Two months ago the US government faced a so-called “Constitutional Crisis” after the FBI raided the Congressional offices of Representative William Jefferson. The congressman had been accused of taking bribes. Federal authorities, armed with a search warrant raided Jefferson’s office on Capitol Hill, seizing documents and equipment in the process. Following the raid, the princely politicians of Washington, on both sides of the aisle, came out in opposition to the raid. They argued, erroneously, that such searches violated the principle of separation of powers. Perhaps no one was more vocal than House Speaker Dennis Hastert.

The Speaker, whose voice had probably never been heard by the American public before, chose this occasion to enter the national spotlight, after all insulating members of congress from the laws they are bound to uphold is a noble cause for a hack politician. The Speaker and other hacks on the left and right rushed to Williams’ defense arguing the FBI had no ground to search a member of congress’ office, how dare they. They also contened that any search would have required advanced notice and should be left to capitol police, all of which is nonsense.

As stated earlier:

The position of the Speaker is groundless; perhaps Hastert is concerned that the equally corrupt Republicans will be targeted next. The FBI followed proper procedure in securing a warrant and the subsequent raid was completely constitutional. Hastert’s concerns over Separation of Powers is a poor attempt to change the meaning of the term. The constitution does not protect members of congress from being investigating for criminal activity.Execution of search warrants do not require advanced notice to the speaker or any other party, indeed that is the very nature of a search warrant and members of congress are not immune from the laws they are sworn to protect. These objections raised by members of congress represent a congressional usurpation in an of itself as they seek to reserve for themselves special treatment, to which ordinary Americans are not entitled…
http://www.thephalanx.com/2006/05/speaker-objects-to-fbi-raid.html

Members of Congress have portrayed this issue as a constitutional matter. Nothing could be farther from the truth; this matter has nothing to do with the concept of separation of powers. Indeed, under the principle of separation of powers, it is the responsibility of the executive branch of government to investigate and prosecute criminal activity; the constitution makes no distinction between John Q. Public and Congressman John Q. Thus the principle of separation of powers does not apply and furthermore the principle of separation of powers does not absolve give certain individuals immunity from a criminal investigation, nor does it grant the extra-legal authority to usurp due process.
http://www.thephalanx.com/2006/05/bush-buckles-to-pressure.html

Now those sentiments have been reiterated by a Federal Judge. U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan ruled Monday that the FBI raid of Rep Jefferson’s office was very much in keeping with the spirit of the constitution, unlike Jefferson’s willingness to accept bribes. Judge Hogan further noted that "Congressman Jefferson's interpretation of the Speech or Debate privilege would have the effect of converting every congressional office into a taxpayer-subsidized sanctuary for crime." Naturally Jefferson has announced he will appeal the ruling, but no amount of appeals will result in a ruling that will declare members of Congress above the law.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003119015_jefferson11.html