Jan 6 committee has subpoenaed witnesses: What happens when they

The House select committee charged with investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection recently subpoenaed four of former President TrumpDonald TrumpBiden’s Red Queen justice: How he destroyed both the investigation and the reputation of border agents Trump asks judge to force Twitter to lift ban Trump teases Schumer about occasional Ocasio-Cortez challenge MORE’s senior advisors — the first subpoenas issued by the committee.

Typically, congressional investigators start with a request for records or testimony, just as the select committee did with its records requests to various executive branch agencies and social media companies. If the receiving parties fail to accommodate the requests in good faith, investigators may resort to subpoenas.

That the Jan. 6 select committee moved “straight to subpoenas” suggests a clear-eyed assessment that Trump’s advisors will not voluntarily cooperate. Rather than waste time, the committee is opting to compel their compliance from the start. 

But will it matter? What options does the committee have when witnesses refuse to comply?

Congressional subpoenas carry the force of law. As a matter of constitutional law, the Supreme Court has long held that the “congressional power to obtain information is ‘broad’ and ‘indispensable’” — and that Congress may self-enforce its demands for information through its inherent contempt power. For 140 years, it did so by deploying its sergeant-at-arms to arrest recalcitrant witnesses. As a matter of statutory law, Congress also long ago made contemnors criminally liable, deputizing U.S. Attorneys to prosecute those who obstruct its work. Congress can additionally seek help from the judiciary, asking judges to enforce subpoenas on its behalf.

Theoretically, at least, Congress can compel compliance, either on its own or with the aid of law enforcement or the courts. But only one of these options is currently feasible.

First, the select committee could invoke the House’s inherent contempt power in an attempt to enforce subpoenas on its own. But that power in practice has lain dormant for nearly a century; the last arrest was made in 1935. Lawmakers have proposed new enforcement methods to reanimate inherent contempt, such as levying fines in lieu of arrests. Select committee member Rep. Jamie RaskinJamin (Jamie) Ben RaskinJan. 6 panel subpoenas 11, including Pierson, other rally organizers Congress shows signs of movement on stalled Biden agenda Hillicon Valley — Presented by Xerox — EU calls out Russian hacking efforts aimed at member states MORE has proposed doing just that. But devising and authorizing a new enforcement tool in such short order seems impractical. Further, it is unclear whether the threat of monetary penalties would in fact be sufficient to incentivize compliance among wealthy witnesses.

Second, in recent years, committees have taken to filing civil suits, hoping the judiciary will intervene and force subpoenaed individuals to comply. While…