Or: THE HOUSE UNAMERICAN AFFAIRS subCOMMITTEE Part 2.
Three university leaders have been asked by Virginia Foxx to testify. She has asked the Chancellor of UCLA in California, the head of Northwestern outside of Chicago in Illinois, and the head of Rutgers in New Jersey to come to Washington, D.C. where they will be raked over the coals in a show trial that might be designed to distract us from the trial of Their Furor in New York City.
If you do not know or have not heard of Virginia Foxx, you may remember something she said. Ms. Foxx is the member of congress who famously told a reporter to shut up when the reporter was asking incoming Speaker of the House Mike Johnson if he took part in efforts to block the 2020 Election results. Take a look at the YouTube clip, here.
Fresh off her success in intimidating reporters, Ms. Foxx, joined by her sidekick Elise Stefanick, has famously moved on to intimidating university chancellors and presidents. More on that later.
Focusing on this week's call for witnesses to come to the District from California, Illinois, and New Jersey, let's dive into these proceedings a little bit before they take place.
It's my understanding that Ms. Foxx has asked but not subpoenaed these witnesses to come to Washington. Then she has no lawful authority over them, if she ever did. They have no responsibility to make that trip and appear there, not without a subpoena.
Second, even if they have been or will be subpoenaed, not showing up does not mean that they automatically go to jail or pay a fine. Ms. Foxx would have to get the entire House of Representatives to vote to file an enforcement lawsuit to enforce her subpoena.
Third, assuming that she can get the House to vote to file and fund an action to enforce her subpoena, it's the Attorney General that would file the action to enforce the subpoena, not Ms. Foxx. It is at least open to question whether even Merrick Garland would file such an enforcement action; he didn't file an action to enforce the subpoena served on Mark Meadows to testify, for example, so why on earth he would file an action to enforce a subpoena served on any of these three university administrators is an open question, at most. The odds are pretty strong that even Merrick Garland would not do that.
Parenthetically, the chances are nil, niente, none if Ms. Foxx hires private counsel to file an enforcement action. She and they have absolutely no authority to do so, and not even the current House majority has the power to authorize her or them to file their own private enforcement action.
Finally, even assuming that the administrators or any of them – and it is a pretty sure bet that the UCLA Chancellor will go to D.C. even without a subpoena, particularly if he is not personally paying the travel expenses – they would be fools to show up in the hearing room without their own counsel present.
In my judgment, they would also be fools to sit there and be berated; in any other place, they would get up and walk out rather than be humiliated. The point is: They don't have to show up there and be humiliated this week, either.
Please read the disclaimer. ©2024 Dennis J. Wall. All rights reserved.