Skip to main content

The Latest: Senate panel will vote on holding Fauci in contempt for refusing to answer questions

1 / 2

President Donald Trump steps off from Marine One upon his arrival at the Ellipse just outside of the White House, Wednesday, Aug. 5, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

A Senate committee is set to vote Thursday morning on whether to hold Dr. Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress and refer him to the Justice Department for potential prosecution over his refusal to answer questions at a hearing last week on his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination more than 100 times at the hearing.

Recommended Videos


Also, Iran said Wednesday it's in the “final stage” of drafting an agreement with Oman over the Strait of Hormuz, and U.S. President Donald Trump has said a deal could be announced this week. The agreement is likely to be contingent on the U.S. lifting its blockade on Iran’s ports.

Here's the latest:

Democrats’ delay tactics get voted down on party lines

Democrats called for the first votes with proposals to delay the resolution against Fauci.

Those moves failed along party lines, with the eight Republicans prevailing over seven Democrats.

That includes Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma voting with his fellow Republicans. During Fauci’s appearance, Lankford told Fauci multiple times that he recognized his right to invoke the Fifth Amendment. Other Republicans followed Paul’s lead and excoriated Fauci for his choice.

Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania also stuck with his party after deviating in tone during Fauci’s appearance. Fetterman wasn’t critical of Fauci but he did not, as many Democrats did, blast Paul and the GOP majority’s approach.

Paul defends the committee’s role as ‘constitutional obligation’

The chairman firmly pushed back at Democrats’ assertions that he’s playing partisan politics.

“Oversight is not a courtesy this committee extends or a favor a former official grants us,” Paul said. “A subpoena is not an invitation. A subpoena with no consequence is not a subpoena. It’s a suggestion. Seeking the truth is not a witch hunt.”

Paul said he wasn’t trying to entrap Fauci.

“He had no liability if he told the truth,” he said.

Top Democrat questions Paul’s pursuit of a contempt vote

Michigan Sen. Gary Peters, the ranking Democrat on the Senate panel, said the process to subpoena Fauci and now to hold him in contempt accomplish nothing to advance public health.

He called Sen. Paul’s work “a one-sided investigation and a rushed process ... that could harm our ability to conduct future investigations.”

Peters also expressed concerns that Paul could send a criminal contempt referral directly to federal prosecutors rather than allow a full Senate vote. Peters maintained that would violate Senate traditions on how to handle contempt.

Paul says the vote isn’t about Fauci’s policy but his refusal to testify

The Kentucky senator used his opening statement as chairman to insist that the contempt vote isn’t about Fauci’s policy decisions during the pandemic, though Paul got in plenty of digs over mask and vaccine mandates and U.S. investments in Chinese research the senator believes could be responsible for the virus.

Paul, a Republican, said the vote is simply about whether a person who gets a Senate subpoena can plead the Fifth Amendment, as Fauci did more than 100 times.

The chairman emphasized that Fauci already has a federal pardon from former President Joe Biden. In the senator’s view, that effectively leaves Fauci with no Fifth Amendment privileges. Some Democrats and Fauci advocates have argued that the 85-year-old immunologist still could face perjury charges given Paul’s and other Republicans’ repeated statements that he should be jailed.

Rand Paul’s Senate committee begins meeting for Anthony Fauci contempt vote

The Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee has begun its meeting to consider holding Dr. Anthony Fauci in contempt because he previously refused to answer the panel’s questions about how he handled the COVID-19 pandemic in his role as one of the federal government’s top public health officials.

Republicans hold a one-vote majority on the committee.

The resolution would refer Fauci to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, which is led by Jeanine Pirro.

Iran says a deal with Oman is close

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Esmail Baghaei, has said an agreement on the Strait of Hormuz with Oman, which lies on the other side of the waterway, is in the “final stage” of drafting. Speaking Wednesday, he said a joint statement will be issued “if certain parties do not obstruct this process,” apparently referring to the U.S.

The agreement is likely to be contingent on the U.S. lifting its blockade on Iran’s ports.

The strait is crucial to global shipping and energy supplies. Before the war, which began with U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran in February, around one fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas passed through the waterway at the mouth of the Persian Gulf.

On Thursday, all eyes were on the U.S. for the next development.

Read more

Senate panel to vote on holding Fauci in contempt for refusing to answer questions

The Senate committee is set to vote Thursday on whether to hold Dr. Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress and refer him to the Justice Department for potential prosecution over his refusal to answer questions at a hearing last week focused on his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination more than 100 times when he appeared before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.

Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, the Republican committee chairman, has said that constitutional protection didn’t apply since Fauci last year received a pardon from President Joe Biden and thus did not have to worry about the threat of prosecution.

But Fauci, in a statement issued before the hearing, said he had good reason to fear the possibility of criminal charges given what he said was Paul’s determination “to get me to say something, anything, that could vindicate his repeated public pledges that I end up, in his words, quote, behind bars, unquote.”

Read more