republicans argued that the pardon eliminates the threat of federal prosecution for conduct during that period and therefore removes Fauci’s justification for remaining silent.

Paul said, “All you have to do is tell the truth, not commit a new crime.”

The pardon did not cover possible state charges or new federal offenses, including any false testimony given after the pardon was issued.

Sen. Maggie Hassan, a Democrat from New Hampshire, said, “The goal was to wait for Doctor Fauci to make any kind of misstatement and then have a weaponized Department of Justice file criminal charges for that new statement that would not have been covered by the pardon.”

Former federal prosecutor Gene Rossi explained the legal implications. “You can only be convicted if your claim of a Fifth Amendment protection is unjustified,” he said.

Rossi added, “This will end up going to court, I predict, before a judge or jury, and that’s where it’s going to be resolved.”

Republicans have repeatedly sought answers from Fauci about whether his agency funded dangerous virus research in Wuhan, China; what he knew about a possible laboratory leak during the pandemic’s earliest days; and whether his private assessments matched what he told Congress and the public.