Oversight maps
Public guide and fictional examples. Use authorized systems for confidential material.
Oversight
Explore who has authority, or start with a question and walk through an investigation. Open a connector to see the decision that permits the next step.
- Why this connection?Explore the structure
- Why this connection?Walk through an investigation
- Why this connection?Lessons and failure points
Sources and working documents
Oversight → Authority map
Start with a legislative purpose and identify the chamber, committee and official with authority.
Oversight → Investigation map
Start with an answerable question. Establish what the records support before assigning a role to anyone.
Oversight → January 6 lessons and failure points
Use historical records to identify specific failure points and test proposed safeguards.
Oversight → House
Identify the legislative purpose, committee with jurisdiction and authority under House rules before a formal inquiry.
Oversight → Senate
Identify the legislative purpose, committee with jurisdiction and authority under Senate rules before a formal inquiry.
Authorized decisions
The evidence can support a legislative response, a separately authorized state referral, both, or neither.
- What is ready?
- A reviewer has checked what the evidence establishes, what is disputed and what remains unknown. Counsel checks each proposed use and disclosure.
- Who decides?
- The official or body with authority under the applicable chamber and committee rules approves congressional action. A receiving state office exercises its own authority.
- When to stop
- Record the evidence gap, jurisdiction problem or disclosure restriction. Narrow the finding, keep investigating within authority, or close the matter as appropriate.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Authorized decisions → Congressional action
The authorized committee approves an action within its jurisdiction using findings the record can support.
Authorized decisions → Coordination and referral
Proceed on a separate state-law basis after verifying the recipient, screening each item and obtaining disclosure approval. State review is optional.
Congressional action
Congress can act on a supported legislative finding without waiting for federal prosecution or a state referral.
- Options
- Consider an authorized hearing, report, audit request, legislative proposal or appropriations follow-up. Use the applicable chamber and committee process.
- Public findings
- Clear the facts, scope and permitted disclosures before release. Label unresolved questions and preserve contrary evidence and corrections.
- Follow-up
- Name the owner and review date. Track the legislative response separately from a referral, an investigation, any charges and a disposition.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Congressional action → Evidence and legal review
Reopen evidence review if new records, contradictions or corrections change what the finding supports.
Authority map
Find who can act, what they can request, and what must be approved before evidence moves.
- Rules snapshot
- 119th Congress, checked November 7, 2026. The map features selected committees and subcommittees. Confirm the current chamber rules, committee rules and any authorizing orders before using them, especially when a new Congress organizes.
- What this map does
- It links to official authority and model work documents. A role or a link does not confer investigative power.
Next choices
Authority map → House
Start with House Rule X and the specific committee’s jurisdiction, then check Rule XI and the committee’s procedures.
Authority map → Senate
Start with Senate Rule XXV jurisdiction and Rule XXVI procedure, then check the committee’s rules.
Authority map → Evidence and legal review
The originating office must document its lawful source and any restrictions before sharing evidence with an authorized review team.
Authority map → Coordination and referral
Counsel may verify a possible state-law nexus and approved points of contact before any transfer of evidence.
Authority map → Congressional action
A committee can use its authorized legislative tools based on reviewed findings, within its jurisdiction and applicable rules.
Authority map → Authorized decisions
Use the reviewed record to identify which authorized outcomes are available.
House
Choose a committee by the legislative question and the program involved.
- Starting rule
- House Rule X assigns jurisdiction. Rule XI sets baseline procedure for hearings, subpoenas and executive-session material.
- Overlapping work
- Identify the committee with a legislative purpose and document coordination with other committees. Each committee acts under its own authorization.
- Disclosure
- House Rule XI, clause 2(k)(7), governs release or public use of evidence taken in executive session. Committee authorization for covered material is separate from authority to request it.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Financial Services
- Why this connection?Judiciary
- Why this connection?Oversight and Government Reform
- Why this connection?Evidence and legal review
Sources and working documents
House → Financial Services
Match the inquiry to financial institutions, securities or another subject within House Financial Services jurisdiction.
House → Judiciary
Match the question to federal law, court administration, civil liberties or another Judiciary subject.
House → Oversight and Government Reform
Check Rule X’s government management and special oversight jurisdiction and identify any committee with overlapping authority.
House → Evidence and legal review
House custody and disclosure restrictions travel with the evidence. A hearing or request approval does not by itself authorize transfer.
Senate
Choose a committee by its Senate jurisdiction and procedural rules.
- Starting rule
- Senate Rule XXV assigns standing committee jurisdiction. Rule XXVI permits investigations and procedural tools within that jurisdiction. Each committee publishes its own rules.
- Overlapping work
- Identify which office may make requests, who may authorize a subpoena and who controls disclosure. House and Senate approvals remain separate.
- Disclosure
- An office considering outside disclosure must check Senate and committee confidentiality rules and any restrictions attached to the evidence.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Judiciary
- Why this connection?Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
- Why this connection?Evidence and legal review
Sources and working documents
Senate → Judiciary
Match the legislative question to the administration of justice, constitutional rights or another Judiciary subject.
Senate → Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Match the legislative question to government operations or another topic within HSGAC’s authority.
Senate → Evidence and legal review
Senate committee confidentiality, record ownership and required approvals govern what the originating office can share.
Financial Services
Banking, markets, and federal financial oversight.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Subcommittees
- Why this connection?Jurisdiction
- Why this connection?Records and hearings
- Why this connection?Who must approve?
- Why this connection?Limits
- Why this connection?Fictional example
- Why this connection?Working documents
Sources and working documents
Financial Services → Subcommittees
Open selected subcommittee assignments and confirm any referral or delegation under the committee’s rules.
Financial Services → Jurisdiction
Match the legislative question to the chamber rule and any assigned subcommittee subject.
Financial Services → Records and hearings
Document the purpose, scope and requested record holder before choosing a request or hearing.
Financial Services → Who must approve?
Identify the specific decision-maker, notice, consultation or vote required before the step.
Financial Services → Limits
Review legal limits and custody before collection, publication or transfer.
Fictional training example
Financial Services → Fictional example
Walk through a fictional inquiry that tests the scope and evidence.
Financial Services → Working documents
Use model work documents to record the rule, approvals, scope and evidence review.
Subcommittees
Selected assignments for this committee. The official directory lists the complete roster.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Financial Institutions
- Why this connection?Capital Markets
- Why this connection?Oversight and Investigations
Sources and working documents
Subcommittees → Financial Institutions
A banking-supervision question fits only to the extent covered by the assigned Rule 5 subjects.
Subcommittees → Capital Markets
A trading question belongs here only when tied to securities law, market structure or other assigned jurisdiction.
Subcommittees → Oversight and Investigations
An overlapping inquiry still needs a legislative purpose within the parent committee’s jurisdiction.
Financial Institutions
The official directory identifies this subcommittee. Rule 5 assigns oversight and legislative work on specified deposit-taking institutions and related regulators.
- Authority check
- A banking-supervision question fits only to the extent covered by the assigned Rule 5 subjects.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Financial Institutions → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Financial Institutions → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Capital Markets
Rule 5 assigns securities, market infrastructure and oversight of specified regulators including the SEC.
