Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                 House Calendar No. 263

110th Congress            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES               Report
2d Session                                                       110-847
_______________________________________________________________________




  RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FIND KARL 
ROVE IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH A SUBPOENA DULY 
                ISSUED BY THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                               ----------                              

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES




                             together with

                  ADDITIONAL VIEWS AND MINORITY VIEWS





    September 15, 2008.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered 
                             to be printed






                                                 House Calendar No. 263

110th Congress 
 2d Session             HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                 Report
                                                                110-847
_______________________________________________________________________




  RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FIND KARL 
ROVE IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH A SUBPOENA DULY 
                ISSUED BY THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                       COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES




                             together with

                  ADDITIONAL VIEWS AND MINORITY VIEWS





    September 15, 2008.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered 
                             to be printed

                                  -------

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

69-006                     WASHINGTON : 2008



For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing 
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov  Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; 
(202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, 
Washington, DC 20402-0001










110th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     110-847

======================================================================



 
  RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FIND KARL 
ROVE IN CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS FOR REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH A SUBPOENA DULY 
                ISSUED BY THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                                _______
                                

 September 15, 2008.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Conyers, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                  ADDITIONAL VIEWS AND MINORITY VIEWS

                  [Including Committee Cost Estimate]

    The Committee on the Judiciary, having considered this 
Report, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the 
Report be approved.
    The form of Resolution that the Committee on the Judiciary 
would recommend to the House of Representatives for citing 
former White House Adviser Karl Rove for contempt of Congress 
pursuant to this Report is as follows:
    Resolved, That former White House Adviser Karl Rove is in 
contempt of Congress for failure to comply with the subpoena 
issued to him on May 22, 2008; and it is further
    Resolved, That pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 192 and 194, the 
Speaker of the House of Representatives shall certify the 
Report of the Committee on the Judiciary, detailing the refusal 
of former White House Adviser Karl Rove to appear before the 
Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law as directed 
by subpoena, to the United States Attorney for the District of 
Columbia, to the end that Mr. Rove be proceeded against in the 
manner and form provided by law; and it is further
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives should pursue 
enforcing the subpoena through other legal remedies as 
appropriate.

                       BACKGROUND AND EXPLANATION

 I. BACKGROUND OF COMMITTEE INVESTIGATION AND REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION 
                             FROM KARL ROVE

