PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 16, 2008
Special Criminal Contempt of Congress Procedures Act of 2008 - Establishes alternate procedures for the prosecution of current or former officers or employees of the executive branch found in contempt of Congress for refusal to testify or produce documents in response to a congressional subpoena.
Establishes a Special Division of the U.S. Supreme Court to hear such criminal contempt cases. Requires the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court to designate three judges or justices, one of whom shall be an active judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, to serve on the Special Division. Requires the Special Division to appoint a special advocate to serve as the prosecuting attorney in criminal contempt cases after the Attorney General declines to present such cases to a grand jury. Grants full power and independent authority to the special advocate to exercise all prosecutorial functions and powers.
Sets forth provisions for the removal of the special advocate and the termination of the special advocate's authority.
Makes this Act effective on January 20, 2009.
People & committees
Rep. Miller, Brad [D-NC-13] · D–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.6508 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.6508 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.6508 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.6508 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.