- Authority check
- A trading question belongs here only when tied to securities law, market structure or other assigned jurisdiction.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Capital Markets → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Capital Markets → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Oversight and Investigations
Rule 5 assigns oversight across Financial Services jurisdiction.
- Authority check
- An overlapping inquiry still needs a legislative purpose within the parent committee’s jurisdiction.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Oversight and Investigations → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Oversight and Investigations → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Jurisdiction
House Rule X, clause 1(h), covers banks and banking, money and credit, securities, insurance generally and specified housing and international financial subjects. Identify the federal law, regulator or program the proposed inquiry would evaluate.
Sources and working documents
Records and hearings
Start with public records and appropriately scoped voluntary requests. Rule XI hearings and subpoenas support a legislative inquiry. Before considering protected customer records, show why public or agency records cannot answer the question.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Records and hearings → Who must approve?
Use the committee’s approval procedure before a compulsory request or other step requiring authorization.
Fictional training example
Records and hearings → Fictional example
Follow a fictional question from lawful records to a preliminary finding.
Who must approve?
Committee Rule 3(e), as amended by Barr #1A, delegates authorization and issuance to the committee chair. The rule calls for written notice to the ranking minority member with the proposed subpoena at least 48 hours in advance, with an exigency exception.
- Disclosure is a separate decision
- Confirm with counsel which actor must authorize release of this particular record and record any limits. Do this before sharing outside the authorized team.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Who must approve? → Evidence and legal review
Check the source record, access permissions and disclosure decision before moving into evidence review.
Limits
Define the legislative purpose and minimize unnecessary sensitive data. Counsel should review protections for financial records and any separation-of-powers issues. Committee Rule 4(d) distinguishes reports approved by the committee from other study reports.
Sources and working documents
Fictional training example
Fictional example
A fictional payment platform’s audit shows recurring gaps in a federal reporting program. Start with the regulator’s aggregate reports and voluntary requests for the platform’s data definitions. A bank’s role as custodian does not establish misconduct.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Fictional training example
Fictional example → Evidence and legal review
Document which parts of the example are established and identify remaining gaps before proposing any action.
Working documents
Use these existing public models as starting points for the authorized committee team.
Sources and working documents
Judiciary
Federal law, courts, civil liberties, and administration of justice.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Subcommittees
- Why this connection?Jurisdiction
- Why this connection?Records and hearings
- Why this connection?Who must approve?
- Why this connection?Limits
- Why this connection?Fictional example
- Why this connection?Working documents
Sources and working documents
Judiciary → Subcommittees
Open selected subcommittee assignments and confirm any referral or delegation under the committee’s rules.
Judiciary → Jurisdiction
Match the legislative question to the chamber rule and any assigned subcommittee subject.
Judiciary → Records and hearings
Document the purpose, scope and requested record holder before choosing a request or hearing.
Judiciary → Who must approve?
Identify the specific decision-maker, notice, consultation or vote required before the step.
Judiciary → Limits
Review legal limits and custody before collection, publication or transfer.
Fictional training example
Judiciary → Fictional example
Walk through a fictional inquiry that tests the scope and evidence.
Judiciary → Working documents
Use model work documents to record the rule, approvals, scope and evidence review.
Subcommittees
Selected assignments for this committee. The official directory lists the complete roster.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Crime and Federal Government Surveillance
- Why this connection?Judiciary Oversight
Sources and working documents
Subcommittees → Crime and Federal Government Surveillance
For an inquiry about clemency administration, identify the legislative issue and the appropriate source of process records.
Subcommittees → Judiciary Oversight
Start with the assigned component and statutory responsibility. Coordinate with other committees where jurisdiction overlaps.
Crime and Federal Government Surveillance
Committee Rule VI assigns federal criminal law, sentencing, parole and pardons, and other criminal enforcement subjects.
- Authority check
- For an inquiry about clemency administration, identify the legislative issue and the appropriate source of process records.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Crime and Federal Government Surveillance → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Crime and Federal Government Surveillance → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Judiciary Oversight
Committee Rule VI assigns oversight of departments, agencies and components within the parent committee’s jurisdiction.
- Authority check
- Start with the assigned component and statutory responsibility. Coordinate with other committees where jurisdiction overlaps.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Judiciary Oversight → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Judiciary Oversight → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Jurisdiction
House Rule X, clause 1(l), covers federal courts, civil liberties, the federal criminal code and other specified subjects. Use Committee Rule VI to distinguish the relevant subcommittee’s assignment from that of the full committee.
Sources and working documents
Records and hearings
The committee can pursue voluntary requests and authorized hearings. Committee Rule IV governs compulsory requests and requires the inquiry to fit the committee’s jurisdiction.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Records and hearings → Who must approve?
Use the committee’s approval procedure before a compulsory request or other step requiring authorization.
Fictional training example
Records and hearings → Fictional example
Follow a fictional question from lawful records to a preliminary finding.
Who must approve?
Under Rule IV, the committee chair may authorize and issue a subpoena after consulting the ranking minority member. The chair normally provides the draft at least one calendar day before issuance. A committee or subcommittee vote is a separate route and requires a majority present and a majority of those voting in favor.
- Disclosure is a separate decision
- Confirm with counsel which actor must authorize release of this particular record and record any limits. Do this before sharing outside the authorized team.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Who must approve? → Evidence and legal review
Check the source record, access permissions and disclosure decision before moving into evidence review.
Limits
Apply hearing rules, review privilege and separation-of-powers questions with counsel, and protect material from private proceedings. For a president’s personal records, assess the additional concerns discussed in Trump v. Mazars.
Sources and working documents
Fictional training example
Fictional example
A fictional review asks whether the Department of Justice documents its clemency intake consistently. Compare public guidance and aggregate administrative records before deciding whether an authorized request is needed. An unexplained timeline cannot establish an improper exchange.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Fictional training example
Fictional example → Evidence and legal review
Document which parts of the example are established and identify remaining gaps before proposing any action.
Working documents
Use these existing public models as starting points for the authorized committee team.
Sources and working documents
Oversight and Government Reform
Federal operations, records, procurement, and cross-agency oversight.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Subcommittees
- Why this connection?Jurisdiction
- Why this connection?Records and hearings
- Why this connection?Who must approve?
- Why this connection?Limits
- Why this connection?Fictional example
- Why this connection?Working documents
Sources and working documents
Oversight and Government Reform → Subcommittees
Open selected subcommittee assignments and confirm any referral or delegation under the committee’s rules.
Oversight and Government Reform → Jurisdiction
Match the legislative question to the chamber rule and any assigned subcommittee subject.
Oversight and Government Reform → Records and hearings
Document the purpose, scope and requested record holder before choosing a request or hearing.
Oversight and Government Reform → Who must approve?
Identify the specific decision-maker, notice, consultation or vote required before the step.
Oversight and Government Reform → Limits
Review legal limits and custody before collection, publication or transfer.
Fictional training example
Oversight and Government Reform → Fictional example
Walk through a fictional inquiry that tests the scope and evidence.