A. LHouse Judiciary Committee Hearings
    Beginning in March 2007, the House Judiciary Committee and 
its Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law (CAL 
Subcommittee) have held a number of hearings on the alleged 
politicization of the Justice Department, including the 
termination of U.S. Attorneys in 2006, allegations of selective 
prosecution, and related issues. These have included:
    U.S. Attorneys & William Moschella. On March 6, 2007, six 
of the terminated U.S. Attorneys \1\ and William E. Moschella, 
Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General, U.S. Department of 
Justice, among others, testified before the CAL 
Subcommittee.\2\ At this hearing (and in private briefings on 
February 28 and March 5 to CAL Subcommittee members and staff 
that preceded it), Mr. Moschella testified, inter alia, as to 
the Justice Department's then- claimed reasons for firing these 
U.S. Attorneys. The terminated U.S. Attorneys testified, inter 
alia, that they had not been given reasons for their firing 
and, among other matters, responded to some of the Department's 
asserted reasons for their firing, and discussed potentially 
improper political and other factors that may have been related 
to their firing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ H.R. 580, Restoring Checks and Balances in the Confirmation 
Process of U.S. Attorneys: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial 
and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007). 
The six former U.S. Attorneys who testified were Ms. Lam, Mr. Iglesias, 
Mr. Cummins, Mr. McKay, Mr. Bogden, and Mr. Charlton.
    \2\ The other witnesses included the following: Representative 
Darrell E. Issa (R-CA); former Representative Asa Hutchinson (R-AR); 
John A. Smietanka, a former United States Attorney for the Western 
District of Michigan; George J. Terwilliger, III, former Deputy 
Attorney General of the U.S. Department of Justice; T.J. Halstead, 
Legislative Attorney, American Law Division, Congressional Research 
Service; and Atlee W. Wampler, III, President of the National 
Association of Former United States Attorneys.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ensuring Executive Branch Accountability. On March 29, 
2007, the CAL Subcommittee heard testimony assessing the 
validity of White House assertions concerning executive 
privilege in the U.S. Attorney controversy.\3\ Beth Nolan, 
former White House Counsel under President Clinton, indicated 
that she had testified four times before congressional 
committees on matters directly related to her White House 
duties, including three times while she was serving in that 
position.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Ensuring Executive Branch Accountability: Hearing Before the 
Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 
110th Cong. (2007). The witnesses at the hearing included John Podesta, 
former White House Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton; Beth 
Nolan, former White House Counsel to President Bill Clinton; Frederick 
A.O. Schwarz, Jr., Senior Counsel, Brennan Center for Justice; and Noel 
J. Francisco, former Associate Counsel to President George W. Bush.
    \4\ Id. (testimony of Beth Nolan, former White House Counsel to 
President Bill Clinton).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    James Comey. On May 3, 2007, former Deputy Attorney General 
James Comey testified before the CAL Subcommittee.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ Continuing Investigation into the U.S. Attorneys Controversy: 
Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law of the H. 
Comm. on the Judiciary,110th Cong. (2007) (testimony of James Comey, 
former Deputy Attorney General).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Alberto Gonzales. On May 10, 2007, Attorney General 
Gonzales appeared before the full Judiciary Committee for an 
oversight hearing that focused on the U.S. Attorneys 
controversy.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ United States Department of Justice: Hearing Before the H. 
Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007) (testimony of Attorney 
General Alberto Gonzales).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Monica Goodling. After a grant of limited use immunity, 
Monica Goodling, former Senior Counsel to Attorney General 
Alberto Gonzales and the Department's White House Liaison, 
appeared before the full Committee on May 23, 2007.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ Continuing Investigation into the U.S. Attorneys Controversy 
and Related Matters: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 
110th Cong. (2007) (testimony of Monica Goodling, former Senior Counsel 
to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and White House Liaison, U.S. 
Department of Justice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Paul McNulty. On June 21, 2007, Deputy Attorney General 
Paul McNulty testified before the CAL Subcommittee.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Continuing Investigation into the U.S. Attorneys Controversy 
and Related Matters: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and 
Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007) 
(testimony of Paul McNulty, Deputy Attorney General).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Harriet Miers. Former White House Counsel Harriet Miers 
refused to comply with a subpoena requiring her appearance 
before the CAL Subcommittee on July 12, 2007.\9\ Ms. Miers not 
only failed to provide testimony or documents; she failed even 
to appear for the hearing. CAL Subcommittee Chair Linda Sanchez 
proceeded to overrule the White House's claims of immunity and 
privilege with respect to Ms. Miers, and the ruling was 
sustained by CAL Subcommittee Members in a recorded vote of 7-
5.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ Continuing Investigation into the U.S. Attorneys Controversy 
and Related Matters: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and 
Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007).
    \10\ Id. On July 25, 2007, the Committee met in open session and 
adopted a resolution ``recommending that the House of Representatives 
find that former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and White House 
Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten be cited for contempt of Congress for 
refusal to comply with subpoenas issued by the Committee.'' The 
Committee voted 22-17 to report a resolution recommending finding them 
in contempt to the full House. On February 14, 2008, the House voted 
223-32 to hold Ms. Miers and Mr. Bolten in contempt of Congress and to 
grant the Chairman of the Committee the power to file a civil suit to 
seek declaratory and injunctive relief for the failure to comply with 
the subpoenas. Attorney General Michael Mukasey declined to refer the 
contempt citations to a grand jury, and the Chairman of the Committee 
initiated a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of 
Columbia. That case is currently pending.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Allegations of Selective Prosecution: The Erosion of Public 
Confidence in our Federal Justice System. On October 23, 2007, 
the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security and 
the CAL Subcommittee held a joint hearing exploring several 
cases of alleged selective prosecution, including the 
prosecutions of former Democratic Alabama Governor Don 
Siegelman, Wisconsin state employee Georgia Thompson, and 
prominent Democrat Cyril Wecht in Pittsburgh. Testimony was 
received from former Attorney General Richard Thornburgh, 
Professor Donald C. Shields, and former Alabama U.S. Attorney 
Doug Jones.\11\ Part II of the hearing was held on May 14, 
2008, at which testimony was received from the Hon. Paul W. 
Hodes (D-N.H.), consultant Allen Raymond, Attorney Paul Twomey, 
and Professor Mark C. Miller.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ Allegations of Selective Prosecution: The Erosion of Public 
Confidence in our Federal Justice System: Joint Hearing Before the 
Subcomm. on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security and the Subcomm. on 
Commercial and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. 
(2007).
    \12\ Allegations of Selective Prosecution Part II: The Erosion of 
Public Confidence in our Federal Justice System: Joint Hearing Before 
the Subcomm. on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security and the 
Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 
110th Cong. (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Karl Rove. Former White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl 
Rove refused to comply with a subpoena requiring his appearance 
before the CAL Subcommittee on July 10, 2008, failing to appear 
for the hearing to answer questions.\13\ CAL Subcommittee Chair 
Sanchez proceeded to overrule the claims of immunity and 
privilege with respect to Mr. Rove, and the ruling was 
sustained by CAL Subcommittee Members in a recorded vote of 7-
1.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ The Politicization of the Justice Department and Allegations 
of Selective Prosecution: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and 
Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2008).
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. LRequests for Information from the White House and Subpoena Issued 
        to Karl Rove
    Because Mr. Rove was considered a central witness who could 
provide information that is unavailable through any other 
source, in March 2007 Chairman John Conyers, Jr. and CAL 
Subcommittee Chair Linda Sanchez sought Mr. Rove's voluntary 
compliance with the Committee's investigation, along with that 
of other witnesses, by letter to White House Counsel Fred 
Fielding.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. 
Law, to Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President (Mar. 9, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In response, Mr. Fielding explained that he was prepared to 
make Mr. Rove and other White House officials available for 
interviews with the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on a 
joint basis; but his offer was conditioned on various 
preconditions and scope restrictions.\16\ Mr. Fielding's offer 
required that the interviews be confined to ``the subject of 
