Fmr Sen. Levin urges Congress not to hesitate in using 'inherent contempt' to jail Barr, others

[hlthe2b]

Laurence Tribe concurs: I’ve been urging that this power not be retired just yet, given its Supreme Court pedigree (1927, reaffirmed 1972), despite claims that it’s no longer “normal.” But an abnormal presidency may require abnormal measures. At least don’t rule them out!

Link to tweet

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/8/1856064/-Fmr-Senator-Carl-Levin-urges-Congress-not-hesitate-using-inherent-contempt-to-jail-Barr-others

[hlthe2b]

1. So what is "inherent contempt"?

Inherent contempt

Under this process, the procedure for holding a person in contempt involves only the chamber concerned. Following a contempt citation, the person cited is arrested by the Sergeant-at-Arms for the House or Senate, brought to the floor of the chamber, held to answer charges by the presiding officer, and then subjected to punishment as the chamber may dictate (usually imprisonment for punishment, imprisonment for coersion, or release from the contempt citation). [10]

Concerned with the time-consuming nature of a contempt proceeding and the inability to extend punishment further than the session of the Congress concerned (under Supreme Court rulings), Congress created a statutory process in 1857. While Congress retains its "inherent contempt" authority and may exercise it at any time, this inherent contempt process was last used by the Senate in 1934, in a Senate investigation of airlines and the U.S. Postmaster. After a one-week trial on the Senate floor (presided over by Vice President John Nance Garner, in his capacity as Senate President), William P. MacCracken, Jr., a lawyer and former Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Aeronautics who was charged with allowing clients to remove or rip up subpoenaed documents, was found guilty and sentenced to 10 days imprisonment.[11]

MacCracken filed a petition of habeas corpus in federal courts to overturn his arrest, but after litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress had acted constitutionally, and denied the petition in the case Jurney v. MacCracken.[12][13]

Presidential pardons appear not to apply to a civil contempt procedure such as the above, since it is not an "offense against the United States" or against "the dignity of public authority."[14]

--wiki entry

See also:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/05/house-democrats-could-arrest-william-barr-contempt/588976/
The Rarely Used Congressional Power That Could Force William Barr’s Hand

It hasn’t been done in nearly a century, but House Democrats could arrest the attorney general after they find him in contempt.

[erronis]

2. Thank you for the definition on inherent contempt. Referred here from your link on the Adam Schiff

post: https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=12087048