In addition to identifying multiple ways that “This ‘investigation’ is illegitimate” (like how Smith is violating the Tenth Amendment by usurping states’ power) and an “abuse of authority,” Johnson looked into the two SCOTUS cases Smith invoked to justify his witch hunt. Johnson writes: “Both of these cases involved the notorious House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC)...If ever there was an example of a ‘witch hunt’ in the history of the United States Congress, the HUAC investigations best fit the bill. For that reason, it is more than a little disconcerting that [Smith] think[s] those cases’ fact patterns so closely resemble your own investigation.”
But it gets even worse than merely mimicking McCarthy, as Smith has done, because “Rather than supporting the legal grounds of [Smith’s] investigation, the Watkins decision is actually an indictment against it.” So, she writes, “based on the legal authorities [Smith himself has] cited, this ‘investigation’ violates the Constitution.” This means that Smith is not only aware that he’s following in McCarthy’s footsteps, but also that he can’t even be factually accurate in doing so.
As per the Watkins ruling, the only way Smith’s investigation would be legitimate would be if Congress were considering legislation relevant to the issue, the most plausible of which Johnson says would be “altering Federal fraud and RICO Act statutes to inappropriately help Big Oil avoid potential liability.” But even then Smith wouldn’t have jurisdiction, because “such a bill would not come anywhere near the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology.”
Ironically, under the guise of protecting ExxonMobil’s constitutional right to free speech, Smith is himself acting unconstitutionally. And in doing so, he is infringing on the constitutional right of NGOs to petition their government to enforce their laws (in this case by investigating potential fraud.) That’s two unconstitutionals in one! What a deal!
Finally, Johnson points out the irony of Smith’s accusation that the #ExxonKnew investigations might be “having a chilling effect on the free flow of scientific inquiry and debate regarding climate change.” But of course, if anyone is guilty of such a “chilling” it would be Smith, who spent months attacking NOAA over a study that debunked the denier-favorite “pause.” And what of that witch hunt? “In the end, [Smith’s] investigation, like so many recent Science Committee investigations, found nothing.”
Which is why she describes the Committee as becoming “more like a Committee on Harassment. The Committee’s prolific, aimless and jurisdictionally questionable oversight activities have grown increasingly mean-spirited and meaningless.”
Harsh words from Johnson, but fair given that Smith is acting as though he’s Chair of the House Un-Scientific Activities Committee. May we suggest a catchy new jingle for Mr. McCarthy 2.0? Double the unconstitutionality, double the irony, in the statements from the Committee of Harassment for Fun.
Top Climate and Clean Energy Stories:
ExxonMobil: New Disclosures Show Oil Giant Still Funding Climate Science Denial Groups | It is impossible to reconcile EM’s stated support for a revenue-neutral carbon tax with the lobbying activities of EM and the trade associations that claim to represent EM on the Hill.
How a single word sparked a four-year saga of climate fact-checking and blog backlash | attacking a researcher at one of Australia’s leading universities as a “bimbo” and a “brain-dead retard” doesn’t do much to encourage professional climate scientists to engage with the scores of online amateur
We just broke the record for hottest year, 9 straight times | Earth’s record hottest 12 consecutive months were set in each month ending in September 2015 through May 2016
'Shocking images' reveal death of 10,000 hectares of mangroves across Northern Australia - International mangroves expert Dr Norm Duke said he had no doubt the "dieback" was related to climate change.