Key and likely to satisfy DOJ: "Boasberg ruled that while Pence does have some limited protections because of [Speech or Debate], the immunity does not prevent him from testifying about conversations related to alleged 'illegality' on Trump’s part." nbcnews.com/politics/donal…
2. Looks like very narrow carveout: "The judge said ... that Pence can still decline to answer questions related to HIS ACTIONS on January 6 itself, when he was serving as president of the Senate." (my emphasis added) cnn.com/2023/03/28/pol….
3. NYTimes report is along the same lines: "Judge Boasberg also said that Mr. Pence would have to testify to the grand jury about any potentially illegal acts committed by Mr. Trump, the person familiar with the matter said." That may be the ballgame. nytimes.com/2023/03/28/us/…
@rgoodlaw “May decline to answer questions” re time he was presiding on 1/6– does that include why he wouldn’t get in the car?? Doesn’t sound like spreech and debate clause subject matter to me
@rgoodlaw I hope we get testimony from Dan Quayle and judge Luttig.
@rgoodlaw A Pence attorney would emphasize different words I imagine: "Pence can still decline to answer questions RELATED TO his actions on January 6 itself..." Hard to know what to make of it without seeing the actual ruling.
@rgoodlaw Does it mean Pence can plead the Fifth?
@rgoodlaw The President of the Senate is not a "Senator" as defined by the Constitution. How is it he retains protections of the S&D Clause, which is specifically reserved for "Senators and Representatives?"