The House of Representatives voted to hold Mark Meadows, the former White House chief of staff, in contempt of Congress after new text messages uncovered by the special committee investigation on the January 6 Capital Riot. The text messages reportedly show Meadows ignoring GOP allies who begged him to tell former President Trump to end the riot.

By voting on holding Meadows in contempt of Congress, the House of Representatives finds that he intentionally interfered with Congressional action by refusing to testify before the special committee investigating the January 6 Riots. He had provided thousands of pages of documents but refused, under subpoena, to talk about them.

The ability for the legislative branch to hold an executive branch official in contempt of Congress is not explicitly stated in the Constitution but is implied, as it allows Congress to carry out its duties. This principle was defined in Marshall v. Gordon (1917). The power can only be used over topics that Congress has legislative power. It cannot, for example, subpoena or summon an individual over allegations of personal or private affairs.

When the legislative branch votes on contempt of Congress, it is not charging an individual; it is a statement that an individual deserves to be charged by the justice system for criminal contempt. However, the Justice Department can decline to prosecute, especially if the individual is an official in a current presidential administration.

Congress does have the ability to go a step above holding an individual in contempt of Congress by holding them in “inherent contempt” which orders the chamber’s sergeant-at-arms to arrest the witness refusing to cooperate. This measure hasn’t been used since the early 1930s.

Meadows is the former White House chief of staff and has a reputation around Washington as the congressional disrupter and a conservative firebrand. He was one of the founding members of the House Freedom Caucus, which took every chance to oppose former President Barack Obama and helped shut down the Congress in an effort to defund the Affordable Care Act.

Meadows claims he does not have to testify or sit for disposition because former President Donald Trump has claimed executive privilege. Executive privilege allows the President to keep certain communication confidential from the court system. This privilege is not laid out in the Constitution, but it comes from the separation of powers doctrine.

The court case of United States v. Nixon, however, established that a President must provide communication that is relevant to a criminal court case.

The special committee responsible for the investigation into the January 6 Riot faces pressure to finish before the midterm elections, which have the potential to shift power in the House. Steve Bannon, a former adviser to Trump, was also held in contempt of Congress earlier this year. Bannon refused to produce documents and appear for testimony.