A US Senate committee on Thursday voted to hold Dr Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress and recommend referring the matter to the Justice Department over his refusal to answer questions during a hearing on his role in the government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The decision has intensified a political dispute over congressional authority and witness testimony.

The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs took the action one week after Fauci appeared before the panel and invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination more than 100 times. The committee’s Republican chairman, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, argued that Fauci could have answered questions because he had received a presidential pardon.

Paul said the pardon issued by former Democratic President Joe Biden removed the possibility of federal prosecution for the period covered by the order. He argued that the committee’s vote was not about Fauci’s previous policies or public statements but about whether a witness could refuse to comply with a congressional demand for testimony.

Also Read: Trump's Attorney General Pick Secures Senate Deal After Confirmation Battle Ends

Fauci and Democratic lawmakers who opposed the contempt resolution maintained that his decision was legally justified. Fauci said he had concerns about potential criminal exposure due to public calls from some Republican lawmakers for investigations and possible prosecution related to his handling of pandemic policies.

The pardon issued by Biden covered certain federal offenses allegedly committed between 2014 and January 2025, but it does not provide protection against state-level investigations or allegations involving false statements made after the pardon period. The committee’s recommendation will now be sent to the US attorney’s office in Washington, which will decide whether further action is warranted.

The controversy has also raised broader questions about the limits of congressional power to compel testimony from individuals who have received pardons. The outcome of the case could have wider implications for future investigations involving officials who receive clemency protections.

Also Read: Zelensky Supports US Bill Targeting Russia Trade With Heavy Tariff Threat