Sen. Rand Paul has referred Dr. Anthony Fauci to the Justice Department for contempt, renewed fierce criticism over pandemic-era funding choices, and is moving a committee contempt vote toward a legal referral while other Republicans press for accountability.
Sen. Rand Paul on Thursday said he has formally referred Dr. Anthony Fauci to the Department of Justice for contempt after a tense, nearly three-hour Senate hearing. Paul blamed Fauci for promoting government overreach during the COVID-19 pandemic and for decisions that, in his view, put Americans at risk. The senator tied his contempt move to a pattern of judgment calls he finds deeply troubling.
Paul focused on Fauci’s role in funding research that he says looks like gain-of-function work, pointing to private notes and public actions that, to Paul, don’t line up. He pressed the point that if Fauci suspected risky work, funding it was poor judgment and potentially dangerous. That criticism is at the heart of the contempt push and the legal materials Paul says he will deliver to DOJ.
“The question is this: should we be paying for the taxpayer to take animal viruses and purposely mutate them to become human viruses? He knew it was going on,” Paul said. “In January of 2020, his private notes say, ‘We’re suspicious of the Chinese because we know they do gain-of-function research.’ But if he was suspicious, why did he fund them? It’s a terrible judgment to fund a group of people that you now are saying are doing dangerous research that could have led to this pandemic.”
When asked about the expected contempt vote next week, Paul said he didn’t think “there is an exact thing that has to happen” and that “In the past, often contempt messages go from committee to the floor, but I don’t think there’s any rule that says it has to.” He made clear he plans to press forward even if the path is unconventional. Paul said he will send the committee’s product to DOJ along with a legal brief supporting the arguments.
I think it’s less likely to pass on the floor. I think we can pass it out of committee. And from there, I plan on sending it directly with a legal brief supporting the arguments to the Department of Justice. This is similar to in the past. I’ve sent these individually. I’ve sent a criminal referral on Anthony Fauci twice under Biden and twice under Trump. Now I’ll be sending the committee’s product. That’s probably what happens. I can’t guarantee that we’re going to win the vote, but I’m pretty certain we can win the vote next week.
Fauci’s courtroom strategy at the hearing added fuel to Republican concerns when he invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times and declined to answer questions. That refusal to testify left lawmakers frustrated and convinced many GOP senators that contempt is the appropriate next step. Paul told Fauci during the hearing, “It’s against the law to obstruct an investigation of Congress. There will be repercussions to your refusal to testify today.”
Other Republican senators backed the push for consequences and used pointed language that reflects the sharp political stakes. Sen. Rick Scott said, “You forced people to watch their loved ones die alone over the phone. It’s disgusting.” Sen. Ted Cruz argued Fauci “should be held in contempt, he should be prosecuted for perjury, and he should go to jail.” Sen. Josh Hawley added he looks forward to voting yes on the contempt measure.
https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/2082822763585151165
The clash over Fauci is broader than personality or politics; Republicans frame it as a question of accountability for public health decisions that affected millions. Paul and allies are assembling a legal and political case that aims to make a clear record for DOJ and for voters. The next steps are procedural but serious: a committee vote, a potential floor consideration, and a formal referral that could trigger a criminal review.
For GOP lawmakers, the moment is about more than one hearing. It’s about restoring trust, asking why certain research was funded, and testing whether senior officials can be held to the same standards as everyone else. Paul’s contempt referral is both a legal move and a political signal that Republicans intend to keep these questions in the spotlight.