Oversight and Government Reform → Working documents
Use model work documents to record the rule, approvals, scope and evidence review.
Subcommittees
Selected assignments for this committee. The official directory lists the complete roster.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Subcommittees → Government Operations
Use the parent chair’s referral and hearing approvals for a procurement or federal records question.
Subcommittees → Federal Law Enforcement
Document which agency and oversight function are in scope. Identify any overlapping committee authority before seeking records.
Government Operations
Rule 6 assigns procurement, public information and records, emergency management and certain federal-state relations.
- Authority check
- Use the parent chair’s referral and hearing approvals for a procurement or federal records question.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Government Operations → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Government Operations → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Federal Law Enforcement
Rule 6 assigns oversight of criminal justice, homeland security and federal enforcement, among other specified subjects.
- Authority check
- Document which agency and oversight function are in scope. Identify any overlapping committee authority before seeking records.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Federal Law Enforcement → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Federal Law Enforcement → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Jurisdiction
House Rule X covers government management, operations, public information and records. Clause 4(c) gives this committee special oversight responsibilities. Document the legislative purpose and check which other committees cover the subject program.
Sources and working documents
Records and hearings
Use public or voluntarily supplied procurement and agency records first. Rule 12(g) addresses subpoenas. Rule 15 separately addresses depositions and requires consultation with the ranking minority member.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Records and hearings → Who must approve?
Use the committee’s approval procedure before a compulsory request or other step requiring authorization.
Fictional training example
Records and hearings → Fictional example
Follow a fictional question from lawful records to a preliminary finding.
Who must approve?
The committee chair authorizes and issues subpoenas under Rule 12(g) and House Rule XI. The full committee chair refers matters and approves subcommittee hearing dates under Rules 6 and 7. Confirm any additional applicable House orders.
- Disclosure is a separate decision
- Confirm with counsel which actor must authorize release of this particular record and record any limits. Do this before sharing outside the authorized team.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Who must approve? → Evidence and legal review
Check the source record, access permissions and disclosure decision before moving into evidence review.
Limits
Committee Rule 10 governs records and public proceedings. House Rule XI governs executive-session evidence. Check the record’s provenance, privacy and release approval before any public finding or outside transfer.
Sources and working documents
Fictional training example
Fictional example
A fictional federal contract file omits a scoring memo. Ask the agency for the evaluation record and check whether a later correction was made. A missing memo alone supports a records-management question, without establishing favoritism.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Fictional training example
Fictional example → Evidence and legal review
Document which parts of the example are established and identify remaining gaps before proposing any action.
Working documents
Use these existing public models as starting points for the authorized committee team.
Sources and working documents
Judiciary
Federal courts, civil rights and administration of federal justice.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Subcommittees
- Why this connection?Jurisdiction
- Why this connection?Records and hearings
- Why this connection?Who must approve?
- Why this connection?Limits
- Why this connection?Fictional example
- Why this connection?Working documents
Sources and working documents
Judiciary → Subcommittees
Open selected subcommittee assignments and confirm any referral or delegation under the committee’s rules.
Judiciary → Jurisdiction
Match the legislative question to the chamber rule and any assigned subcommittee subject.
Judiciary → Records and hearings
Document the purpose, scope and requested record holder before choosing a request or hearing.
Judiciary → Who must approve?
Identify the specific decision-maker, notice, consultation or vote required before the step.
Judiciary → Limits
Review legal limits and custody before collection, publication or transfer.
Fictional training example
Judiciary → Fictional example
Walk through a fictional inquiry that tests the scope and evidence.
Judiciary → Working documents
Use model work documents to record the rule, approvals, scope and evidence review.
Subcommittees
Selected assignments for this committee. The official directory lists the complete roster.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Crime and Counterterrorism
- Why this connection?Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights
Sources and working documents
Subcommittees → Crime and Counterterrorism
Use the official assignment and confirm the committee chair’s referral under Rule VII. Rule IX governs any compulsory request.
Subcommittees → Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights
A grant-oversight or court-administration question requires its own Senate legislative purpose and appropriate Rule VII referral.
Open Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights
Crime and Counterterrorism
The committee assigns oversight of the Office of the Pardon Attorney, among other criminal justice and enforcement functions.
- Authority check
- Use the official assignment and confirm the committee chair’s referral under Rule VII. Rule IX governs any compulsory request.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Crime and Counterterrorism → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Crime and Counterterrorism → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights
The published assignment includes federal courts, certain administrative procedures, and oversight of DOJ grants.
- Authority check
- A grant-oversight or court-administration question requires its own Senate legislative purpose and appropriate Rule VII referral.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action and Federal Rights → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Jurisdiction
Apply Senate Rule XXV’s Judiciary jurisdiction and the committee’s published subcommittee assignments. Keep a record of the Senate’s legislative question even if the House studies the same topic.
Sources and working documents
Records and hearings
Senate Rule XXVI supplies the procedural framework. Committee Rules II, IX and X distinguish hearings, compulsory requests and depositions. Start with authorized voluntary collection where practical.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Records and hearings → Who must approve?
Use the committee’s approval procedure before a compulsory request or other step requiring authorization.
Fictional training example
Records and hearings → Fictional example
Follow a fictional question from lawful records to a preliminary finding.
Who must approve?
Committee Rule IX permits the committee chair to subpoena with the ranking member’s agreement or by committee vote. The chair or designated committee member signs. Under Rule VII, subcommittee referrals normally come from the chair, subject to the rule’s alternatives.
- Disclosure is a separate decision
- Confirm with counsel which actor must authorize release of this particular record and record any limits. Do this before sharing outside the authorized team.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Who must approve? → Evidence and legal review
Check the source record, access permissions and disclosure decision before moving into evidence review.
Limits
Rule X generally provides for private depositions and gives both sides the opportunity to participate. A chair and ranking member may agree to waive the member-presence rule. Counsel should separately verify any release authority.
Sources and working documents
Fictional training example
Fictional example
A fictional program review finds that similarly situated clemency applicants received inconsistent status notices. Seek process data and the agency’s explanation. Distinguish a notice-policy finding from conclusions about individual decisions.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Fictional training example
Fictional example → Evidence and legal review
Document which parts of the example are established and identify remaining gaps before proposing any action.
Working documents
Use these existing public models as starting points for the authorized committee team.
Sources and working documents
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Government operations and Senate investigative oversight.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Subcommittees
- Why this connection?Jurisdiction
- Why this connection?Records and hearings
- Why this connection?Who must approve?
- Why this connection?Limits
- Why this connection?Fictional example
- Why this connection?Working documents
Sources and working documents
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs → Subcommittees
Open selected subcommittee assignments and confirm any referral or delegation under the committee’s rules.
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs → Jurisdiction
Match the legislative question to the chamber rule and any assigned subcommittee subject.
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs → Records and hearings
Document the purpose, scope and requested record holder before choosing a request or hearing.
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs → Who must approve?
Identify the specific decision-maker, notice, consultation or vote required before the step.
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs → Limits
Review legal limits and custody before collection, publication or transfer.
