A U.S. Senate committee has voted to hold former top Health official Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress after he declined to answer questions during a hearing examining his handling of the Covid-19 pandemic. The party-line vote authorizes the committee to refer the matter to the Justice Department for potential prosecution over Fauci’s failure to comply with a congressional subpoena. It remains unclear whether the department will pursue the case.
During his testimony last week, Fauci invoked his constitutional right against self-incrimination more than 100 times. He argued that Kentucky Senator Rand Paul was attempting to put him “behind bars.” Paul has for years accused Fauci of seeking to obscure the origins of Covid-19 and of funding a research laboratory in Wuhan, China, where some allege the pandemic began with a lab leak. Most scientists maintain that exposure to an infected animal is the more likely origin.
Former President Joe Biden granted Fauci a pre-emptive pardon on his last day in office in 2025, shielding him from federal prosecution for actions taken between 2014 and 2025. However, the pardon does not cover potential contempt charges arising after that date, nor does it protect against state or local charges.
“The chair directed Anthony Fauci to answer. He refused,” Paul said before the vote. “That is what we are voting on today — not his opinions, not his policies, not anything he said from the podium six years ago. We are voting on whether a witness who has received the benefit of a federal pardon can be ordered by this committee to answer questions and then defy that order without consequence.”
Fauci has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. Last week, he accused Paul of harboring an “obvious obsession” with prosecuting him. “The only conclusion I can reach is that the sole reason he is calling me before this committee is to get me to say something — anything — that could vindicate his repeated public pledges that I end up, in his words, ‘behind bars,’” Fauci said.
The contempt referral underscores the deep partisan divide over pandemic accountability and the limits of congressional oversight. While the Justice Department will decide whether to bring charges, the move signals an escalation in efforts to compel testimony from high-profile figures. Legal experts note that the pardon’s scope and the timing of any alleged contempt will be central to any prosecution. The committee’s action also raises questions about the interplay between executive clemency and legislative authority. As the referral moves to the Justice Department, the next steps will test whether congressional subpoenas can be enforced against a pardoned former official.
