So where are all the IRS-Obama Scandle People now that the Truth is coming out?

Sadly Jem, personal opinions carry little weight in the law unless they are the opinions of judges or juries handing down a ruling. You will notice in the link I gave you that the important feature is "...in response to probative evidence" You might rejoinder here, if you are clever enough, with the probative evidence (not opinion nor conjecture, nor supposition, nor charges) against Lerner. And remember Jem, taking the fifth cannot be used as evidence.)

I wouldn't hold my breath, were I you, waiting for the Supreme Court to rule that government employees give up their Constitutional rights.
I don't think even Scalia would go that far, though I'm not too sure of that.:D
 
Quote from jem:

by the way I just found this very good run down of the situation.


http://www.pointoforder.com/2013/05/22/taking-the-fifth-before-congresThis raises a number of legal questions, which we will proceed to consider.

1. Why can a witness invoke the Fifth Amendment before Congress when the privilege against self-incrimination applies only to criminal cases? With surprisingly little controversy (but see here for an academic view to the contrary), it has long been accepted by Congress and the courts that a congressional witness may invoke the Fifth. The theory is that if a witness were forced to testify in a congressional hearing, that testimony could be used against her in a subsequent criminal case. Note that this theory only holds if in fact the testimony could be used in court.

2. When can the witness invoke the Fifth? The witness must have a reasonable belief that her testimony might be used against her in a criminal prosecution. This does not mean that the witness must believe that she has actually committed a crime or that her truthful testimony would lead to her conviction. It just means that there is some realistic possibility that the witness may be criminally prosecuted for a matter to which her testimony might be relevant. This is a fairly low bar.

3. Can government officials invoke the Fifth before Congress and keep their jobs? Although I personally find it difficult to understand how a government official (particularly a senior official like Lerner) can refuse to testify before Congress, which is constitutionally responsible for overseeing the activities of her agency, it is fairly clear that she cannot be fired for doing so. My view is that at the least the President should be able to fire cabinet officials and others who serve at his pleasure for invoking the Fifth, but even this view was controversial when the issue arose during my tenure on the Hill. In any event, Lerner is a career employee, and my understanding is that she cannot be subjected to adverse employment consequences (unlike a private employee) for invoking her self-incrimination privilege.s/

more good info follows... at the above link.
More...
Good info, jem. Your link has an extra 'This' that breaks it. It should be:

http://www.pointoforder.com/2013/05/22/taking-the-fifth-before-congress/
 
Very trick response piezoe/

I was not pointing out that the scholar was correct... I was pointing out that area of the law is unresolved.

Its interesting you are now pointing out personal opinions don't matter. That is what I was telling you when you were making your "broad" interpretations. We need the court to tell us if public employee can assert the 5th outside of criminal proceedings... partiularly when congress is doing oversight.

How can congress do good oversight if public employees don't have to give the sight?


Note. I read your case it cites Hoffman... one of the big cases in this area of the law.

That was a special grand jury case... not a non criminal oversight hearing.

Quote from piezoe:

Sadly Jem, personal opinions carry little weight in the law unless they are the opinions of judges or juries handing down a ruling. You will notice in the link I gave you that the important feature is "...in response to probative evidence" You might rejoinder here, if you are clever enough, with the probative evidence (not opinion nor conjecture, nor supposition, nor charges) against Lerner. And remember Jem, taking the fifth cannot be used as evidence.)

I wouldn't hold my breath, were I you, waiting for the Supreme Court to rule that government employees give up their Constitutional rights.
I don't think even Scalia would go that far, though I'm not too sure of that.:D
More...
 
Quote from jem:

really... so you can take the 5th at a hearing at your Homeowners association? ... I really think you should be providing case law when you make your legal proclamations.


but the way...

this was a bit of bombshell and probably explains why learner took the 5th... dont you think...



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...8614220949743916.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
More...

No you can't. A hearing of your Home Owners Association is not legal proceeding. But you can refuse to participate. :D

You are drifting into the ridiculous, by the way.
 
Quote from piezoe:

No you can't. A hearing of your Home Owners Association is not legal proceeding. But you can refuse to participate. :D

You are drifting into the ridiculous, by the way.
More...

no you drifted into the ridiculous when you declared / implied the existance of a law which does not exist...with no support... so I pointed out how absurd your statement was...

so now... show us the sup ct law showing us you can take the 5th at a Congressional oversight hearing.... particularly when you work for the govt. ( remember the oversight hearing is not a court rooom, it is not a criminal or civil legal proceeding)
 
I think the question is not really about whether you can plead the 5th Amendment not to answer when questioned before Congress. But, are you required to provide answers to questions posed to you when called before Congress at all? Can you just remain silent as you can if the FBI asks you questions?

If it is only the rights afforded by the 5th Amendment that allows you to be silent when questioned by the FBI or the police, then it would apply in any situation where the government would prefer to force one to provide answers.
 
It applies specifically to cases where the Court has ruled as in for example civil and criminal legal proceedings including testifying under oath before Congress. The Court has also ruled in Miranda v. Arizona that it applies in other cases as well, such as the examples you mentioned. (Both 5th and 6th Amendments apply in Miranda) There may be other cases where it might also apply that have not yet been tested in the courts, but we know for certain that it applies when someone is asked to testify under oath before Congress -- and that's been invoked many times now. I'm not at all sure about this, but possibly the first time the fifth amendment was invoked before Congress was in the McCarthy hearings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top