Photograph Source: NIAID – CC BY 2.0
We all make choices. Dr. Anthony Fauci, former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, invoked the Fifth Amendment over 100 times when he appeared before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on July 29. Subpoenaed to testify about his handling of the COVID pandemic and the questions surrounding the origins of the virus, Fauci declined to answer the committee’s substantive questions, a striking departure from his previous appearance before the House in 2024, when he answered questions for hours and defended his actions and decisions during the pandemic.
Fauci began his testimony before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic with,“Thank you for this opportunity to testify.” Two years later, before the Senate Committee, he said: “Therefore, although it pains me to do so because of the respect that I have for the legislative branch of government and my decades-long record of cooperating with Congress, under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution to refrain from answering your questions.”
What changed?
Fauci’s decision to invoke the Fifth Amendment before Congress put him in an unusual but well-established American tradition. Government officials like Oliver North have relied on the constitutional protection when congressional questioning threatened to expose them to possible criminal liability. Many Hollywood figures such as Abraham Polonsky and Carl Foreman “Took the Fifth” before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) during the “Red Scare” when faced with congressional questioning about associations with the Communist Party. Donald Trump once famously asked, “If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth?” He later invoked the Fifth Amendment hundreds of times during a 2022 civil deposition, explaining that his lawyers had advised him he had no practical alternative.
But the good Dr. Fauci taking the Fifth? “To many,” Katie Rogers wrote in the Times, “this was a tacit admission of guilt from the 85-year-old, who retired from public service in 2022.” David Wallace-Wells, also writing in the Times, called it “cowardly.”
Fauci was not always “cowardly.” Before Fauci even began speaking before the House in 2024, Republican Chairman Brad Wenstrup said: “First, I want to thank you for decades of public service. You served your country through multiple epidemics, pandemics, and health crisis.” He continued: “Regardless of any disagreements we may have, you chose to serve and I want to extend our appreciation and gratitude. I also want to thank you for your willing cooperation with the Select Subcommittee.”
Wenstrup added: “You have voluntarily sat for more than 14 hours of testimony and are appearing voluntarily today. This is more than we can say about other witnesses we have called, and we appreciate it.”
In 2026, Fauci began his testimony on very different terms: “However, given Senator Paul’s obvious obsession with calling for my prosecution, his repeated slanderous comments about me, and recently, his publicly releasing my unredacted personal diary, aimed at embarrassing and intimidating me, the only conclusion I can reach is that the sole reason he is calling me before this committee is to get me to say something—anything—that could vindicate his repeated public pledges that I end up, in his words, ‘behind bars.’”
In 2026, Fauci clearly believed that Rand Paul and the Republicans on the committee were out to get him. Trump has called Fauci an “idiot,” a “phony,” and a “terrible ‘athlete’.” Paul and the committee were following the same line of attack.
Fauci was later lambasted by RFK Jr. on CNN August 2: “Now we know that Anthony Fauci, who was the expert, was lying about everything, about masks, about the social distancing, about natural immunity, about the transmission from the vaccine, about the source of COVID,” said the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The Committee voted along party lines on August 6 to hold Fauci in contempt and referred the matter to the Justice Department for possible prosecution. It is unclear whether the Department will take up the case.
Beyond the criticisms of Fauci, the major change between 2024 and 2026 may have been the image of Fauci himself. During the pandemic, he was the medical expert as well as the kindly family doctor. He had the nation’s respect and confidence.
The recently released diary material has given critics a very different view of Fauci’s private personality. The Washington Post, for example, reported that the entries showed him reflecting on his fame and media coverage, including references to spending time with A-listers such as Julia Roberts. The diary changed the public image of Fauci, but it doesn’t answer the substantive questions that Congress was asking.
Why did Fauci take the Fifth and refuse to answer the committee—and the public—about his actions during the pandemic?
Perhaps the answer is as simple as the one he gave: his lawyers advised him that answering could expose him to criminal liability. Perhaps he genuinely believed that Senator Paul’s repeated calls for prosecution made it impossible for him to testify without putting himself at risk, despite the pardon issued to him by Joe Biden.
In an article in The New Yorker, Amy Davidson Sorkin also questioned Fauci’s decision not to answer. “Yet Fauci’s silence was a loss. Paul may have come at the matter with theatrics and ill will, but some of his questions, in their most basic forms, are worth exploring, because the debate about where the novel coronavirus came from is ongoing, divisive, and important.” David Wallace-Wells made a similar point in the Times.
And after everything Americans and the world were told about—and suffered through—during COVID, perhaps asking those questions is not unreasonable. The virus, the vaccines, lockdowns, masks, social distancing and the people making those decisions all affected millions of lives.
Beyond asking why Fauci changed between 2024 and 2026, I would like to know more about the choices he made before and during the pandemic. Is he holding back until he writes a best-selling tell-all? Why he took the Fifth is only one question. He made choices that affected millions of people. Those choices need explanations as well.
