A major new report (pdf) from the Congressional Research Service provides a detailed account of Congress’s contempt power, including the use of contempt proceedings to coerce compliance with congressional demands for information or testimony and to punish non-compliance.
“This report examines the source of the contempt power, reviews the historical development of the early case law, outlines the statutory and common law basis for Congress’s contempt power, and analyzes the procedures associated with each of the three different types of contempt proceedings. In addition, the report discusses limitations both nonconstitutional and constitutionally based on the power.”
The 68-page report also examines the Justice Department position that “Congress cannot, as a matter of statutory or constitutional law, invoke either its inherent contempt authority or the criminal contempt of Congress procedures against an executive branch official acting on instructions by the President to assert executive privilege in response to a congressional subpoena.”
See “Congress’s Contempt Power: Law, History, Practice, and Procedure,” July 24, 2007.
The cost of inaction is not merely economic; it is measured in preventable illness, deaths and diminished livelihoods.
Through investments in infrastructure for heat safety, Congress can save lives, protect the economy, and enhance resilience nationwide.
A shift toward more circular, transparent systems would not only reduce waste and increase efficiency, but also unlock new business models, strengthen supply chain resilience, and give consumers better, more reliable information about the products they choose.
Could the largest U.S. public-private critical minerals deal of the decade be a model for the future?