Fauci Invokes Fifth Amendment, Refuses to Answer Senate on COVID Origins

Dr. Anthony Fauci took the Fifth Amendment before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday, declining to respond to any substantive questions at a hearing examining the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic.

"Under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution to refrain from answering your questions," Fauci, 85, said in his opening statement. He is the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, a post he held for 38 years.

Fauci acknowledged having testified before or briefed congressional panels more than 200 times over the course of his career, describing his refusal this time as difficult. He nonetheless maintained that the committee's Republican chairman, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, was pursuing a single objective: constructing a perjury case against him.

"The only conclusion I can reach is that the sole reason he is calling me before this committee is to get me to say something — anything — that could vindicate his repeated public pledges that I end up, in his words, 'behind bars,'" Fauci said.

In the days leading up to the hearing, Paul made public more than a thousand pages drawn from Fauci's private pandemic-era diary. GOP committee members argued that journal entries showed Fauci had quietly entertained the possibility that COVID-19 originated in a laboratory even as he downplayed that scenario publicly. As reported, the diary entries reflect an early openness to both a natural-origin and a lab-leak explanation before Fauci grew more convinced by evidence pointing to natural origins.

Paul questioned Fauci about diary passages referencing a February 2020 conference call during which scientists had not settled on how the virus emerged. He also raised whether Fauci had been aware of a March 2020 White House plan for reopening sent to governors — a matter Sen. Ron Johnson said was contradicted by Fauci's own journal.

Fauci refused to address any of those questions. Sen. Josh Hawley accused Fauci of showing "contempt" for Congress, and Johnson said he planned to pursue a subpoena to force Fauci to testify.

Paul announced that the committee would hold a vote the following week on a contempt-of-Congress resolution targeting Fauci.

A clash erupted during Paul's line of questioning when one of Fauci's lawyers, David Schertler, who was seated next to his client, repeatedly attempted to cut in. Paul told the attorney he had not been recognized and warned that continued interruptions would lead to his removal from the room. After Schertler persisted, Paul summoned Capitol Police, who then escorted the attorney out of the hearing room. Following the removal, Paul dryly noted in a post on X that "Dr. Fauci will still have the advice of the other half a dozen attorneys" remaining at the table.

Paul also said in a post on X that Fauci was obstructing a congressional investigation, warning of consequences after Fauci's repeated invocations of the Fifth Amendment.

Democratic committee members defended Fauci's constitutional right to invoke the Fifth Amendment, which shields any individual from being compelled to give self-incriminating testimony. Ranking member Sen. Gary Peters of Michigan characterized the hearing as unproductive and argued that making an example of Fauci could deter future public health officials from cooperating with Congress. A number of Democratic senators devoted their allotted time to expressing gratitude for Fauci's career of public service.

Reaction on X centered largely on the dramatic nature of Fauci's refusal to testify and the removal of his attorney, with many users noting it was among the more striking confrontations in recent congressional oversight history.

Legal analysts noted that a presidential pardon issued during the Biden administration would not shield Fauci from any new offenses committed after that pardon was granted.

The World Health Organization stated in 2025 that the natural-origins theory remained the best-supported explanation based on available evidence, while acknowledging that the question of COVID-19's origin remains "inconclusive" pending additional information.