Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Miles Archer

(18,837 posts)
Thu Mar 2, 2017, 04:10 PM Mar 2017

Mother Jones asked three constitutional law professors if Sessions could be prosecuted for perjury.

Can Jeff Sessions Be Prosecuted for Perjury?
We asked three constitutional law professors. Here's what they said.

NATHALIE BAPTISTEMAR. 2, 2017 1:54 PM



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/03/can-jeff-sessions-be-prosecuted-perjury

The answer is not exactly cut and dry. At the time of his confirmation hearings, Sessions was still serving as a senator from Alabama. The Constitution's Speech or Debate Clause shields lawmakers from prosecution for lying during proceedings in the House or Senate. The clause was written with the intent to foster debate in Congress without the threat of lawsuits stifling discussion. So, since Sessions was a sitting Senator when he allegedly misled Congress, does that mean he's off the hook? Mother Jones put the question to three constitutional law experts.

"There might be other things he can be prosecuted for," says Josh Chafetz, a law professor at Cornell University, referencing laws that allow Congress to hold individuals in contempt for providing false testimony. But, says Chafetz, Sessions can't be prosecuted for perjury.

Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe sees it differently. "That would be a laughable misuse of the Speech and Debate Clause," he says. "He was testifying under oath as an (Attorney General) nominee, not in the discharge of any Senatorial business of his own."

Yale Law Professor Bruce Ackerman says he's inclined to believe that Sessions is not protected by the clause. Still, Ackerman says there's no decisive case law on the issue, which muddies the waters. "Only one thing is clear," he says, "Sessions must recuse himself, and it is incumbent on the Administration to appoint a special prosecutor."
13 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
1. Interesting issue of the application of the "Speech and Debate clause". Of course James Clapper...
Thu Mar 2, 2017, 04:16 PM
Mar 2017

wasn't a senator and he wasn't charged with perjury.

 

HoneyBadger

(2,297 posts)
2. Politicians always have an eye out for what might be used against them in the future
Thu Mar 2, 2017, 04:16 PM
Mar 2017

So politicians protected by the same protections that Sessions enjoys will NOT push the issue. Which is where an independent outsider would be handy.

Warpy

(111,286 posts)
3. If we get Jefferson Beauregard out of the Senate and then out of government, entirely
Thu Mar 2, 2017, 04:16 PM
Mar 2017

then Dolt45 might have done this country--and the people of Alabama--a great service by shining a strong light on him.

He's been a segregationist stink in government for far too long and I always thought the only way we'd get him out is feet first after he'd broken Thurmond's record.

Caliman73

(11,740 posts)
5. Seems like a stupid law.
Thu Mar 2, 2017, 04:19 PM
Mar 2017

If you have to lie to continue a debate, then I think you have lost the debate. Only in congress would it be protected to lie.

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
12. I'm guessing it won't get that far as few really think the Supreme Court would be persuaded
Thu Mar 2, 2017, 04:33 PM
Mar 2017

that his testimony had to do with the "legislative acts" protected by the speech and debate clause.

Cosmocat

(14,566 posts)
9. He was under oath...
Thu Mar 2, 2017, 04:27 PM
Mar 2017

It was not floor discussion and he was not acting as a senator, he was in a confirmation hearing for a cabinet position for the executive branch (a job interview).

Really, if there is no expectation that he answers honestly, why do it? AND, he is far from the only senator to go through this process.

Had Hillary purjed herself like that during her SOS hearing ...

JudyM

(29,251 posts)
13. If that protects him in this instance, it would render the oath taking completely useless.
Thu Mar 2, 2017, 06:21 PM
Mar 2017

His problem is that he has become so accustomed to lying in the Senate that he didn't think to watch himself.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Mother Jones asked three ...