Senate panel to vote on holding Fauci in contempt after Fifth Amendment refusal

Coverage spread: 3 sources — 2 left · 1 right

Lean ratings via AllSides / Media Bias-Fact-Check. How this works.

Where they agree

Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment over 100 times during a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing on July 29, 2026, refusing to answer questions about the pandemic response.
Rand Paul is leading the push for a committee vote to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress, arguing Fauci’s pre-emptive pardon from Biden and his opening statement undercut his right to plead the Fifth.
If contempt passes, the committee can refer the matter directly to the DOJ or request a full Senate vote, and any prosecution would need a D.C. grand jury indictment.
Fauci’s pandemic-era diary entries, obtained from HHS, and his HHS iPhone have both become key pieces of evidence fueling further investigations.

Where they differ

Fox News frames the story around Paul’s confidence he’ll win the vote and swiftly refer Fauci to the DOJ, emphasizing the personal “duel” narrative between Paul and Fauci.
NBC News gives more weight to the legal weakness of Republicans’ Fifth Amendment waiver argument, quoting a Georgetown law professor who calls the “waiver” claim “specious.”
NBC News separately reports a distinct escalation — Florida, West Virginia and Louisiana attorneys general subpoenaing Fauci over alleged financial “self-dealing” — a angle not covered by Fox or NPR in these pieces.
Fox News uniquely reports that Fauci’s HHS-issued iPhone has been handed to Sen. Ron Johnson’s subcommittee, while NBC and NPR make no mention of the phone.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, chaired by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is voting on a resolution to hold Dr. Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress after he invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times during a July 29, 2026 hearing on the COVID-19 pandemic response. Paul says he expects to win the vote and plans to immediately refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeanine Pirro, for possible prosecution.

What happened at the hearing that triggered this?

Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was subpoenaed to testify before Paul’s committee about his role in the pandemic response, including allegations that he funded risky gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China. Instead of answering questions, Fauci, on the advice of his attorneys, repeatedly pleaded the Fifth Amendment, telling the panel: “Although it pains me to do so because of the respect I have for the legislative branch of government, and my decades-long record of cooperating with Congress under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution to refrain from answering your questions.” He did not substantively answer questions again for the remainder of the hearing.

Why does Paul say Fauci can’t legally plead the Fifth?

Paul argues Fauci forfeited his Fifth Amendment protection because former President Joe Biden issued him a pre-emptive pardon before leaving office, and because Fauci’s own opening statement addressed subject matter relevant to the committee’s questions, which Republicans say amounts to a waiver. “I ordered him to answer and warned him about contempt, yet he still refused,” Paul said in a Tuesday statement. “That is obstruction of a congressional investigation. The Committee will act accordingly.” Georgetown Law professor Abbe Smith told NBC News these arguments are shaky: the scope of protection a pre-emptive pardon actually provides is legally untested, and an opening statement about public service and past cooperation isn’t the kind of specific factual answer that typically counts as a waiver.

What happens if the committee votes for contempt?

If the resolution passes, the committee can refer it directly to the Justice Department or ask Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., to hold a full Senate vote. Paul says he intends to send the referral straight to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. Any prosecution would still require that office to secure an indictment from a D.C. grand jury, a jurisdiction where prosecutors pursuing similar cases have had a mixed record.

What other pressure is Fauci facing?

Beyond the contempt push, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced Wednesday that his office, along with West Virginia Attorney General John McCuskey and Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, issued an investigative subpoena to Fauci. They allege he personally profited from pandemic guidance through awards, grants, book deals and board positions, citing more than 1,000 pages of Fauci’s personal diary entries that Paul’s office recently obtained from HHS and released. Uthmeier said “Fauci’s diary focused more on self-promotion than the legitimate safety concerns from the mRNA vaccines,” and the subpoena demands records on vaccine efficacy, myocarditis risk, messaging strategy and communications with vaccine manufacturers, covering January 2020 through the present, due by Aug. 31. Fauci has denied any wrongdoing, and his attorney, David Schertler, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Separately, Fox News reported that Fauci’s HHS-era iPhone has been turned over to the Senate Homeland Security Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, chaired by Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis. A Johnson spokesperson confirmed the subcommittee obtained a copy of the phone, though it’s unclear whether investigators can actually access its contents; a source close to Paul’s office said the senator also possesses the device.

Why this matters

Fauci has been a top target for Republicans since his prominent role advising the Trump and Biden administrations on COVID-19 policy, including lockdowns, vaccine messaging and the virus’s origins. Paul has pursued him for years and has said Fauci should face prison time. This week’s contempt vote and the new state-level subpoenas mark an escalation from congressional criticism into direct legal exposure, testing untested legal questions about pre-emptive pardons and Fifth Amendment waivers that could shape how far lawmakers and state attorneys general can push a former federal official who invokes constitutional protection against self-incrimination.

Sources

Featured photo: The White House from Washington, DC via Wikimedia Commons (Public domain)