Can a presidential pardon be granted to a person being held under inherent contempt of Congress?

...as yet, that can only happen if she is arrested, prosecuted and found guilty by a jury of her peers. At this point the President is the one blocking her testifying so he could be help in contempt and also for interfering with the justice process. I guess he could issue immunity from prosecution, but that would only compel congress then to have Meyers testify which would most certainly fry Bush's and Cheney's and Rove's collective asses. So all Bush can do is keep stating that Meyers does not have to testify because of executive privilege. The committee has a motion to argue that point and I guess will after the five days are up. I'm not a lawyer so take my comments here with a grain of salt. I'm just watching the theater of this whole thing :popcorn:

charged with a crime. Nixon was never indicted, let alone convicted, and Ford pardoned him.

That said, I tend agree with the poster below. The pardon power is limited to "offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment."

I'm not sure contempt of Congress is an offense against the United States.

because anyone held under an inherent contempt citation is not guilty of an offense against the United States, but an offense against Congress.

I'm thinking it might be a separation of powers thing. If they go the US attorney route, I suspect the Chimp can arguably have a hand in it, but if they go the Sergeant at Arms route, it might be a different story.

but of course, I could be entirely wrong.


That said, I'm not comfortable with the notion of "inherent contempt". It gives one branch of government the power to charge, try, convict and punish someone with no judicial review. I don't like the President having this power, and I don't like the Congress having it, either.

Is an inherent contempt citation the same as contempt of congress?

contempt of congress is a regular crime. It would be referred to the DC federal attorney for presentation to a grand jury, and if charged, a regular jury trial would be held.

Under inherent contempt, the congress itself arrests and holds the subject, independent of the judiciary.

must be processed through the DOJ, the Inherent Contempt charge is handled through the Sargent at Arms and stays totally within the House.

From what I've read lately, there are 2 types of Contempt of Congress:

Statutory, which is codified in the law and has a judicial remedy.

Inherent, which is legislative and is not subject to judicial review, but, the party jailed may not be held after a new Congress is seated.

Inherent Contempt also does not constrain the pursuit of punishment under the statute.

-Hoot

Could you elaborate on that, maybe post a link? I don't think the President can overrule on a civil case can he?

someone does something about it.

... It'd go to court, but that's how I think it'd end up.