Assuming all the subpoenaed witnesses show up and testify...

[StarfishSaver]

31. Inherent contempt sounds great but is virtually unworkable in practice

Under its Inherent Contempt powers, Congress can try to compel witnesses to appear through two enforcement mechanisms - arrest and monetary fines.

In order to arrest someone, Congress would cite the witness for Contempt of Congress and issue an arrest warrant, ordering the Sergeant-at-Arms to take them into custody and bring them before the Committee or detain them until they agree to appear.

However, the Sergeant-at-Arms' jurisdiction is limited by statute to the Capitol complex and a tight radius around it. The SAA did deputize someone to make an arrest in Ohio nearly 90 years ago and the court upheld the arrest, but that case probably wouldn't be binding today for a couple of reasons. First, that occurred before the SAA jurisdiction was limited by statute and second, and importantly, the defendant in that case challenged the SAA's subject-matter jurisdiction (the right to arrest), but not it's geographical jurisdiction (where that arrest can be done). The distinction is rather complicated but critical - in short, they argued that the House didn't have the power to arrest them at all. The court rejected that argument and said the House did have the power to have them arrested. But they didn't claim - so the court didn't rule on the issue - that the SAA didn't have jurisdiction to arrest them in Ohio, off of Capitol grounds

If the House orders someone arrested, as soon as the warrant is issued, the subject would immediately go to court challenging the inherent contempt authority in general and the arrest in particular and get an injunction preventing the arrest during the pendancy of the litigation. And one of the arguments the defendant would use to prevent the arrest is that the SAA lacks the jurisdiction to arrest them unless they're within a specific perimeter of the Capitol. And since it's unlikely that any of the witnesses would be wandering around the Capitol complex, this alternative is not workable.

The other alternative for enforcement under the Inherent Contempt power is to impose a fine. But, just as an arrest warrant would be challenged, the minute a fine is imposed, the witness would immediately go to court to contest it and the case would end up being litigated for some time.

Bottom line, even if the House tries to use its inherent contempt authority to arrest or fine someone, no one will be arrested any time soon and no fine will be collected in the near future.

As I said, Inherent Contempt sounds good, but it would not have the results many people think it would have. It would really be just a waste of time.