(a) communications between the White House and persons outside 
the White House concerning the request for resignations of the 
U.S. Attorneys in question; and (b) communications between the 
White House and Members of Congress concerning those 
requests.'' \17\ Questioning on internal White House 
discussions of any kind, by personnel at any level, would not 
be allowed. In addition, Mr. Fielding required that the 
interviews ``be private and conducted without the need for an 
oath, transcript, subsequent testimony, or the subsequent 
issuance of subpoenas.'' \18\ In other words, no matter what 
might be revealed, no other testimony or documents could be 
requested from the White House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ Letter from Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President, to 
Patrick Leahy, Chairman, S. Comm. on the Judiciary, John Conyers, Jr., 
Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, Lamar Smith, Ranking Member, H. 
Comm. on the Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on 
Commercial and Admin. Law (Mar. 20, 2007).
    \17\ Id.
    \18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On March 21, 2007, the CAL Subcommittee authorized Chairman 
Conyers to issue subpoenas to Karl Rove and other present and 
former White House officials to obtain testimony and 
documents.\19\ Both before and after March 21, letters were 
exchanged between the Committee and the White House to seek to 
resolve voluntarily the Committee's requests for information 
from the White House; but those efforts were not successful. 
Committee letters (one of which was sent jointly with Senate 
Judiciary Committee Chairman Leahy) included letters of March 
9, March 22, March 28, and May 21, 2007.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\ Meeting to Consider Subpoena Authorization Concerning the 
Recent Termination of United States Attorneys and Related Subjects 
Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2007). In addition, the Subcommittee authorized 
Chairman Conyers to issue a subpoena for D. Kyle Sampson, former Chief 
of Staff to the Attorney General. Mr. Sampson has thus far voluntarily 
cooperated with the Committee's investigation.
    \20\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. 
Law, to Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President (Mar. 9, 2007); Letter 
from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Linda 
Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law, to Fred 
Fielding, Counsel to the President (Mar. 22, 2007); Letter from John 
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Patrick Leahy, 
Chairman, S. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Fred Fielding, Counsel to the 
President (Mar. 28, 2007); and Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, 
H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on 
Commercial and Admin. Law, to Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President 
(May 21, 2007). All of these letters are on file with the House 
Committee on the Judiciary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As the Committee's investigation proceeded and as 
additional allegations and information emerged, Chairman 
Conyers, CAL Subcommittee Chair Sanchez, and Committee Members 
Artur Davis and Tammy Baldwin wrote to Mr. Rove on April 17, 
2008, asking that he voluntarily testify on the alleged 
politicization of the Justice Department, including the 
termination of U.S. Attorneys in 2006, allegations of selective 
prosecution, and related issues.\21\ On April 29, 2008, Robert 
Luskin, who represents Karl Rove, offered to make Mr. Rove 
available for an interview only on the Siegelman matter, which 
would neither be under oath nor transcribed.\22\ Committee 
Members responded on May 1 by rejecting Mr. Luskin's offer and 
requesting that Mr. Rove reconsider his decision not to testify 
voluntarily.\23\ On May 9, Mr. Luskin offered that Mr. Rove 
respond to written questions and only with respect to the 
Siegelman prosecution.\24\ Committee Members responded in a May 
14 letter rejecting Mr. Luskin's offer and reiterating that Mr. 
Rove should testify on the politicization in the Department, 
including such matters as the U.S. Attorney firings as well as 
the Siegelman case.\25\ On May 21, Mr. Luskin restated the two 
offers in his April 29 and May 9 letters.\26\ Because of Mr. 
Rove's refusal to testify voluntarily about the politicization 
of the Department, Chairman Conyers issued a subpoena to Mr. 
Rove on May 22, pursuant to the previous authorization, 
directing him to appear before the CAL Subcommittee on July 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law, 
Artur Davis, member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Tammy Baldwin, 
member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Karl Rove (Apr. 17, 2008).
    \22\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John 
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (Apr. 29, 2008).
    \23\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law, 
Artur Davis, member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Tammy Baldwin, 
member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl 
Rove (May 1, 2008).
    \24\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John 
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (May 9, 2008).
    \25\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. Law, 
Artur Davis, member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, and Tammy Baldwin, 
member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl 
Rove (May 14, 2008).
    \26\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John 
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (May 21, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subsequently, Committee staff had several discussions with 
Mr. Luskin in which he offered to have Mr. Rove interviewed 
without a transcript or oath, but without prejudice to the 
Committee's right to pursue its subpoena for sworn testimony. 
However, such an interview would be limited to questions 
concerning the Siegelman matter. Chairman Conyers and CAL 
Subcommittee Chair Sanchez wrote to Mr. Luskin to express their 
encouragement about the offer that Mr. Rove be interviewed 
without prejudice, but reiterated that Mr. Rove should be 
prepared to answer questions about the entire issue of 
politicization as described above and would be expected to 
appear on July 10 to do so.\27\ On July 1, Mr. Luskin indicated 
that Mr. Rove would decline to appear before the CAL 
Subcommittee.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. 
Law, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove (June 16, 2008).
    \28\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John 
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (May 21, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On July 3, Chairman Conyers and CAL Subcommittee Chair 
Sanchez wrote to Mr. Luskin urging Mr. Rove to reconsider his 
position and to appear pursuant to his legal obligations.\29\ 
On July 9, Mr. Luskin confirmed that Mr. Rove would not appear, 
and attached a July 9 letter from White House Counsel Fred 
Fielding, an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) letter regarding Mr. 
Rove dated August 1, 2007, and an OLC letter regarding Ms. 
Miers dated July 10, 2007.\30\ According to Mr. Fielding's 
letter, Mr. Rove has ``constitutional immunity . . . because 
Mr. Rove was an immediate presidential adviser and because the 
Committee seeks to question him regarding matters that arose 
during his tenure and that relate to his official duties in 
that capacity.'' \31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. 
Law, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove (July 3, 2008).
    \30\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John 
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (July 9, 2008).
    \31\ Letter from Fred Fielding, Counsel to the President, to Robert 
Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove (July 9, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On July 10, 2008, the CAL Subcommittee met as scheduled, 
and Mr. Rove in fact failed to appear. At that meeting, CAL 
Subcommittee Chair Sanchez issued a ruling that rejected the 
immunity claims with respect to Mr. Rove, and the CAL 
Subcommittee, by a vote of 7 to 1, sustained that ruling.\32\ 
The ruling specifically covered Mr. Rove's refusal to appear as 
required by the subpoena issued to him. Chairman Conyers and 
CAL Subcommittee Chair Sanchez sent Mr. Rove's counsel a letter 
enclosing a copy of the ruling, and again urging compliance and 
warning of the possibility of contempt.\33\ The letter also 
requested that Mr. Rove's counsel notify the Committee by July 
16 as to whether Mr. Rove would comply with the subpoena.\34\ 
On July 29, 2008, Mr. Rove's attorney wrote to Chairman Conyers 
, indicating that Mr. Rove would not comply with the subpoena 
but urging the Committee not to proceed with contempt.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ The Politicization of the Justice Department and Allegations 
of Selective Prosecution: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Commercial and 
Admin. Law of the H. Comm. on the Judiciary, 110th Cong. (2008).
    \33\ Letter from John Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, and Linda Sanchez, Chair, Subcomm. on Commercial and Admin. 
Law, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove (July 10, 2008).
    \34\ Id.
    \35\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to John 
Conyers, Jr., Chairman, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (July 29, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On July 15, 2008, Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Lamar 
Smith sent a letter and a set of questions regarding the 
Siegelman matter to Mr. Rove's counsel.\36\ Mr. Rove's counsel 
provided Ranking Member Smith with written answers to those 
questions on July 22.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \36\ Letter from Lamar Smith, Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the 
Judiciary, to Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove (July 15, 2008).
    \37\ Letter from Robert Luskin, counsel to Karl Rove, to Lamar 
Smith, Ranking Member, H. Comm. on the Judiciary (July 22, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 II. AUTHORITY AND LEGISLATIVE PURPOSE

