The Volokh Conspiracy

As she should have done immediately after deciding that she wouldn't testify.

I have no problem and fully support the right of private citizens to invoke their 5th Amendment rights. If Ms. Goodling wants to invoke her constitutional rights, then Congress and the courts should protect those rights.

I do, however, have an enormous problem with somebody responsible for law enforcement throughout the United States even giving the impression that there was something about her conduct that was illegal. As a private citizen, she's innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. As an aide to the United States' chief law enforcement officer (and I read Eugene's comment that he hates that term :-), she should hold herself to the highest standard of conduct. In other words, once she decided to cast a cloud over herself and her actions, she should have been relieved of her duties immediately.

(For whatever it's worth, I don't disagree that a police officer suspected of wrongly killing a suspect in the line of duty should have every right to take the 5th. That doesn't mean, however, that he should remain on active patrol duty during the investigation that follows, or that he should keep his job even if a jury finds him not guilty.)

Is it correct that government ethics rules prevent a federal employee such as Goodling from accepting help from a private legal defense fund, and a resignation removes that barrier? I seem to remember something about that in the context of Scooter Libby.

Unless John Dowd and entourage are working pro bono, the fees from Akin Gump must be getting steep already.

The gross incompetence displayed by fellow Republicans is becoming somewhat irritating.

Randy R, that is hilarious!