Fictional training example
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs → Fictional example
Walk through a fictional inquiry that tests the scope and evidence.
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs → Working documents
Use model work documents to record the rule, approvals, scope and evidence review.
Subcommittees
Selected assignments for this committee. The official directory lists the complete roster.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
- Why this connection?Border Management, Federal Workforce and Regulatory Affairs
Sources and working documents
Subcommittees → Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
Check the scope assigned to PSI and its separate rules for authorizing an investigation, hearing or subpoena.
Subcommittees → Border Management, Federal Workforce and Regulatory Affairs
Review the official subcommittee rules and HSGAC Rule 8(E) before considering compulsory process.
Open Border Management, Federal Workforce and Regulatory Affairs
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
PSI examines government efficiency and economy and other matters within its delegated investigative jurisdiction.
- Open an investigation
- PSI Rule 1 requires approval from the subcommittee chair and ranking minority member, with notice to all subcommittee members.
- Hold a public hearing
- Rule 1 permits approval by the chair and ranking member or a subcommittee majority. If all minority members object, a full committee majority must approve. Check the advance notice rule.
- Request compulsory records
- PSI Rule 2 allows authorization and issuance by the subcommittee chair or a designated subcommittee member, with notice. Check its 48-hour rule and the parent Rule 8(E) notice and timing conditions before issuance.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Border Management, Federal Workforce and Regulatory Affairs
The committee identifies border operations, workforce and regulatory oversight within this subcommittee’s portfolio.
- Authority check
- Review the official subcommittee rules and HSGAC Rule 8(E) before considering compulsory process.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Border Management, Federal Workforce and Regulatory Affairs → Records and hearings
Use the parent committee’s record-collection guidance together with any separate subcommittee delegation.
Border Management, Federal Workforce and Regulatory Affairs → Who must approve?
Check the parent and subcommittee rules before a request, hearing or compulsory step.
Jurisdiction
Apply Senate Rule XXV and HSGAC’s authority over government operations and the Department of Homeland Security. Review the governing resolution and Rule 8 for any subcommittee assignment.
Sources and working documents
Records and hearings
Consider voluntary agency records, interviews, authorized hearings and subpoenas. The full committee’s Rule 5(C) and the subcommittee rules under Rule 8(E) establish separate procedures.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Records and hearings → Who must approve?
Use the committee’s approval procedure before a compulsory request or other step requiring authorization.
Fictional training example
Records and hearings → Fictional example
Follow a fictional question from lawful records to a preliminary finding.
Who must approve?
Full committee Rule 5(C) authorizes the chair to subpoena with notice to the ranking minority member. Written notice ordinarily starts a 72-hour wait, excluding Saturdays and Sundays. The rule allows a ranking member waiver or written urgency certification by the chair.
- Disclosure is a separate decision
- Confirm with counsel which actor must authorize release of this particular record and record any limits. Do this before sharing outside the authorized team.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Who must approve? → Evidence and legal review
Check the source record, access permissions and disclosure decision before moving into evidence review.
Limits
Rule 7 governs confidential proceedings. Restrict access as required. Rule 8(E) allows subcommittees separate subpoena rules subject to its notice and timing conditions. Consult both rule sets before issuance.
Sources and working documents
Fictional training example
Fictional example
A fictional agency uses an intermediary to deliver services and records two conflicting completion dates. Compare invoices, performance records and an auditor’s account before deciding whether there is a procurement controls issue.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Fictional training example
Fictional example → Evidence and legal review
Document which parts of the example are established and identify remaining gaps before proposing any action.
Working documents
Use these existing public models as starting points for the authorized committee team.
Sources and working documents
Investigation map
Start with a question about a decision, transaction, or gap in oversight. Follow the records to the people with documented roles and test what the evidence supports.
- What we know
- Every claim needs its own source and status. A record can verify a payment, a date, or that someone made a statement.
- Who can act
- Public researchers can examine public records. Any official request, compulsory process, or release needs its own authorized decision-maker.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Define the question
- Why this connection?Evidence and legal review
- Why this connection?Did a fee buy clemency access?
- Why this connection?Did a nonpublic decision inform a trade?
- Why this connection?What did a contract intermediary deliver?
Sources and working documents
Investigation map → Define the question
Frame a bounded legislative question before collecting records.
Investigation map → Evidence and legal review
Open shared evidence and legal review when the record is ready to assess.
Fictional training example
Investigation map → Did a fee buy clemency access?
Use a fictional payment to test the difference between a transaction, a claim of access, and an exchange.
Fictional training example
Investigation map → Did a nonpublic decision inform a trade?
Use a fictional trade to test the link between a decision and an order.
Fictional training example
Investigation map → What did a contract intermediary deliver?
Use a fictional procurement file to test whether an intermediary performed the work it billed for.
Define the question
Name the action or gap that warrants review, the dates, and the legislative decision the inquiry could inform.
- Start here
- What reporting rule, selection procedure, or conflict safeguard might have failed? Identify the best lawful alternative explanation.
- Who can act
- Committee counsel checks jurisdiction, scope, and legislative purpose before formal inquiry or compulsory collection.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Define the question → Find and preserve records
The question defines which records can answer it and keeps collection within scope.
Define the question → Authority map
Check the committee's authority and approval rules before making an official request.
Find and preserve records
Record the issuer, date, exact location, original format, and any limits on use. Preserve provenance and distinguish a statement in a record from the event it describes.
- What is missing
- Identify the smallest record request that would close a material gap. Check whether a public source or voluntary response is sufficient.
- Who can act
- The designated custodian holds records under the office's rules. Counsel and the authorized committee decision-maker review any compulsory request or sharing.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Find and preserve records → Follow the money
Trace a transaction only when a record identifies an actual event, amount, date, or counterparty.
Follow the money
Trace the source, intermediary, account or entity, recipient, and any subsequent transfer. Treat every connection as a separate claim.
- Per connection
- Show the supporting record, date, amount, parties, contrary evidence, and VERIFIED, INFERRED, or UNKNOWN status.
- Stop point
- If the next transfer lacks support, mark the link Not established. Matching amounts, nearby dates, or a shared bank can suggest a check but cannot fill a gap.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Bank as record custodian
- Why this connection?Resolve entities and accounts
- Why this connection?Source: applicant's business
- Why this connection?Authorized decisions
Sources and working documents
Follow the money → Bank as record custodian
Ask what the bank can document, which records are held, and what authority any further request needs.
Follow the money → Resolve entities and accounts
Resolve legal names, ownership, and control before attributing a benefit.
Fictional training example
Follow the money → Source: applicant's business
Inspect a fictional transfer one link at a time, starting at its documented source.
Follow the money → Authorized decisions
Bring supported links, contrary records, and documented gaps to the authorized decision-makers.
Bank as record custodian
A bank may hold account-opening, payment, and settlement records. Treat it as a record custodian unless separate evidence establishes another role.
- Already held
- Inventory the lawfully available payment confirmation and any approved statement excerpt. Mark missing dates, fields, or custody events.
- What is missing
- A posting record may confirm the destination account. The purpose of the payment may require separate agreements, invoices, or testimony.