    The Committee on the Judiciary is a standing Committee of 
the House of Representatives, duly established pursuant to the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, which are adopted 
pursuant to the Rulemaking Clause of the Constitution.\38\ 
House Rule X grants to the Committee legislative and oversight 
jurisdiction over, inter alia, ``judicial proceedings, civil 
and criminal,'' and ``criminal law enforcement''; the 
``application, administration, execution, and effectiveness of 
laws and programs addressing subjects within its 
jurisdiction''; the ``organization and operation of Federal 
agencies and entities having responsibilities for the 
administration and execution of laws and programs addressing 
subjects within its jurisdiction''; and ``any conditions or 
circumstances that may indicate the necessity or desirability 
of enacting new or additional legislation addressing subjects 
within its jurisdiction.'' \39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \38\ U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 5, cl. 2.
    \39\ House Rule X(1)(k)(1) and (7); House Rule X(2)(b)(1)(A)-(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    House Rule XI specifically authorizes the Committee and its 
subcommittees to ``require, by subpoena or otherwise, the 
attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the production 
of such books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, and 
documents as it considers necessary.'' \40\ The Rule also 
provides that the ``power to authorize and issue subpoenas'' 
may be delegated to the Committee chairman.\41\ The subpoenas 
discussed in this report were issued pursuant to this 
authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \40\ House Rule XI(2)(m)(1)(B).
    \41\ House Rule XI(2)(m)(3)(A)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The investigation into the alleged politicization of the 
Justice Department, including the termination of U.S. Attorneys 
in 2006, allegations of selective prosecution, and related 
issues, is being undertaken pursuant to the authority delegated 
to the Committee under Rule X as described above. The oversight 
and legislative purposes of this investigation fall into two 
related categories: 1) investigating and exposing any possible 
malfeasance, abuse of authority, or violation of existing law 
on the part of the Executive Branch related to these concerns, 
and 2) considering whether the conduct uncovered may warrant 
additions or modifications to existing Federal law, such as 
more clearly prohibiting the kinds of improper political 
interference with prosecutorial decisions as have been alleged 
here.

