Question

Former Attorney General Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress for failing to provide documents subpoenaed by Congressional committees. Research this case. Was the contempt finding warranted? Explain.

Answer 1

The criminal contempt resolution which was passed against Former Attorney General Eric Holder during the Obama Government  related to the controversial federal investigation on gun control, Operation Fast and Furious, launched in Arizona to ensnare gun smugglers involved with the drug cartels from Mexico.

The plea for contempt was filed in the Congress by the Republican members which many argue was a strategic move to create political propaganda against the former government. The Congress committee demanded that the Auditor General present the classified papers regarding the operation in Arizona, failing which Holder would be held in contempt.

In legal terms, the contempt resolution vote is of doubtful significance and it did not seem warranted as the contempt issue was handed to the US attorney for the District of Columbia for final decision. The prosecutor however, was an official within the Attorney General’s department of justice, and it was therefore already bound to be a inflict of interest and the prosecutor could not have been expected to professionally proceed with a case against his/her own employer. Furthermore, the contempt resolution seemed to be a premeditated move of the opposition party that tried to dissolve the controversy by identifying with the one official of the Oval office as the target. Thus, the allegation against Holder seemed unwarranted since all the necessary papers about Operation Fast and Furious had been previously released by the Attorney General’s office.