Fauci Accountability from the States
Segment #431
I am not an attorney; however, it appears that Fauci could be compelled to testify federally in either a Congressional investigation or a federal court proceeding. However, if that testimony is compelled Fauci testimony on a federal level might not be admissible in a state proceeding. Could Fauci be pursued civilly? Potentially yes but it is a high bar and some cases have already failed. Bottom line - good chance Fauci skates and beats both criminal and civil actions. The good news is that Fauci must be very careful not to perjure himself in either a federal court or a congressional investigation. The truth will come out because Fauci now has no fifth amendment protection. He will spend a lot of time in the future answering federal questions, state AF questions, and those from lawyers representing class action plaintiffs. I am going to be interested to see who pays all the legal bills.
Can states pursues Fauci criminally
States may attempt to pursue criminal charges against Anthony Fauci, but several legal hurdles make it unlikely to succeed. A presidential pardon issued by Joe Biden on January 20, 2025, grants Fauci immunity from federal prosecution for actions dating back to January 1, 2014, covering his role in the COVID-19 response. However, this pardon does not extend to state-level prosecutions, as presidential pardons only apply to federal offenses.
Some states, like South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Florida, have shown interest in investigating Fauci for alleged misconduct during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson is leading a coalition of state attorneys general to probe Fauci’s actions, citing mismanagement, misleading statements, and suppression of scientific debate. They argue that state laws could apply if evidence suggests violations, such as misrepresenting the pandemic’s origins or mismanaging NIH funds. In Oklahoma, Representative Justin Humphrey has urged Attorney General Gentner Drummond to prosecute Fauci, alleging crimes like fraud or extortion under state RICO statutes. In Florida, a legal group called Vires Law has requested an investigation into Fauci for second-degree murder and terrorism-related charges, though no formal action has been confirmed.
Despite these efforts, significant obstacles remain. Fauci’s actions were primarily conducted in his federal capacity as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and Chief Medical Advisor to the President, which may shield him under federal supremacy or qualified immunity if he was acting within his official duties. Additionally, proving criminal intent for charges like murder, fraud, or terrorism would require clear evidence of deliberate wrongdoing, which has not been conclusively established. Congressional investigations, such as those by the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, have criticized Fauci for misleading statements (e.g., on gain-of-function research or social distancing guidelines) but have not produced evidence of criminal activity sufficient for prosecution.
Fauci has denied any criminal conduct, stating, “I have committed no crime,” and framing his actions as efforts to improve public health. Critics, including some Republican lawmakers and MAGA supporters, argue that his testimony to Congress about NIH-funded research in Wuhan or his role in shaping COVID-19 protocols could constitute perjury or other crimes, but these claims remain speculative without concrete evidence. Moreover, pursuing a prominent scientist like Fauci could face public and legal scrutiny for appearing politically motivated, potentially chilling scientific research, as noted by Dr. Cory Franklin.
Fauci has a pardon that eliminates his fifth amendment protections
Dr. Anthony Fauci received a full and unconditional pardon from President Joe Biden on January 20, 2025, just hours before Biden left office. This preemptive pardon covers any potential federal offenses Fauci may have committed between January 1, 2014, and the date of the pardon, encompassing his tenure as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and as Chief Medical Advisor to the President during the COVID-19 pandemic. Wikipedia
Legal Implications of the Pardon
A full and unconditional presidential pardon eliminates the risk of federal prosecution for the offenses covered. Consequently, Dr. Fauci cannot invoke the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination regarding matters within the scope of the pardon, as there is no longer a threat of federal prosecution. If he were to refuse to testify on such matters, he could be compelled to do so.
However, it's important to note:
Perjury Risk: While the pardon shields Fauci from prosecution for past federal offenses, it does not protect him from future offenses such as perjury. If he were to provide false testimony under oath, he could face new charges.
State Prosecutions: The presidential pardon applies only to federal offenses. It does not preclude state-level investigations or prosecutions, should any state authorities choose to pursue them.
Context and Reactions
President Biden stated that the pardons, including Fauci's, were issued to protect public servants from "baseless and politically motivated investigations" anticipated under the incoming administration. Dr. Fauci expressed gratitude for the pardon, asserting that he had "committed no crime" but appreciated the protection amid ongoing threats of politically driven reprisals. WikipediaPOLITICO
Critics, including some Republican lawmakers, have argued that the preemptive nature of the pardon implies wrongdoing. However, legal experts affirm that such pardons are within the president's constitutional authority and do not constitute an admission of guilt.
Fauci must testify truthfully in Federal court. Is that testimony admissible in state court
Yes, testimony given in federal court can be admissible in state court, but there are important legal caveats:
1. Relevance and Admissibility
Like all evidence, testimony must be relevant, material, and not unduly prejudicial to be admitted under the state’s rules of evidence (which often parallel the Federal Rules of Evidence).
