Dear Readers, Last Spring, I had explained about the concept of “Executive Privilege” in the context of the firings of U.S. Attorneys. The issue was the potential for a “show-down” between Congress and the President about the “politicizing” of the Justice Department. A few months after writing that column, Alberto Gonzales resigned, cooling Congress’ desire to investigate the Executive Branch.
In the meantime, we heard of a similar, but more explosive issue – Karl Rove’s involvement in the prosecution of the former Democratic Governor of Alabama, Don Siegelman. This story broke last summer. In 2002, Gov. Siegelman narrowly won a bitter race triumphing only after a recount erased the apparent victory of his opponent, Bob Riley.
Siegelman’s victory was destined be short-lived. An attorney and lifelong GOP supporter who worked on Riley’s campaign, participated in a conference call during the 2002 recount in which it was made clear that Karl Rove would use either or both of Alabama’s two U.S. Attorneys to remove Gov. Siegelman from power. Four years later, this threat came to fruition. Shaky Federal criminal charges were brought in the Northern District, only to be dismissed by the judge before a trial was even scheduled.
Fresh from this vindication, Siegelman kicked his reelection campaign into gear. Then, new charges were brought against him in the Middle District; the U.S. Attorney running the investigation was the wife of a key associate of Mr. Rove. Despite the fact there was no evidence he ever received any money, Siegelman was convicted of these bribery and conspiracy charges in June of 2006.
Fifty-two former state attorneys-general, including a number of Republicans, pleaded with Congress to investigate the political motivations manipulating Gov. Siegelman’s fall from grace. That plea was answered by subpoenas issued requiring Rove to come before Congress to testify about his role in Siegelman’s conviction; these subpoenas were summarily ignored.
Interest in Siegelman’s plight picked up steam in late-March earlier this year. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals took the extremely rare step of reversing the trial court’s decision to deny Siegelman the right to bond pending his appeal and he was released from prison.
The Court’s opinion signaled the conviction itself might be endangered, basing its decision to reverse the lower court on its finding that Siegelman’s appeal raises “substantial questions of law or fact.”
Last week, Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers publicly indicated that he was through with Rove’s stonewalling; he was ready to have Rove arrested. Statutes exist to protect Congress’ integrity; but, prosecution under these statutes requires the assistance of the Justice Department. As you might imagine, with the allegations reaching into the Justice Department and the Office of the President, no interest has been shown to do so.
This leaves Congress with only one option – to use, for the first time in over 70 years, its inherent powers of contempt. In exercising this unique power, Congress votes on a contempt resolution and orders its Sergeant at Arms to arrest the defendant, bring the individual before Congress, and a trial is held right there. Imprisonment in the bowels of Congress is a possible consequence of being convicted of Contempt of Congress.
While this political game of chicken may come before us later this year, the extraordinary depth of the decision acknowledging this power is what we will look at next week.
Warner Robins attorney Jim Rockefeller is the former Chief Assistant District Attorney for Houston County, and a former Florida Assistant State Attorney. Owner of Rockefeller Law Center, Jim has been in private practice since 2000. E-mail your comments or confidential legal questions to ajr@rockefellerlawcenter.com.
