{"id":15200,"date":"2024-02-07T01:46:17","date_gmt":"2024-02-07T01:46:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/2024\/02\/07\/house-judiciary-committee-sues-fbi-agent-for-defying-subpoena-in-government-big-tech-collusion-probe\/"},"modified":"2024-02-07T01:46:17","modified_gmt":"2024-02-07T01:46:17","slug":"house-judiciary-committee-sues-fbi-agent-for-defying-subpoena-in-government-big-tech-collusion-probe","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/2024\/02\/07\/house-judiciary-committee-sues-fbi-agent-for-defying-subpoena-in-government-big-tech-collusion-probe\/","title":{"rendered":"House Judiciary Committee sues FBI agent for defying subpoena in government, Big Tech collusion probe"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

The House Judiciary Committee is suing FBI agent Elvis Chan for defying a congressional\u00a0subpoena for his deposition related to the federal government\u2019s alleged collusion with social media companies to censor speech, Fox News Digital has learned.<\/p>\n

Chan, according to the committee, led by Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, served \u2018as the primary liaison\u2019 between the FBI\u2019s Foreign Influence Task Force and social media companies.<\/p>\n

The committee first subpoenaed Chan in September 2023, after he refused to voluntarily appear for a transcribed interview in March 2023.<\/p>\n

The deposition, or interview, was requested and later compelled as part of the committee\u2019s investigation into \u2018the extent and nature\u2019 of the FBI\u2019s involvement in alleged censorship of speech online.<\/p>\n

The House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday filed a 46-page lawsuit against Chan \u2018in his official capacity as Assistant Special Agent\u2019 at the FBI.<\/p>\n

\u2018After public reporting revealed that the Executive Branch was coercing and colluding with technology companies and other intermediaries to censor online speech, the Judiciary Committee launched an investigation into how and to what extent agencies like the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) were working to interfere with the marketplace of ideas and suppress the voices of the American people,\u2019 the lawsuit states. \u2018The ultimate purpose of this investigation is to develop legislative reforms, such as new statutory limits on the Executive Branch\u2019s ability to work with social media companies and other entities to restrict the circulation of content online and deplatform users. And to do so, the Committee must first fully understand the nature of the problem.\u2019<\/p>\n

The lawsuit states that the committee \u2018quickly identified Chan as a pivotal figure in its investigation,\u2019 citing publicly available information that indicated Chan \u2018was at the heart of the FBI\u2019s interactions with technology companies, including Facebook and Twitter.\u2019<\/p>\n

\u2018Indeed, Chan described himself as \u2018one of the primary people with pass-through information,\u2019 information the companies used when deciding whether to restrict online content,\u2019 the lawsuit states.<\/p>\n

The lawsuit goes on to explain that Chan defied his subpoena, after the Justice Department \u2018instructed him not to appear\u2019 \u2013 a directive he complied with.<\/p>\n

\u2018By refusing to comply with the Subpoena, Chan is frustrating the Committee\u2019s ability to conduct oversight \u2013 a critical part of the legislative power that the Constitution vests in Congress,\u2019 the lawsuit states.<\/p>\n

The lawsuit explains that DOJ\u2019s reasoning for instructing Chan not to appear was \u2018only because, under House Rules, agency counsel (a lawyer who represents the Executive Branch\u2019s interests, not Chan\u2019s) cannot attend.\u2019<\/p>\n

\u2018DOJ contends that a subpoena compelling testimony about an agency employee\u2019s official duties, without agency counsel present, is unconstitutional and thus unenforceable,\u2019 the lawsuit states.<\/p>\n

The committee is asking that the court declare that Chan\u2019s refusal to appear \u2018lacks legal justification,\u2019 and hopes it issues an injunction ordering him to appear and testify \u2018immediately.\u2019<\/p>\n

The Justice Department and the FBI declined to comment.<\/p>\n

Fox News Digital obtained a letter the DOJ sent to Jordan in October, in which Assistant Attorney General Carlos Uriarte states that the \u2018underlying principles that inform the Department\u2019s position are longstanding across administrations.\u2019<\/p>\n

Uriarte argued that \u2018every other Department employee who has appeared before the Committee during this Congress has appeared with agency counsel.\u2019 He also argued that there was \u2018no need\u2019 for the committee to issue a subpoena, saying Chan \u2018is willing and ready to provide the requested testimony voluntarily\u2014provided, of course, that he may be accompanied by both personal and agency counsel.\u2019<\/p>\n

\u2018A congressional subpoena that purports to compel testimony on matters within the scope of an agency employee\u2019s official duties, including potentially privileged information, without the presence of agency counsel is without legal effect and cannot constitutionally be enforced,\u2019 he wrote, citing a 2019 legal memo from the DOJ\u2019s Office of Legal Counsel.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, when asked Tuesday if the committee would move to hold Chan in contempt of Congress, a source familiar told Fox News Digital: \u2018Everything is on the table.\u2019<\/p>\n

Chan was also referenced in Missouri v. Biden, and appeared for a civil deposition.<\/p>\n

The House Judiciary Committee\u2019s investigation is ongoing.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Last month, the committee subpoenaed Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines for documents as part of its investigation into the Biden administration\u2019s alleged collusion with Big Tech companies and its intermediaries to \u2018censor speech.\u2019<\/p>\n

Jordan said that through its investigation, the committee found that the federal government \u2018has pressured and colluded with Big Tech and other intermediaries to censor certain viewpoints on social media in ways that undermine First Amendment principles.\u2019<\/p>\n

Jordan, last February, as part of the investigation, subpoenaed the CEOs of Google, Amazon, Facebook and others for documents relating to the government\u2019s alleged \u2018collusion\u2019 with\u00a0Big Tech companies\u00a0to \u2018suppress free speech.\u2019<\/p>\n

Also last year, Jordan subpoenaed the Justice Department and the FBI for documents related to the probe.<\/p>\n

The investigation comes after Republicans have sounded the alarm for years on Big Tech censorship and bias against conservatives.<\/p>\n

Separately, the Supreme Court agreed in October to review a court-ordered ban on certain communications between the Biden administration and Big Tech platforms after state attorneys general from Missouri and Louisiana accused high-ranking government officials of working with social media companies \u2018under the guise of combating misinformation.\u2019 They argued this ultimately led to censoring speech on topics that included Hunter Biden\u2019s laptop, COVID-19 origins and the efficacy of face masks<\/p>\n

Fox News\u2019 Brianna Herlihy contributed to this report.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS<\/div>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The House Judiciary Committee is suing FBI agent Elvis Chan for defying a congressional\u00a0subpoena for his deposition related to the federal government\u2019s alleged collusion with social media companies to censor speech, Fox News Digital has learned. Chan, according to the committee, led by Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, served \u2018as the primary liaison\u2019 between the FBI\u2019s <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":15201,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[25],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-15200","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-politics"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15200","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15200"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15200\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/15201"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15200"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15200"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/shareperformanceinsight.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15200"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}