Congressional Investigations

With fewer than 180 days until the midterm elections, Democratic Members of Congress are laying the groundwork for future congressional investigations in the event the party regains control of one or both chambers next year. Even as Democratic Members prepare for the possibility of winning the majority, developments such as…

Continue Reading Today’s Press Release Could Be Tomorrow’s Subpoena: Bracing For the Possibility of Democratic Congressional Investigations

With the midterm elections rapidly approaching, Democratic lawmakers in both the House and Senate have begun to return to an increasingly familiar tactic of the minority: firing off a flurry of document preservation letters that are a harbinger for the subpoenas to come.  These early letters signal that key Democrats intend to hold potential investigative targets accountable if they regain power, and that they will not look fondly on parties that dismiss their requests.  By urging federal agencies and private entities to secure records in advance, Democratic Ranking Members are making clear that they won’t wait idly to ensure relevant evidence is preserved. 

Continue Reading The Paper Trail Starts Now: Minority Document Preservation Letters and Preparing for Oversight to Come

Congressional investigations are now a common reality across corporate America, and companies large and small are therefore more focused than ever on the potential effects of congressional inquiries into business activities, goals, and strategies. In this new reality, the most sophisticated companies, private equity firms, and other corporate players are…

Continue Reading A Potentially Overlooked Risk Area: Incorporating Congressional Investigations into Transactional Due Diligence

If the upcoming midterm elections result in a Democratic majority in the House next year, companies, organizations, and individuals can expect a new wave of congressional investigations, hearings, and oversight, with a familiar focus on the Trump administration and an emphasis on a variety of private sector targets. The Democratic…

Continue Reading Democratic Investigations Agenda is Coming Into Focus

Following a string of high-profile investigations targeting Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, congressional ethics investigations are more visible than ever. Indeed, as we recently explored, the House Ethics Committee in particular may be moving toward a more active and transparent enforcement posture, with its most…

Continue Reading Congressional Ethics Investigations: An Overview of Processes, Challenges, and Implications for Private Actors

On September 16, 2025, Judge Trevor McFadden of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed Dr. Ralph de la Torre’s effort to bar criminal or civil enforcement of the Senate’s resolutions holding him in civil and criminal contempt of Congress.  In bringing his pre-enforcement challenge, Dr. de la Torre alleged that any effort to pursue civil or criminal sanctions in connection with the resolutions would entail further “punishment” for his having invoked his Fifth Amendment rights in refusing to testify before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (“HELP”) Committee regarding the bankruptcy of Steward Health Care.  Judge McFadden’s sweeping rejection of this challenge underscores the limited ability of congressional subpoena targets to seek relief in court and highlights the formidable protection the Constitution’s Speech or Debate Clause provides to congressional investigators.

Continue Reading Federal Court Dismisses Pre-Enforcement Challenge to HELP Committee Subpoena, Underscoring Limited Options for Congressional Subpoena Targets

Last week, the Georgia state Senate authorized a sweeping investigation of former gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, continuing a national trend of increased state legislative investigations.  Although state-level investigations continue to lag far behind congressional investigations, state legislatures appear to be replicating what we see on the federal level with increasing…

Continue Reading Georgia Senate Launches Abrams-Focused Inquiry, Signaling Growing Risk of State Legislative Investigations

This week, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) will vote to pursue civil enforcement and criminal contempt of Congress charges against Steward Health Care CEO Dr. Ralph de la Torre.  If the vote succeeds, and it is likely it will, Dr. de la Torre will be only the second corporate executive subject to a subpoena enforcement action in the history of the Senate.

The bipartisan enforcement action, announced by Committee Chairman Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Ranking Member Sen. Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-La.), followed a hearing last week for which Dr. de la Torre was subpoenaed to testify but failed to appear.

