Absolutely immune
Also Kellyanne Conway: she ignored a subpoena.
White House counselor Kellyanne Conway on Tuesday said she was “taking one for the team” by defying a House subpoena compelling her to testify on her multiple violations of the Hatch Act.
“They’re trying to silence me and take away my First Amendment rights,” she said in an interview on Fox News of her decision to skip the House Oversight hearing for which she received a subpoena to attend. “I would be happy to testify, just so we’re clear. I have nothing to hide. I have done nothing wrong.”
It’s not a “First Amendment right” to use your job in the White House for campaign purposes, just as it’s not a “First Amendment right” to lie under oath or to commit fraud via spam.
Last month, Conway was cited by the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, the federal agency that oversees Hatch Act compliance, for multiple violations of the 1939 law that prohibits government employees from participating in political speech while performing their official duties. Conway was cited for speaking in her official capacity about both the 2020 election and 2017’s special Senate election in Alabama.
…
In a letter to House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings on Monday, White House counsel Pat Cipollone said Conway would be skipping the hearing. The Justice Department “has advised me that Ms. Conway is absolutely immune from compelled congressional testimony with respect to matters related to her service as a senior adviser” to Trump, he told the committee.
If that’s true (which of course is disputed) then it’s example #759,365 of how “checks and balances” are a joke. Congress is supposed to be able to oversee the executive branch, so if people like Conway have absolute immunity from being questioned about violations of law, Congress can’t do the thing it’s supposed to be able to do. Checks and balances? Not that anyone can see.
First Amendment Rights may be one of the more misused phrases. Does no one understand those aren’t absolute? I work for an employer as a science professor. I cannot teach my class about the four humors or the aether, because my employer has a right to ensure that I teach accurate science. So I have a list of duties that includes core competencies that I am expected to teach.
As a public college employee, I cannot use my job to (1) promote products that I have created and am selling (unless I wrote the textbook we are using); (2) promote political candidates that I favor; or (3) promote other ideas that are personal or political and have no reference to my job. In short, yes, I can teach about global warming, even though many people think that is political. Yes, I can teach that the Vietnam War was an environmental disaster. No, I cannot stand up and say “Vote for Ford Prefect, because I think he is the best candidate for mayor”. No, I cannot say “You should go out and buy every book I’ve written just because I’m so awesome.”
Why? Because there is a power imbalance, for one. Because I represent my employer, for another.
They’re trying to silence her by compelling her testimony.
I’m still waiting to hear how not appearing for a subpoena and speaking doesn’t land you in jail. If it doesn’t, there are no checks and balances.
OB: I think the part of the post after the first block quote needs a second “not.” It’s not a 1st Am right to use your office to campaign, just as it’s NOT a 1st Am right to lie under oath.
Whoops, so it does, thank you.