- Who may ask
- Counsel checks the authorized committee's powers, financial privacy, and scope before any request. The public map grants no access to bank data.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Bank as record custodian → Authority map
The governing rules and applicable privacy restrictions determine the authorized records route.
Resolve entities and accounts
Match an entity through its legal name, jurisdiction, dates, and reliable records. Identify separately who holds an account, controls an entity, or receives an economic benefit.
- Competing explanation
- Similar names, shared addresses, and routine registered-agent services can connect unrelated entities in a search result. Verify each link before relying on it.
Next choices
Resolve entities and accounts → Identify documented roles
A person enters the map when a document or corroborated account establishes a relevant role.
Identify documented roles
Label people by their role in the records, such as custodian, intermediary, recipient, witness, or decision-maker.
- What is missing
- Distinguish a signature from authority to decide, an account posting from economic benefit, and a witness account from corroborated fact.
Next choices
Identify documented roles → Test the evidence
Compare each proposed finding with the supporting record, adverse evidence, and credible alternatives.
Identify documented roles → Witness cooperation and immunity
Counsel evaluates the authority and safeguards for any witness approach.
Test the evidence
Review the strongest contrary records and lawful explanations with a second reviewer. Narrow the finding to what the sources support.
- VERIFIED
- The identified original record supports the stated fact at a specific location.
- INFERRED
- The records support a stated interpretation, with the reasoning and alternatives visible.
- UNKNOWN
- The record cannot establish the claim. Name the gap or the evidence that could resolve it.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Test the evidence → Evidence and legal review
Record how the review resolved each contradiction and which questions remain open.
Test the evidence → Authorized decisions
Present the independent review and counsel's handling decisions before seeking approval for action.
Evidence and legal review
Bring source-backed findings to independent review and counsel. Separate collection, access, and release decisions for each record.
- Handling
- Record the custodian, allowed users, handling restriction, independent source, and release status. Keep restricted originals in the authorized office's secure system.
- Sharing
- A shared map can show why an item is withheld. Counsel and the authorized office decide what may be released, to whom, and for what use.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Follow the money
- Why this connection?Test the evidence
- Why this connection?Witness cooperation and immunity
- Why this connection?Coordination and referral
- Why this connection?Authorized decisions
- Why this connection?Authority map
Sources and working documents
Evidence and legal review → Follow the money
The reviewed record determines which payments can be traced and which connections remain unestablished.
Evidence and legal review → Test the evidence
Independent review checks provenance, contrary evidence, and what each source can establish.
Evidence and legal review → Witness cooperation and immunity
Separate voluntary contact, statutory immunity, and clemency before choosing a lawful witness mechanism.
Evidence and legal review → Coordination and referral
Early coordination can establish authorized contacts. Any referral still needs state-law jurisdiction and a separate disclosure decision.
Evidence and legal review → Authorized decisions
The approved evidentiary record is the basis for separate legislative and state-referral decisions.
Evidence and legal review → Authority map
Verify which institution owns the decision and which approvals apply.
Fictional training example
Did a fee buy clemency access?
An applicant's business paid a consultant before a favorable clemency decision. What did the consultant deliver, and is there evidence of access or an exchange?
- Question
- Compare the payment, the consultant's representations, the official timeline, and the services delivered before judging their relationship.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Did a fee buy clemency access? → Source: applicant's business
Start with the original payment record and follow each documented link separately.
Fictional training example
Did a fee buy clemency access? → Test the claim of access
Review the consultant's documented representation as a separate question from the money trail.
Fictional training example
Source: applicant's business
The business's authorized statement excerpt shows a USD 12,000 debit on April 10, 2026.
- VERIFIED · Original record
- Fictional bank statement A-01, April 10, line 8. The debit matches a USD 12,000 transfer confirmation.
- Counterevidence
- The confirmation references a consulting invoice. The payment alone establishes neither the actual service nor its purpose.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Source: applicant's business → Intermediary: consulting firm
April 10, 2026 · USD 12,000 · VERIFIED. Fictional transfer confirmation A-02 names the consultant as payee. Invoice A-03 describes records preparation, which remains to be tested.
- Fictional record A-02 · Posted transfer
- April 10, 2026. Sender: applicant. Payee: consulting firm. USD 12,000. Payment reference C-0410. Status: posted.
- Counterevidence and limit
- Invoice A-03 describes records preparation. The transfer record cannot identify the purpose of the payment or establish access to a decision-maker.
Fictional training example
Intermediary: consulting firm
The consultant's receipt names the firm's operating account. Its invoice describes a records review and application preparation.
- VERIFIED · Original record
- Fictional invoice A-03, April 8, item 1, and receipt A-04, April 10, line 2. These establish what was billed and acknowledged.
- Counterevidence
- A later sales message describes possible access. The billing documents and the sales claim have different evidentiary uses.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Intermediary: consulting firm → Account: firm operating funds
April 10, 2026 · USD 12,000 · VERIFIED. The fictional authorized deposit excerpt A-05 matches the receipt by payment reference. The deposit alone does not establish anyone's purpose.
- Fictional record A-05 · Bank excerpt
- April 10, 2026. Account holder: consulting firm. Credit USD 12,000. Reference C-0410. Credit line 5.
- Counterevidence and limit
- The consulting firm's receipt matches the payment reference. Other credits appear in the same account. Later payments need their own evidence.
Fictional training example
Account: firm operating funds
An authorized bank excerpt shows the deposit into the firm's operating account. Other receipts in the same account complicate attribution of later payments.
- VERIFIED · Original record
- Fictional bank excerpt A-05, April 10, credit line 5. The account holder name matches the consulting firm's receipt.
- UNKNOWN · Gap
- The common account balance cannot identify which incoming funds paid a later invoice.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Account: firm operating funds → Recipient: records specialist
April 14, 2026 · USD 3,500 · VERIFIED outgoing payment from the firm's account in A-06. Attribution of that payment to the applicant's deposit is UNKNOWN because funds were pooled.
- Fictional record A-06 · Wire excerpt
- April 14, 2026. Sender: consulting firm operating account. Payee: records specialist. USD 3,500. Reference: specialist invoice A-07.
- Counterevidence and limit
- The dated delivery receipt corroborates the specialist's work. Account balances do not establish which incoming funds paid this invoice.
Fictional training example
Recipient: records specialist
A USD 3,500 payment went to a specialist that supplied records research. This establishes the account recipient and supports an ordinary-services explanation.
- VERIFIED · Original record
- Fictional wire A-06, April 14, and provider invoice A-07, April 13, identify the payee and USD 3,500 amount.
- Counterevidence
- A dated delivery receipt and completed work product corroborate the services. The file contains no subsequent transfer record from the specialist.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Recipient: records specialist → Subsequent transfer: not established
Subsequent transfer · UNKNOWN date, amount, and recipient. The available records end at the specialist. No transfer to a decision-maker is established.
- Last supported record
- Fictional record A-06 establishes only the consulting firm's payment to the specialist on April 14, 2026.
- Not established
- There is no supporting record for a subsequent transfer. Its date, amount and recipient remain unknown.
