The Clintons in contempt in the Epstein case: Can they go to prison?

The House Oversight Committee voted on Wednesday in a bipartisan manner in favor of introducing two resolutions recommending that the House of Representatives hold former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in contempt for disobeying subpoenas related to their investigation into the Epstein case.

The House committee voted, by  34 to 8, to send the resolution against Bill Clinton to a floor vote. It also approved advancing a resolution to hold Hillary Clinton in contempt for the same reason, although this passed by a smaller margin of 28 to 15.

Contempt is a legal mechanism rarely used by Congress and can carry up to one year in prison and a fine of up to$100,000. However, the committee vote is only the first step: the full House still must approve the measure before it can be sent to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for possible prosecution.

If the resolution gets the simple majority needed to pass the House, the DOJ will have to decide whether or not to proceed with criminal charges. The House is not expected to take up the resolution this week, a source familiar with the matter told Axios.

The Clintons responded with "defiance, delay, and obstruction"

Bill and Hillary Clinton repeatedly postponed their scheduled testimony before the House committee, initially scheduled for October 2025 and then moved to mid-December, citing in both cases the need to attend a funeral. The committee indicated it was willing to accommodate their schedules if they proposed firm dates in January, but neither did. As a result, new subpoenas were issued: Bill Clinton's deposition was set for Jan. 13, 2026, and Hillary Clinton's for Jan. 14, 2026. Neither appeared on the assigned dates.

"These bipartisan subpoenas for the Clintons were approved unanimously and issued more than five months ago as part of the Committee’s investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. The Clintons were legally required to appear and instead responded to our good-faith negotiations with defiance, delay, and obstruction. The Committee is taking the necessary steps to uphold Congress’s investigative authority and now urges the full House to act swiftly to hold the Clintons accountable," Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY.) stated on Tuesday, following the vote in favor of both resolutions.

Comer also offered statements during the session, stressing that the Committee does not take this action lightly, but must hold the Clintons accountable for their refusal to comply with the subpoenas. He noted that "the Clintons’ testimony is critical to understanding Epstein’s sex trafficking network and the ways he sought to curry favor and influence to shield himself from scrutiny."

Comer concluded that Congress must do what is necessary to maintain its investigative authority and demonstrate to the American people that justice is applied equally regardless of position, lineage or prestige.

Family name does not entitle them to "special treatment"

Negotiations to obtain Bill Clinton's testimony fell apart Tuesday after James Comer rejected a proposal that would have allowed the former president to testify in New York without an official transcript and full committee attendance.

"The Clintons’ latest demands make clear they believe their last name entitles them to special treatment," Comer wrote in a statement Tuesday. "The House Oversight Committee’s bipartisan subpoenas require the Clintons to appear for depositions that are under oath and transcribed. Former President Clinton has a documented history of parsing language to evade questions, responded falsely under oath, and was impeached and suspended from the practice of law as a result," he added.

During a deposition in a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by Paula Jones in 1998, Bill Clinton denied having a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Subsequently, physical evidence and testimony proved that claim false.

"The absence of an official transcript is an indefensible demand that is insulting to the American people who demand answers about Epstein’s crimes," Comer exclaimed.

Navarro case, an important precedent

Former White House advisers Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro were held in contempt by the full House, indicted, convicted and obliged to serve time in federal prison after refusing to testify before the House Select Committee on Jan. 6.

"The difference with Clinton is no executive privilege was invoked, and he’s facing a duly authorized committee," Navarro told the New York Post on Tuesday. "If he gets a subpoena, he has to come. Full stop."

During the Biden administration, the DOJ brought charges against Bannon and Navarro, and both served four-month sentences in 2024 before Donald Trump's return to the White House.