                                Hearings

    In its investigation into the alleged politicization of the 
Justice Department, including the termination of U.S. Attorneys 
in 2006, allegations of selective prosecution, and related 
issues, the CAL Subcommittee held 6 days of hearings, on March 
6, March 29, May 3, June 21, July 12, 2007, and July 10, 2008. 
In addition, the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland 
Security and the CAL Subcommittee held 2 days of joint hearings 
on October 23, 2007 and May 14, 2008. The full Committee held 2 
days of hearings, on May 10 and May 23, 2007. More discussion 
of these hearings is contained in the background section of 
this Report.

                        Committee Consideration

    On July 30, 2008, the Committee met in open session and 
ordered this Report favorably reported, without amendment, by a 
vote of 20 to 14, a quorum being present.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the 
following recorded votes took place:
    1. On ordering this Report favorably reported, without 
amendment.

                                                   ROLLCALL NO. 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher.....................................................              X
Mr. Nadler......................................................              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................              X
Ms. Waters......................................................              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................              X
Mr. Wexler......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................              X
Ms. Sutton......................................................              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................              X
Mr. Sherman.....................................................
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................              X
Mr. Weiner......................................................              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................              X
Mr. Davis.......................................................              X
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................              X
Mr. Ellison.....................................................              X
Mr. Smith (Texas)...............................................                              X
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................                              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................                              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Chabot......................................................
Mr. Lungren.....................................................                              X
Mr. Cannon......................................................                              X
Mr. Keller......................................................                              X
Mr. Issa........................................................                              X
Mr. Pence.......................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................                              X
Mr. Feeney......................................................                              X
Mr. Franks......................................................                              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................                              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................                              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             20              14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the 
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on 
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the 
descriptive portions of this Report.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is inapplicable because this Report does not 
provide new budgetary authority or increased tax expenditures.

                        Committee Cost Estimate

    In compliance with clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee believes that 
the cost incurred in carrying out the Report will be 
negligible.

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Report will assist the Committee and the House of 
Representatives in vindicating Congress's responsibility to 
conduct appropriate oversight of the Executive Branch and 
vindicating the rule of law.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for 
this Report in article 1, section 1 of the Constitution.

                          Advisory on Earmarks

    In accordance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, this Report does not contain any 
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff 
benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of Rule XXI.

               Additional Views of Chairman Conyers and 
                       Subcommittee Chair Sanchez


                             Minority Views


                               APPENDIX A


                               APPENDIX B


                               APPENDIX C


                               APPENDIX D


                               APPENDIX E