Fictional training example
Subsequent transfer: not established
The available records end at the specialist. There is no supported connection from the specialist to an official or decision-maker.
- UNKNOWN · Stop here
- No authenticated transfer, date, amount, or recipient is available for a further step. The ledger stops here unless lawfully obtained new records establish a link.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Subsequent transfer: not established → Test the claim of access
A separate authenticated message can be tested as a claim of influence. It supplies no missing transaction record.
Fictional training example
Test the claim of access
The consultant wrote that they could get the applicant's file in front of a decision-maker. The message verifies the statement and leaves actual access unknown.
- VERIFIED · Original record
- Fictional email A-08, April 15, body paragraph 2, contains the representation.
- Counterevidence
- Routine submission instructions in A-09 offer a lawful route for the file. No meeting log or corroborated witness places the consultant with the decision-maker.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Test the claim of access → A decision follows
Compare the recorded decision date to the separate payment and access records. The timing alone cannot establish a causal link.
Fictional training example
A decision follows
A fictional public decision register records approval on May 18, 2026. The sequence warrants checking the review process and any communications.
- VERIFIED · Original record
- Fictional decision register A-10, May 18, entry 14. It records the outcome and date.
- Counterevidence
- A March 28 receipt shows the application was in the ordinary review queue before the consulting payment. The reason for the decision is UNKNOWN.
Next choices
Fictional training example
A decision follows → Challenge the exchange theory
Test communications, agreements, services performed, and routine review before describing any exchange.
Fictional training example
Challenge the exchange theory
Compare the consultant's agreement and work product with submission logs and authorized communications. Seek contrary evidence and independent corroboration.
- INFERRED · Ordinary services
- The agreement, records delivery and separate invoice support a legitimate services explanation. Actual access, an exchange, and a transfer to any official remain UNKNOWN.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Challenge the exchange theory → Finding: a narrower record
The second reviewer and counsel separate documented payments from unsupported claims and decide whether any release or next step is authorized.
Fictional training example
Finding: a narrower record
The record establishes payment and completed services. It is insufficient to establish purchased access, an exchange, or a transfer to an official.
- Congressional option
- Consider a disclosure-policy review if the verified records expose a systemic gap.
- State referral
- No applicable state-law basis or competent recipient is established on these facts. Record a hold decision.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Finding: a narrower record → Evidence and legal review
Preserve the narrower finding and the unresolved claims for independent review and correction.
Fictional training example
Did a nonpublic decision inform a trade?
A fund bought shares before an agency announcement. Who knew what and when, and when was the order decided?
Next choices
Fictional training example
Did a nonpublic decision inform a trade? → Compare order and disclosure records
Reconcile order entry and execution times with disclosure times and the information actually available to the trader.
Fictional training example
Compare order and disclosure records
Fictional confirmation B-01 shows a USD 48,000 buy at 10:13 UTC on June 9, 2026. Agency bulletin B-02 was public at 14:00 UTC that day.
- VERIFIED
- The trade and publication timestamps are in separate original records.
- Counterevidence
- Fictional broker instruction B-03 was logged June 3. Its conditions match an automated execution triggered by a publicly available price.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Compare order and disclosure records → Finding: ordinary execution is supported
Check whether the existing order could have been changed and whether any reliable record connects the trader to nonpublic information.
Fictional training example
Finding: ordinary execution is supported
An independently timestamped broker audit supports execution under a pre-existing instruction. The record supplies no evidence that the trader received or acted on nonpublic information.
- Disposition
- The evidence supports a lawful explanation. Close the lead on this record and retain the audit trail for correction if new evidence appears.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Finding: ordinary execution is supported → Evidence and legal review
Record the competing explanation and why it fits the independently verified records.
Fictional training example
What did a contract intermediary deliver?
An agency paid a contractor that used an intermediary. Can the agency verify services, prices, and the award decision?
Next choices
Fictional training example
What did a contract intermediary deliver? → Compare award, invoice, and delivery
Compare the award file, invoice, delivery, and agency acceptance before judging the arrangement.
Fictional training example
Compare award, invoice, and delivery
Fictional award C-01 allows subcontracting. Agency payment C-02 shows USD 80,000 on July 17, 2026. Deliverables and invoices support most of the payment.
- VERIFIED
- Payment C-02, entry 4, and acceptance record C-03 identify the award and dates. A USD 8,000 milestone line lacks a dated approval in the supplied file.
- Counterevidence
- A system-migration log identifies a plausible missing-record explanation. Other dated work products support performance under the contract.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Compare award, invoice, and delivery → Finding: a documentation gap
Check the original approval record and payment terms. Keep any finding within the documented exception if the missing item cannot be recovered.
Fictional training example
Finding: a documentation gap
The file does not verify milestone approval before payment. Subcontracting itself was permitted. The missing record cannot establish fraud, an improper award, or who caused the gap.
- Next decision
- An authorized committee may ask about record retention or consider reporting changes. Track any correction when the original file is found.
- State referral
- The evidence establishes no separate state-law basis on the current record.
Next choices
Fictional training example
Finding: a documentation gap → Congressional action
A supported records-control gap can inform authorized legislative follow-up without any referral.
Coordination and referral
Prepare a state-law path early when the facts suggest one. Congress retains its own work and the receiving office makes its own decision.
- Who starts
- Committee counsel screens for a possible state-law issue and identifies which office could act.
- What can move now
- Authorized contacts may discuss jurisdiction and handling procedures without transmitting protected evidence.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Screen jurisdiction
- Why this connection?Agree on handling procedures
- Why this connection?Congressional action
Sources and working documents
Coordination and referral → Screen jurisdiction
Identify a plausible state statute and a factual link to the state before treating an office as a possible recipient.
Coordination and referral → Agree on handling procedures
Draft a handling plan in advance. Use placeholders until the recipient and scope are verified.
Coordination and referral → Congressional action
Keep the congressional track moving even if a state-law basis is unavailable or the recipient declines.
Screen jurisdiction
Check the statute, its elements, the facts connecting the conduct to the state, venue, timing and the receiving office’s authority.
- Working record
- Record the proposed law, fact-to-element match, open questions, responsible counsel and any special appointment or referral required.
Next choices
Screen jurisdiction → New York
Use this New York example if the facts support a New York issue. Confirm the law and office on the specific matter.
Screen jurisdiction → Washington
Use this Washington example if the facts support a Washington issue. Confirm the law and office on the specific matter.
Screen jurisdiction → Check another state
Use the jurisdiction checklist and official directories for a state without a worked example.
Screen jurisdiction → No established recipient
Pause the state pathway when a statute, factual connection, venue or office authority is missing.
Check another state
The map includes worked examples for New York and Washington. For another jurisdiction, counsel must verify which law and office apply before routing evidence.
- Attorney general
- Find the serving office in the official directory and verify the specific statute or appointment under which it could act.
- Local prosecutor
- Check the relevant county, venue and any special assignments under state law.
- Regulator
- Check the activity, charter or license and the agency's enforcement authority.
