ABSTRACT
Some witnesses have cited the First Amendment to justify a refusal to answer, on the theory that the right to speak includes a right to remain silent or, at the very least, to edit the contents of speech. Courts have generally refused to accept this rationale. The US Supreme Court has held that this right can be invoked during congressional hearings if the purpose is to keep the witness from uttering words that a prosecutor could take down and use later in criminal court proceedings. Witnesses have been more successful in claiming the protection of the Fifth Amendment right against compulsory self-incrimination. If the Fifth Amendment is invoked, Congress may either excuse the witness or offer immunity. In a broad sense, a grant of immunity can supplant the Fifth Amendment. The witness must then answer the questions. But in return, if federal prosecutors put the witness on trial, they are forbidden to use the information provided by the witness.
