Florida AG Says Subpoenas in Fauci Investigation Could Come Next Week

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier and Dr. Anthony Fauci in a split-image composite

UPDATE — July 31: Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office now says the investigation will examine whether Fauci’s alleged conduct caused physical or monetary harm to Floridians and created liability under Florida law. The office still has not identified a specific statute, documented injury, case number or subpoena recipient, and no finding of wrongdoing has been made.

During an interview with Benny Johnson on The Benny Show, Uthmeier said his office would retrieve records from Washington and could issue subpoenas “likely as early as next week.”

“We’ll probably be sending out subpoenas likely as early as next week,” Uthmeier said.

The attorney general also said Florida investigators intend to obtain records from Washington and work with U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, the Kentucky Republican who chairs the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Paul publicly offered to share what he characterized as a “mountain of evidence” with Florida officials. His committee recently launched an online archive containing documents, correspondence and other records collected during its investigation into the origins of COVID-19 and federally funded virus research.

No subpoena from Uthmeier’s office has been made public, and Florida officials have not confirmed receiving or independently authenticating records from Paul.

Florida has not identified suspected offense

Uthmeier announced the state investigation following Fauci’s July 29 appearance before Paul’s Senate committee.

During the contentious hearing, Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination more than 100 times while declining to answer questions about the pandemic response, COVID-19’s origins, federal research funding and his previous congressional testimony.

Fauci accused Paul of conducting what he called an “unhinged” campaign to prosecute him. Paul said his committee would consider holding Fauci in contempt of Congress.

Exercising the Fifth Amendment is a constitutional right and is not evidence that a person committed a crime.

Uthmeier has not disclosed a case number, the suspected Florida offense, the legal theory behind the investigation or the people and organizations that could receive subpoenas.

Although Uthmeier’s office has now identified alleged harm to Floridians as a focus, it has not disclosed a specific injury, conduct occurring within Florida or the statutory basis for potential liability.

Rand Paul offers federal records

Paul’s committee has spent years investigating federal funding provided to organizations studying coronaviruses, including research involving the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

His newly launched “Reading Room” contains documents and internal correspondence that Paul says raise questions about federal officials’ handling of COVID-19 origins and gain-of-function research.

Paul’s Senate office has published an extensive collection of records through its COVID investigation Reading Room, including a newly released investigative document compilation. Uthmeier has not identified which records Florida investigators intend to obtain or use in preparing possible subpoenas.

Paul’s office has also released a 465-page collection of Fauci’s historical records and emails spanning 2001 through July 2015. The collection predates the COVID-19 pandemic and does not itself establish that Fauci violated Florida law.

The senator’s characterization of those records as evidence does not establish that Fauci violated federal or Florida law.

Paul’s potential contempt action is also separate from Florida’s investigation. A congressional contempt referral would involve federal procedures, while any enforcement action by the Florida Attorney General’s Office would require authority under state law.

Previous Florida COVID inquiry ended without indictments

Florida previously convened a statewide grand jury to investigate COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers and representations made about vaccine safety and effectiveness.

That grand jury completed its work without issuing criminal indictments related to vaccine development. Its inquiry was not necessarily identical to the investigation Uthmeier has now announced.

The prior outcome does not prevent Florida from examining newly obtained information, but investigators would still need to establish jurisdiction and a lawful basis for any subpoena.

Uthmeier’s office has separately pursued recent cases involving alleged illegal voting by a Canadian citizen and a multi-county fentanyl-trafficking investigation. Unlike the Fauci inquiry, those announcements identified defendants and specific criminal charges.

What happens next

The release of an actual subpoena would clarify what information Florida is seeking, who must respond and what authority Uthmeier’s office is relying upon.

Until then, the investigation remains in its preliminary stage. No charges have been announced, no subpoena has been publicly released and no court has determined that Fauci violated Florida law.