- No established recipient
- Record the missing legal or factual basis and hold the referral while congressional work continues.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Check another state → Verify authorized contacts
Once an office's authority is verified, identify the authorized contact and confirm the secure channel.
Check another state → No established recipient
Hold the proposed referral when office authority or jurisdiction is unresolved.
New York
Select the office type after checking the applicable New York statute and the facts. The presence of an account in New York alone supplies no decision about a referral.
Next choices
New York → New York Attorney General
Check a specific statutory grant or a valid executive or agency referral before identifying the Attorney General as a criminal recipient.
New York → New York district attorney
For a state crime, check the county’s venue and any special prosecutorial assignment.
New York → New York financial regulator
Check whether the activity and entity fall within the Department of Financial Services’ supervisory authority.
New York → No established recipient
Record no established recipient when no jurisdictional or agency basis can be confirmed.
New York Attorney General
Executive Law § 63 provides different authorities for different matters. Section 63(12) provides a civil path for repeated fraudulent or illegal acts or persistent fraud or illegality in business. Sections 63(2) and (3) describe distinct criminal referral routes.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
New York Attorney General → Verify authorized contacts
Verify which subdivision or other statute applies and which unit is authorized for this matter.
New York district attorney
County Law § 700 sets out a district attorney’s duties for crimes cognizable by the county courts, subject to exceptions. Counsel checks venue and any special assignment.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
New York district attorney → Verify authorized contacts
Verify the competent county office through its official channel before discussing a proposed transfer.
New York financial regulator
The Department of Financial Services supervises covered financial entities and activities. Verify the entity’s license or charter and the governing regulatory provision.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
New York financial regulator → Verify authorized contacts
Confirm that the agency supervises this entity and activity, and verify its official contact for the matter.
Washington
Select the office type after checking the Washington statute and facts. Criminal prosecution and financial supervision have separate authorities.
Next choices
Washington → Washington Attorney General
Check whether the statutory process for an Attorney General prosecution applies.
Washington → Washington county prosecutor
Check the county prosecutor’s authority and venue for the conduct at issue.
Washington → Washington financial regulator
Check the institution’s charter, license and regulated activity before routing to DFI.
Washington → No established recipient
Record no established recipient if no state-law or agency basis can be confirmed.
Washington Attorney General
RCW 43.10.232 grants concurrent authority upon a qualifying written request or concurrence. The relevant county prosecutor, the governor or a majority of the organized crime oversight committee can supply it.
- Before prosecution
- The Attorney General and the county must reach an agreement on payment of prosecution costs under this section.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Washington Attorney General → Verify authorized contacts
Confirm any necessary request or concurrence and the authorized unit before treating this office as a recipient.
Washington county prosecutor
RCW 36.27.020 assigns prosecutorial duties to county prosecutors. Confirm the relevant county and any statutory allocation or exception for the matter.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Washington county prosecutor → Verify authorized contacts
Verify the competent county office through its official channel before discussing a proposed transfer.
Washington financial regulator
The Department of Financial Institutions supervises covered providers, including Washington state-chartered banks and certain licensed money transmitters. Charter or license helps identify the correct regulator.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Washington financial regulator → Verify authorized contacts
Confirm the entity and activity are within the agency’s authority, and verify the appropriate unit.
No established recipient
Hold the state referral. Record the missing fact, legal basis or authority and the condition for reconsidering the decision.
Next choices
No established recipient → Congressional action
Take any supported legislative action within the committee’s own authority.
Verify authorized contacts
Verify the office, authorized contact and secure intake channel independently. Discuss process at first and obtain agreement before any case material moves.
- Who can act
- Authorized congressional staff and the verified receiving office contact. Each side confirms its authority and capacity.
- What is missing
- A case-specific recipient and the materials each side is authorized to receive, use or retain.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Verify authorized contacts → Agree on handling procedures
With both offices identified, record which channels and handling rules each office approves.
Agree on handling procedures
Document ownership, permitted uses, access, security, retention, corrections, witness issues and independent decision-making before any transfer.
- Authority
- A handling agreement sets procedures. Each disclosure still requires its own legal basis and approval.
- Record
- Name the sending and receiving custodians, correction contacts, secure channel and how access is reviewed.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Agree on handling procedures → Approve each disclosure
Only when the recipient and procedure are verified may counsel assess each item for possible disclosure.
Agree on handling procedures → Restricted records and access
If a record could be restricted by immunity, privilege or safety concerns, route it to authorized counsel for review.
Approve each disclosure
Identify the exact materials, authority to disclose, restrictions, required redactions and authorized committee decision. Use the verified secure channel.
- Approval
- Counsel checks privilege, immunity, privacy and other restrictions. The authorized official records what may move, to whom and for which purpose.
- Hold condition
- Keep protected or unapproved items in their authorized system. Reassess a narrower disclosure if the packet cannot proceed.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Approve each disclosure → Referral and disposition
Send only the approved version after documenting state-law basis, authorized recipient, disclosures and transfer channel.
Approve each disclosure → Hold the disclosure
Hold the referral if disclosure approval or secure transfer remains unresolved, even if the receiving office is known.
Hold the disclosure
Record which item, approval or transfer condition is unresolved. Preserve the existing authorization and record restrictions while counsel reviews options.
Next choices
Hold the disclosure → Approve each disclosure
Reassess an authorized redaction, narrower packet or verified secure channel only if counsel identifies a lawful option.
Referral and disposition
Track approval, delivery and any confirmed disposition separately. The receiving office may decline, investigate or pursue a remedy under its own law.
- What delivery establishes
- A receipt confirms delivery. Record further action only when the office confirms it and disclosure of the status is authorized.
- What happens next
- Assign an authorized follow-up owner and a review date. Preserve a correction and version history.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Referral and disposition → Congressional action
Congress continues its separately authorized response without depending on a state enforcement decision.
Witness cooperation and immunity
Seek complete, truthful information and corroborate it. Keep voluntary cooperation, compelled testimony under an immunity order and clemency separate.
Next choices
Witness cooperation and immunity → Voluntary or negotiated cooperation
Identify the authorized interviewer or prosecutor and confirm the witness’s voluntary participation or the agreement’s legal authority.
Witness cooperation and immunity → Compelled congressional testimony
If the witness invokes the privilege against self-incrimination, counsel checks the statutory procedure and its risks before seeking an order.
Witness cooperation and immunity → Pardon or commutation
Only the legally empowered authority can decide whether to grant clemency.
Witness cooperation and immunity → Restricted records and access
Apply the record-specific limits before access, further review or any transfer.
Witness cooperation and immunity → Authorized decisions
Respect use and disclosure restrictions. Any prosecutor relying on independent sources must document that provenance.
Voluntary or negotiated cooperation
Authorized congressional staff may request a voluntary interview. A prosecutor with jurisdiction may negotiate within that office’s authority and any required approvals.
- Terms
- Identify the covered conduct, parties, duties, consequences for false statements and any office outside the agreement’s scope.
- Evidence
- Seek a truthful account regardless of whether it supports the hypothesis. Corroborate important details with independent records or testimony.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Voluntary or negotiated cooperation → Restricted records and access
Confirm permitted uses and who may review the interview and agreement before sharing either.
