28 U.S.C. § 595

Congressional oversight

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a)Oversight of Conduct of Independent Counsel.—(1)Congressional oversight.—The appropriate committees of the Congress shall have oversight jurisdiction with respect to the official conduct of any independent counsel appointed under this chapter, and such independent counsel shall have the duty to cooperate with the exercise of such oversight jurisdiction.(2)Reports to congress.—An independent counsel appointed under this chapter shall submit to the Congress annually a report on the activities of the independent counsel, including a description of the progress of any investigation or prosecution conducted by the independent counsel. Such report may omit any matter that in the judgment of the independent counsel should be kept confidential, but shall provide information adequate to justify the expenditures that the office of the independent counsel has made.(b)Oversight of Conduct of Attorney General.—Within 15 days after receiving an inquiry about a particular case under this chapter, which is a matter of public knowledge, from a committee of the Congress with jurisdiction over this chapter, the Attorney General shall provide the following information to that committee with respect to that case:(1) When the information about the case was received.(2) Whether a preliminary investigation is being conducted, and if so, the date it began.(3) Whether an application for the appointment of an independent counsel or a notification that further investigation is not warranted has been filed with the division of the court, and if so, the date of such filing.(c)Information Relating to Impeachment.—An independent counsel shall advise the House of Representatives of any substantial and credible information which such independent counsel receives, in carrying out the independent counsel’s responsibilities under this chapter, that may constitute grounds for an impeachment. Nothing in this chapter or section 49 of this title shall prevent the Congress or either House thereof from obtaining information in the course of an impeachment proceeding.(Added Pub. L. 95–521, title VI, § 601(a), Oct. 26, 1978, 92 Stat. 1871; amended Pub. L. 97–409, § 2(a)(1), Jan. 3, 1983, 96 Stat. 2139; Pub. L. 100–191, § 2, Dec. 15, 1987, 101 Stat. 1304; Pub. L. 103–270, § 3(g), June 30, 1994, 108 Stat. 734.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1994—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 103–270 substituted “annually a report on the activities of the independent counsel, including a description of the progress of any investigation or prosecution conducted by the independent counsel. Such report may omit any matter that in the judgment of the independent counsel should be kept confidential, but shall provide information adequate to justify the expenditures that the office of the independent counsel has made” for “such statements or reports on the activities of such independent counsel as the independent counsel considers appropriate”.

1987—Pub. L. 100–191 amended section generally, substituting subsecs. (a) to (c) relating to congressional oversight for former subsecs. (a) to (e) relating to reporting and congressional oversight.

1983—Pub. L. 97–409, § 2(a)(1), substituted “independent counsel” for “special prosecutor” and “independent counsel’s” for “special prosecutor’s” wherever appearing.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1994 Amendment; Transition Provisions

Amendment by Pub. L. 103–270 applicable with respect to independent counsels appointed before, on, or after June 30, 1994, with transition provision relating to reporting requirements established or modified by Pub. L. 103–270, see section 7(a), (g) of Pub. L. 103–270, set out as a note under section 591 of this title.

Effective Date of 1987 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–191 effective Dec. 15, 1987, and applicable to proceedings initiated and independent counsels appointed on and after Dec. 15, 1987, see section 6 of Pub. L. 100–191, set out as a note under section 591 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 23 cases, 1984–2020 · leading case: In Re Oliver L. North (Omnibus Order)

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In Re Oliver L. North (Omnibus Order) (1994) cadc · cites it 7× “First, they assert their rights under 28 U.S.C. § 595 (b)(3) (1982) (recodified at 28 U.”

Morrison v. Olson (1988) scotus · cites it 2× “See also 28 U. S. C. § 595 (c) (1982 ed., Supp. V) (independent counsel must report to the House of Representatives information "that may constitute grounds for an impeachment").”

Martha Nathan v. William French Smith, U.S. Attorney General. Martha Nathan v. William French Smith, U.S. Attorney Gener (1984) cadc · cites it 5× “The bills’ supporters, however, believed that “if [the Attorney General] does not respond to a situation that appears to be appropriate,” members of the House Judiciary Committee can request a special prosecutor under 28 U.”

In Re Bruce R. Lindsey (Grand Jury Testimony) (1998) cadc · cites it 2× “” 28 U.S.C. § 595 (c) (1994). In November 1997, a Congressman introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives calling for an inquiry into possible grounds for impeachment of the President.”

In Re Sealed Case (Three Cases) (1988) cadc · cites it 2× “28 U.S.C. § 595 (e) reads: A majority of majority party members or a majority of all nonmajority party members of the Committee on the Judiciary of either House of the Congress may request in writing that the Attorney General apply for the appointment of [an] independent counsel.”

John F. Banzhaf, III v. William French Smith, Individually and as United States Attorney General (1984) cadc · cites it 2× “28 U.S.C. § 595 (e). And “[n]ot later than thirty days after the receipt of such a request, or not later than fifteen days after the completion of a preliminary investigation of the matter with respect to which the request is made, whichever is later, the Attorney General shall…”

Michael K. Deaver v. Whitney North Seymour, Jr., as Independent Counsel (1987) cadc “On April 23, 1986, five members of the United States Senate wrote to the Attorney General and, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 595 (e) (1982), 1 requested the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate Deaver’s lobbying activities.”

In Re Henk Visser (1992) cadc · cites it 4× “28 U.S.C. § 595 (c). Subsequent allegations as to a “Federal True Bill [that] had only State misdemeanors” are incomprehensible as is Visser’s effort to combine a 1974 demurrer to a misdemeanor complaint in Municipal Court in Los Angeles, State v.”

In re: App. Cmte. of the Judiciary (2020) cadc “Rather, a member of the executive branch, the Independent Counsel, disclosed the materials to Congress pursuant to the Ethics in Government Act, 28 U.S.C. § 595 (c), after receiving Rule 6(e) authorization from the Special Division of this court.”

In Re Sealed Case (1987) cadc “at 7272; with 28 U.S.C. §§ 595 and 597, respectively. 14 .”

Jones v. Clinton (1999) ared “8 On September 9, 1998, the Independent Counsel, having concluded there was substantial and credible information that the President committed acts that may constitute grounds for impeachment, submitted his findings from his investigation of the Lewinsky matter to the United…”

North v. Walsh (1987) dcd “28 U.S.C. § 595 (b). The independent counsel may be removed only for cause by the Attorney General, who must then report to the appointing court and to Congress the specific reasons for the removal.”

Show all 23 citing cases →

— 28 U.S.C. § 595(b)(2) — 1 case

Response to Congressional Requests for Information Regarding Decisions Made Under the Independent Counsel Act (1986) olc

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.