Not surprisingly, Jefferson maintains his innocence and claims that a precedent-setting raid of his Capitol Hill office was unconstitutional because it trampled on congressional independence and violated the constitutionally established separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government.A federal judge authorized last year’s 18-hour FBI search—the first ever at a Capitol Hill office–which led to the seizure of records, equipment and other incriminating evidence. Last month Jefferson argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that the raid was unconstitutional.
Judicial Watch filed an amicus brief stating that the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause, which protects members of Congress from “intimidation by the executive and accountability before a possible hostile judiciary,” does not make the search of Jefferson’s office unconstitutional. The Speech or Debate Clause, the brief states, only protects members of Congress conducting legislative actions.
This does raise an interesting constitutional issue. Personally, I don’t want to see the FBI tromping all over Capitol Hill. But by the same token, Eliot Ness should not be completely forbidden to act. If only Alberto Gonzales was Eliot Ness…
Technorati Tags: FBI, Speech or Debate Clause, William Jefferson, Eliot Ness