Compelled congressional testimony
Under 18 U.S.C. §§ 6002 and 6005, a duly authorized congressional representative requests a federal district court order when the witness refuses on self-incrimination grounds.
- Approval
- For a chamber proceeding, a majority of members present must approve. For a committee or subcommittee proceeding, two-thirds of the members of the full committee must approve.
- Notice and court order
- Serve the U.S. attorney general at least 10 days before requesting the order. On the attorney general’s application the court must defer issuance for the specified period, up to 20 days from the request. The presiding officer communicates the order to the witness.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Compelled congressional testimony → Independent evidence sources
Decide how to isolate compelled material and demonstrate independent provenance before an authorized prosecution team sees evidence.
Independent evidence sources
The compelled information and what derives from it generally cannot be used against that witness in a criminal case. The statute has limited exceptions for perjury, false statements and noncompliance.
- Burden
- Under Kastigar, the prosecution must demonstrate a legitimate independent source for evidence it proposes to use once the immunity issue is raised as required.
- Proposed safeguard
- Keep compelled testimony and its leads separate. Track how and when the independent team obtained each item and record any exposure for counsel review.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Independent evidence sources → Restricted records and access
Apply role-based access and keep an exposure log before anyone opens a record or follows a lead.
Pardon or commutation
Clemency is a separate decision by the legally empowered authority. Check the jurisdiction, covered conduct and terms of the grant.
- Federal
- The President’s pardon power covers offenses against the United States. State-law offenses fall under state clemency authority.
- State example
- In Washington the governor holds clemency powers under state law and the board makes recommendations. Check the applicable state’s own constitution and statutes.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Pardon or commutation → Clemency effects
Review the historical proclamation and its actual scope before drawing conclusions about another matter.
Restricted records and access
In an authorized workspace, show each record’s restrictions and permitted roles. A blocked team sees the reason and an approved review route without receiving protected contents.
- Proposed access model
- Separate private collection, counsel review and authorized publication. Keep compelled material, derived leads, independent sources and exposure histories separately controlled.
- Public map
- Only public material and fictional examples belong here. Secure record handling and real permissions live in the authorized institution’s own systems.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Restricted records and access → Evidence and legal review
Return to evidence review with only the material this team may access.
Restricted records and access → Approve each disclosure
Review any proposed external disclosure item by item through authorized counsel.
January 6 lessons and failure points
Follow the public record from collection and contested requests through referrals, federal prosecutions and clemency. Each screen separates the historical record from a proposed safeguard.
Next choices
- Why this connection?Evidence preservation
- Why this connection?Delay and deadlines
- Why this connection?Contested requests
- Why this connection?Witness handling
- Why this connection?Referrals
- Why this connection?Prosecution outcomes
- Why this connection?Clemency effects
Sources and working documents
January 6 lessons and failure points → Evidence preservation
Start with the documented public record and its custody.
January 6 lessons and failure points → Delay and deadlines
Check how authorization and decision dates constrain the work.
January 6 lessons and failure points → Contested requests
Examine the documented privilege dispute and its outcome.
January 6 lessons and failure points → Witness handling
Separate witness testimony, corroboration and lawful limits.
January 6 lessons and failure points → Referrals
Distinguish committee referrals from prosecutorial decisions.
January 6 lessons and failure points → Prosecution outcomes
Use dated charging and court records to evaluate outcomes.
January 6 lessons and failure points → Clemency effects
Read the proclamation to determine who and what it covered.
Evidence preservation
The House Select Committee published its final report and released hearing and supporting materials. GovInfo preserves a collection of those public records.
- Proposed safeguard
- Assign custody at the outset and record source, date, original format and access limits. Maintain an approved publication copy and a separate preservation record.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Evidence preservation → Delay and deadlines
Check preservation and authorized milestones before setting investigative deadlines.
Delay and deadlines
The House established the Select Committee on June 30, 2021. Its final report is dated December 22, 2022. Requests and disputes had to fit within the committee’s work period.
- Proposed safeguard
- Set milestones for preservation, responses, enforcement review and reporting. Assign an owner and a fallback source for every critical request.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Delay and deadlines → Contested requests
Assess delay one request at a time using the request, objection, court action and actual production dates.
Contested requests
A dispute over presidential records reached the Supreme Court. On January 19, 2022 it denied a request to stay the mandate and enjoin disclosure pending review in Trump v. Thompson.
- Proposed safeguard
- Record the scope, response date, asserted privilege and accommodation options. Counsel assesses enforcement separately from preserving an alternate source.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Contested requests → Witness handling
Identify which objections concern witnesses and which concern records before choosing a response.
Witness handling
The Select Committee reported that more than 30 witnesses invoked the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Its final report discusses witness credibility and corroboration.
- Proposed safeguard
- Keep a record of the testimony or asserted privilege, corroborating sources and access restrictions. An invocation alone does not establish the underlying allegation.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Witness handling → Referrals
Separate the corroborated findings that a committee can disclose from protected testimony and other restricted material.
Witness handling → Witness cooperation and immunity
Use the distinct cooperation, immunity and clemency branches to evaluate lawful options.
Referrals
The Select Committee referred possible federal offenses to the Department of Justice. Its report separately proposed legislative changes.
- Proposed safeguard
- Record what was approved and sent. Track committee findings, legal referrals and receiving-office outcomes as separate entries.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Referrals → Prosecution outcomes
Check DOJ records and case dispositions separately from the committee’s referral record.
Prosecution outcomes
On January 6, 2025 DOJ reported charging more than 1,500 people for crimes around the attack. Federal prosecutions produced convictions, including the linked trial example.
- What remains separate
- The aggregate charging count does not establish the result for any particular person or theory. Case-specific judgments and dispositions answer that question.
- Proposed safeguard
- Use dated court records to track charges, convictions, dismissals, sentences and later clemency separately.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Prosecution outcomes → Clemency effects
Check which federal proceedings and sentences the later proclamation addressed.
Clemency effects
On January 20, 2025 the President commuted specified sentences, pardoned other covered convicted individuals and directed the attorney general to seek dismissal with prejudice of pending covered indictments.
- Proposed safeguard
- Check federal clemency and court dispositions against the specific conduct and case. A state route requires genuinely independent state-law authority and facts supporting it.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Clemency effects → Presidential immunity
Analyze presidential immunity separately from clemency and state-law jurisdiction.
Clemency effects → Screen jurisdiction
Counsel may assess a possible state-law issue after identifying independently supportable facts.
Presidential immunity
Trump v. United States distinguishes absolute criminal immunity for acts within exclusive constitutional authority, at least presumptive immunity for other official acts, and no immunity under that doctrine for unofficial acts.
- Proposed safeguard
- Counsel assesses the conduct and applicable evidentiary and jurisdictional limits independently. The classification and outcome depend on the specific acts and applicable law.
Next choices
Sources and working documents
Presidential immunity → Screen jurisdiction
Continue only if counsel identifies a separate state-law issue and can support the factual and legal basis for the next step.