Antifascism

805 readers

1 users here now

A community to post acts of antifascism and other left-wing activism. Please message a mod if you would like something posted and we can tag you in the post as well.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

seahorse@midwest.social

exposingfash@midwest.social

299

"and then they came for the socialists" (midwest.social)

submitted 1 month ago by seahorse@midwest.social to c/antifascism@midwest.social

47 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Isn't that what a subpoena is? A letter from a duly authorized congressman or comittee directing production of information or testimony?

[–] kata1yst@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

From Wikipedia:

contempt of Congress has generally applied to the refusal to comply with a subpoena issued by a congressional committee or subcommittee

So the question becomes is this Hawley or something the committee/subcommittee voted to send? It reads like Hawley to me, but IANAL.

[–] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Yeah, thats what I'm curious about. I don't know how much of this is formality and how much codified procedure, but it seems fairly plausible that this letter could be reasonably considered a subpoena - or at least, non-compliance could be considered contempt of congress.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

No subpoenas in Congress are by quorum so one name listed that isn't ranking chair and with the proper verbiage is simply a scare tactic.