By Bennett Roth, CQ Staff

A federal appeals court has ruled that testimony and documents submitted by a member of Congress to the House ethics committee are constitutionally protected and cannot be subpoenaed by a federal grand jury.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruling unsealed Thursday came in a case involving former Florida Rep. Tom Feeney (2003-2009), a Republican who was ordered by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to pay $5,643 for a 2003 trip he took to Scotland that was originally underwritten by former lobbyist Jack Abramoff. The committee was investigating allegations that the trip constituted an illegal gift because it was financed by a lobbyist.

After the committee had closed its case, the Justice Department sought statements and documents submitted by Feeney’s attorneys to the ethics committee, according to court documents, which do not mention Feeney by name.

Feeney then moved to quash grand jury subpoenas for the material,but a district court judge refused. The circuit court, however, ruled that his statements were protected by the Constitution’s “speech or debate” clause, which states that “for any Speech or Debate in either House, [members] shall not be questioned in any other place.” It is intended to protect members of Congress from intimidation by the executive branch.

While the government had argued that the investigation of the Scotland trip was not covered by the clause because it was of a recreational nature, the appeals court said the lawmaker claimed the trip was for “the purpose of legislative fact-finding” and therefore protected.

“The committee’s inquiry thereafter was directed to whether the trip was an exercise of the congressman’s official powers or an abuse of those powers,” the judges wrote.

Feeney was defeated in his reelection bid in 2008 by Democrat Suzanne M. Kosmos, who made an issue of his ties to Abramoff, who was sent to prison after pleading guilty in 2006 to various corruption charges.