http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1148711891215860.xmlMatters of contention
There is disagreement among legal scholars whether the raid on Jefferson's congressional office runs afoul of the Constitution, as charged by Jefferson's lawyers and leaders of the House. They say it violated the "speech and debate" clause of the Constitution as well as the separation of powers between the White House and Congress.
Some legal experts aren't so sure. They say the speech and debate clause, which bars members of Congress from being investigated for a speech made on the floor or work related to legislative activity, isn't applicable to the search of an office. The Supreme Court has ruled that the clause prevents members from being arrested for things they say on the House or Senate floor, or actions taken on behalf of legislation, but not for criminal behavior.
The separation of powers draws different views. Some cite the Supreme Court ruling in the Watergate case that required President Nixon to turn over tapes of his White House conversations despite his arguments that to do so would run afoul of the separation of powers clause.
Others argue that while a search of a congressional office might be justified under some situations, the way the search of Jefferson's office was carried out -- without letting a representative of the House counsel's office be present and without parameters worked out in advance with House leaders -- may not be viewed favorably by federal judges. Some say it would be no different if congressional committees that had been denied White House documents for their investigations of the government's response to Hurricane Katrina had sent Capitol Police to the White House to collect the materials.