❓WHAT HAPPENED: Former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary Clinton, have both refused to comply with a congressional subpoena compelling their testimony before the House Oversight Committee’s inquiry into the activities of deceased pedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.

👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, attorneys for the Clintons, the House Oversight Committee, Chairman James Comer (R-KY), Congressman Tim Burchett (R-TN), deceased pedophile and financier Jeffrey Epstein, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Supreme Court.

📍WHEN & WHERE: The Clintons were scheduled to testify on Tuesday and Wednesday.

💬KEY QUOTE: “I hope there might be some charges over at [the Department of Justice].” — Rep. Tim Burchett

🎯IMPACT: The rejection of the congressional subpoena is likely to be the subject of a DOJ criminal referral and extensive litigation regarding the Supreme Court’s decisions in Watkins v. United States and Trump v. United States.

Former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary Clinton, have both refused to comply with a congressional subpoena compelling their testimony before the House Oversight Committee’s inquiry into the activities of deceased pedophile and financier Jeffrey Epstein. The testimony was slated for Tuesday and Wednesday; however, an attorney representing the Clintons stated that neither would appear before the House panel and argued that the congressional subpoena is “legally unenforceable.”

The refusal to testify and rejection of the congressional subpoena could set up a contempt of Congress showdown between House Republicans and the Clintons, with a possible criminal referral to the Department of Justice (DOJ). “President and Secretary Clinton have already provided the limited information they possess about Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell to the Committee,” the Clinton attorneys’ letter to Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) reads. “They did so proactively and voluntarily, and despite the fact that the Subpoenas are invalid and legally unenforceable, untethered to a valid legislative purpose, unwarranted because they do not seek pertinent information, and an unprecedented infringement on the separation of powers.”

“Your continued insistence that the former President and Secretary of State can be compelled to appear before the Committee under these circumstances, however, brings us toward a protracted and unnecessary legal confrontation that distracts from the principal work of the Congress with respect to this matter, which, if conducted sincerely, could help ensure the victims of Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell are afforded some measure of justice for the crimes perpetrated against them, however late,” the letter adds.

The Clintons’ attorney cites the Supreme Court‘s Watkins decision, which states, “These are functions of the executive and judicial departments of government. No inquiry is an end in itself; it must be related to, and in furtherance of, a legitimate task of the Congress.” The attorneys contend that the House inquiry is not related to legislative business and, therefore, the subpoenas are unenforceable.

However, not all members of the House Oversight Committee agree with the legal analysis provided by the attorneys for the Clintons. Congressman Tim Burchett (R-TN) stated, “I hope there might be some charges over at [DOJ].”

Further, the Supreme Court has been clear that former presidents do not enjoy blanket immunity for their actions, and the Watkins decision on its face appears intended to apply to Congressional subpoenas involving current and not former members of the executive and judicial branches, suggesting the argument of the attorneys for Bill and Hillary Clinton—neither of whom currently holds office—is a stretch at best.

Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.