The use of an empty chair at a hearing to symbolize noncompliance with congressional requests has increased in recent years, but it is nonetheless a rare event on Capitol Hill.  Dr. de la Torre, remarkably, has been represented by an empty chair twice in less than six months.  In March 2024, Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), chair of the Senate HELP Subcommittee on Primary Health and Retirement Security, launched an inquiry into financial mismanagement at Steward Health Care.  Senator Markey twice requested that Dr. de la Torre testify at a Subcommittee hearing on April 3, 2024.  Dr. de la Torre declined to appear, earning his first empty chair of the year.

Continue Reading An Empty Chair and a Not-so-Empty Threat:  Senate HELP Committee to Vote on Rare Civil and Criminal Subpoena Enforcement Actions Against Steward Health Care CEO

Late last week, the Committee on Oversight and Accountability published the House of Representative’s “Authorization and Oversight Plans.” The massive 241-page report is required by the House rules, and the Oversight Committee’s report collects the individual oversight plans that each standing committee of the House is required to create at the start of a new Congress. The report is the most comprehensive collection of the committees’ plans for investigations in the coming Congress.

This year’s report reflects a significant shift in priorities, reflecting the change in control of the House to the Republicans. For example, the Oversight Plan speaks to expected oversight of the Administration’s alleged “collusion” with “Big Tech,” the “politicization” of the federal government, China’s interactions with the American economy and national security, and the federal government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and ongoing prevention efforts. A repeated priority throughout the plans is seeking out and minimizing instances of “waste, fraud, and abuse” in government programs, which includes scrutinizing the recipients and use of government funds.

The plans of the four most active oversight committees—Oversight and Accountability, Judiciary, Energy and Commerce, and Financial Services—stand out in particular for their focus on the private sector and the way companies interact with the federal government. Other committees, including the Foreign Affairs Committee, have outlined ambitious oversight agendas as well. Of note, the Foreign Affairs Committee has added a Subcommittee on Oversight and Accountability “to undertake more complex oversight and investigative activities,” including on issues related to China, the conflict in Ukraine, the United States’ withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the origins of the pandemic. The Oversight Plan does not include the oversight objectives of the newly created House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party, which we explored in a separate alert.

The following summarizes key portions of the Oversight Plan with implications for the private sector and other individuals and entities that routinely interface with government:

Continue Reading Newly Published “Oversight Plan” Outlines the House’s Investigative Priorities

On February 7, 2023, the House Committee on Armed Services (the “Committee”) held a hearing entitled “The Pressing Threat of the Chinese Communist Party to U.S. National Defense.” This hearing marked the Committee’s first in the 118th Congress and it focused on U.S. strategic competition with the Chinese Communist Party (“CCP”) of the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”). This overview is the first in a series of legislative updates we will provide on congressional oversight activities related to China throughout the Congress, including specific activities focused on trade controls, supply chain dependencies, and PRC-sourced telecommunications infrastructure in U.S. networks.

Admiral Harry Harris, USN (Ret.), former commander of U.S. Pacific Command, and Dr. Melanie Sisson, Foreign Policy Fellow at the Strobe Talbott Center for Security, Strategy, and Technology, appeared before the committee as witnesses. The substance and tenor of their testimony, reflected throughout the hearing from member statements, was bipartisan agreement that the PRC and the CCP pose a significant threat to the United States and its way of life.

Key members to watch this Congress, all of whom participated in the hearing, include, Representative Mike Gallagher (R-WI), HASC Member and Chairman of the House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition between the United States and the CCP, as well as Select Committee Members Rob Wittman (R-VA), Jim Banks (R-IN), Seth Moulton (D-MA), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ), and newly elected Carlos Gimenez (R-FL).

We expect these members will work together over the coming months to advance legislative measures in the defense authorization bill to address perceived threats posed by the CCP, particularly after its recent deployment of a surveillance balloon over the United States and military exercises near “Taiwan”.

Continue Reading Public Policy Update:  Key Takeaways from the House Armed Services Committee Hearing on the Chinese Communist Party Threat to U.S. National Defense