[Update: One concern raised is that some of the materials obtained is protected by the Speech and Debate Clause. Fine. As noted various places, means were included in the warrant to sort out this material. Meanwhile, Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed as circuit judge. Sigh.]
And now, when the FBI catches redhanded a Congressman engaged in the most egregious act of corruption, *now* members of Congress are upset that the Executive is asserting too much authority. They have their nerve. ... Make no mistake: the real reason why Congress is so concerned about the raid on Jefferson's office is that many of them know that corruption within Congress is rampant. ...
Quite frankly, I find the bipartisan closing of ranks over this issue disgusting. If Congressmen are interested in Executive overreaching, they should start demanding that the President justify his NSA program; instead they doing everything they can to paper over its illegalities.
-- Jack Balkin
He is right. Now, for largely self-interested reasons, Republicans are sooo concerned about executive overreaching. Something is wrong when Talkleft is on the "pro-prosecution" side. We do hear that something like this was never done before (searching congressional offices), leading some to be suspicious. But ...
The particular provision (Art. I §6) some raise is not really determinative – exceptions are made for felonies, treason, and breach of the peace. I reckon bribery is a felony, right? Bribery also deals with the Speech and Debate Clause aspects of that section. Rep. Jefferson didn't answer a subpoena, the ideal way to go. Special concern was taken respecting the search.
All the same, especially given the majority and minority leaders of the House put out a joint statement [sigh] demanding the files be returned, the White House put a hold on things for forty-five days. It's the port deal all over again! Seriously, there are separation of powers concerns here, but it is rather self-serving for the majority only now to be so concerned. Likewise, if they actually self-regulated -- the guy is looked upon as bad news by the liberals too -- this might have been avoided.
That would be too complicated, I guess. Some efforts were [rightly] made to encourage him to temporary step down from his committee seat, but he referenced others "who have been indicted, tried and won their cases, and who were never asked to step aside from their committee assignments during those processes." As to voluntarily submitting the docs, he cited Fifth Amendment concerns. Fair enough, but current doctrine qua the Fourth Amendment doesn't warrant special concern here -- if the press don't have special dispensation, why a corrupt member of Congress who refuses a subpoena?
So, we are left with separation of powers concerns [and FBI overreaching], for which members on both sides were split. One is simply -- again given everything that went on -- not too concerned. The bottom line is that this is down there on the list of separation of powers problems of late. But, maybe there is a benefit here. Selfish or not, institutional concerns are being raised. A CYA move would be to actually be concerned about it in less seedy cases.
Such as this real attempt to use congressional oversight powers (the purse) re FISA.