For example, if Fauci testifies under oath in a federal investigation, that transcript can be submitted as evidence in a state-level prosecution, assuming it meets admissibility standards.
2. Public Record or Prior Testimony Exception
Under state rules of evidence (e.g., hearsay exceptions), prior federal testimony may be admissible if:
The witness is unavailable, and
The opposing party had a similar motive and opportunity to cross-examine the witness in the earlier federal proceeding.
This is based on rules like:
Fed. R. Evid. 804(b)(1) (prior testimony)
Comparable state rules of evidence (e.g., California Evidence Code §1291)
3. Self-Incrimination and Immunity
If someone was compelled to testify under immunity in federal court, that testimony may not be used in a state prosecution unless the immunity agreement allows it or is overridden (see Murphy v. Waterfront Commission, 378 U.S. 52 (1964)).
If no immunity was granted, and the testimony was voluntary, it may be fair game in state proceedings.
4. Pardons Don’t Apply to States
As noted earlier, a federal pardon (e.g., for Fauci) does not protect against state charges, and federal testimony may still be used by state prosecutors if it meets the criteria above.
Is testimony in a Congressional investigation admissible in state court court - Probably Not
es, testimony given in a Congressional investigation can be admissible in state court, under certain legal conditions. However, there are significant limitations depending on how the testimony was obtained and how it is used.
✅ When Congressional Testimony Can Be Admissible in State Court:
Voluntary, Uncoerced Testimony:
If the witness testified voluntarily before Congress, without invoking the Fifth Amendment and without immunity, the transcript or video can be introduced in a state court proceeding as a statement by a party or as prior testimony, subject to the rules of evidence.Public Record:
Congressional testimony is often a public record, and courts may take judicial notice of it or use it under public records exceptions to hearsay rules.Impeachment or Contradiction:
Statements made under oath in Congress can be used to impeach credibility if the witness makes contradictory statements in state court.State Subpoena of the Transcript:
A state prosecutor may subpoena a transcript from a Congressional committee (though Congress is not always required to comply). Once obtained, it may be introduced if evidentiary standards are met.
❌ Limitations on Admissibility:
Immunized Testimony:
If the witness was compelled to testify under Congressional immunity (granted under 18 U.S. Code § 6002), that testimony cannot be used in criminal prosecutions at any level—state or federal—unless the immunity is waived or doesn't apply. This was affirmed in Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 (1972).Fifth Amendment Protections:
If a witness invoked the Fifth and was later compelled to testify, their testimony is protected. It cannot be used as evidence in state court, even indirectly (e.g., as a lead to other evidence), under the doctrine of derivative use immunity.Hearsay Rules:
Even if testimony is publicly available, it still has to conform to state hearsay rules, which might bar its use unless an exception (like prior sworn testimony) applies.
Example:
If Fauci testified voluntarily before Congress without immunity, and a state AG brought charges related to, say, negligent public health conduct, his statements could potentially be used in that state prosecution.
But if he was compelled to testify under a Congressional immunity order, then those statements could not be used in any state criminal proceedings.
Could Fauci be pursued civilly in a court action
Situations Where Civil Suits Against Fauci Could Proceed
Personal Conduct Outside Official Duties:
If a plaintiff alleges that Fauci engaged in acts outside the scope of his official federal duties, he may not be shielded by immunity (e.g., defamatory statements made personally, not as a government official).Violation of Clearly Established Constitutional Rights:
Under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971), federal officials can be sued personally for constitutional violations (like First or Fourth Amendment violations) only in narrow circumstances. Courts have been reluctant to extend Bivens, but it's possible.State Tort Claims (if not preempted):
If Fauci engaged in conduct resulting in harm—such as medical negligence or misrepresentation—and it can be shown that it wasn’t covered by federal duties, a state tort claim (e.g., wrongful death, fraud) might be pursued.
❌ Barriers That May Protect Fauci from Civil Liability
Absolute and Qualified Immunity:
Absolute immunity protects federal officials for legislative or judicial functions.
Qualified immunity shields them from civil liability unless they violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. This is a high bar to overcome and would likely apply to most of Fauci’s official conduct at NIAID or as Chief Medical Advisor.
Federal Employees’ Liability Reform and Tort Claims Act (FTCA):
Under the FTCA, if a federal employee is sued for actions within their official capacity, the U.S. government may substitute itself as the defendant, and the case proceeds (if at all) against the federal government—not the individual.
Plaintiffs must first exhaust administrative remedies with the agency before filing a civil FTCA suit.
Preemption and Sovereign Immunity:
Any claims that conflict with federal authority or policy may be preempted.
The U.S. government has sovereign immunity, meaning it can only be sued under conditions it consents to (like under the FTCA).
Notable Precedents
Lawsuits have been filed against Fauci and other officials during COVID-19, but most have been dismissed on immunity or jurisdictional grounds.
A few suits continue in lower courts challenging mandates or alleged suppression of speech, and some name Fauci, but courts have thus far upheld immunity protections in most cases.