Through her lawyer, Lerner maintains she broke no laws. | M.Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO House panel holds Lerner in contempt

A House panel voted along party lines to hold ex-IRS official Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress on Thursday, paving the way for a full House vote as Republicans turn up the heat on the woman at the center of the controversy over tax-exempt tea party groups.

If approved by the full House as expected, it would be one of about a dozen congressional contempt votes in the past 35 years. Republicans voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt over the Fast and Furious matter in 2012.


The House Oversight Committee voted 21-12 along in a straight party line vote to hold Lerner in contempt for refusing to answer questions about her role in the IRS tea party scandal that erupted last May. The full House is expected to follow suit in the coming weeks. Democrats compared the process to the 1950s when Sen. Joe McCarthy directed a series of contempt votes on Americans who refused questioning about what he called their “un-American” activities.

( PHOTOS: 8 key players in IRS scandal story)

Lerner, through her lawyer, has maintained that she has broken no laws.

“We are not surprised by today’s partisan contempt vote,” William Taylor said. “The vote is the latest event in the majority’s never-ending effort to keep the IRS story alive through this fall’s midterm elections.”

The controversy is heating up as congressional panels finish up their probes. The admission by Lerner, the former head of the IRS tax exempt unit, of the added scrutiny of tea party groups set off the furor last May. A critical inspector general report on the practices followed days later showing conservative groups were held up for extra attention.

“We need Ms. Lerner’s testimony to complete our [investigation],” said Oversight Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.). “Taxpayers don’t get to plead the Fifth [Amendment] and escape all accountability when the IRS audits them. … It would irresponsible for the committee not to vigorously pursue her testimony.”

Democrats say Issa is playing fast-and-loose with an American’s constitutional rights for political purposes.

( PHOTOS: Lois Lerner returns to the Hill)

“I’m not defending the action (of) Lois Lerner but rather the protections guaranteed by the Constitution to every American,” said top panel Democrat Elijah Cummings. “I cannot cast a vote that will place me on the same page of history books with McCarthy.”

“Ms. Lerner has invoked her Fifth Amendment right, and that’s it. The end!” said Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.).

Republicans, including panel member Jim Jordan of Ohio, said, “We’ve got to pass this resolution to get to the truth” about why the IRS between 2010 and 2013 started pulling conservative groups applying for tax exemptions.

The vote comes just a day after the Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee referred Lerner to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution. Justice is already investigating the matter and has interviewed Lerner.

The Wall Street Journal has reported that Justice was leaning toward closing the investigation having found no smoking gun.

( WATCH: POLITICO'S Driving the Day)

But Justice may not have seen the documents declassified by Ways and Means on Wednesday.

That panel says the now-declassified documents show she potentially broke laws prohibiting her from influencing the agency’s decisions to give conservative groups — including Crossroads GPS — extra attention; misled investigators about what and when she knew of the targeting; and improperly sent private taxpayer information to her personal email account, which is against IRS rules.

The IRS found itself in hot water last year when the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration found that the applications of almost 300 groups were held up. A Republican Ways and Means Committee analysis found that 83 percent of all those were right-leaning while 10 percent leaned left.

IRS agents contacted some of the groups asking for donor lists, private meeting minutes, Facebook posts, group leaders’ resumes and whether they knew certain politicians or had connections with various conservative groups. Those, especially the donor questions, were deemed inappropriate.

TIGTA, however, found no evidence of political bias but simply gross mismanagement at the IRS.

Still, some Republicans originally tried to tie the scandal to the White House, likening it to Nixon’s Watergate, but no proof was found.

Emails have shown that Lerner and other IRS officials were worried about how the Supreme Court’s Citizens United case would affect the actions of nonprofits that were only supposed to engage in limited political activity.

They emailed each other news stories of conservative groups abusing their tax exemptions, and they say that emails show Lerner pushed to have Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS, one group on hold, denied its application.

Lerner says she was just doing her job ensuring tax-exempt groups follow the rules.

Campaign finance reformers say the IRS was right to question whether groups like Crossroads, which spent tens of millions of dollars on election political ads, should get a tax exemption.

Tax exemptions are available for charities and “social welfare groups” — the latter of which has unclear definition under current law. Crossroads was claiming an exemption as a social welfare group, organized as a so-called 501(c)4 under the tax code.

Although many Oversight Democrats have questions about Lerner’s role in the scandal, and some even called for her to resign alongside their GOP counterparts, they have fought tooth and nail against Issa’s plan to hold her in contempt. They argue that he cannot in good authority do so because he didn’t follow the correct contempt procedures.

Issa, Democrats and some lawyers say, was required to notify Lerner during questioning that if she refused to answer, she would be held in contempt of Congress. A court struck down a similar contempt situation in the 1950s.

Issa didn’t specifically tell Lerner she would be held in contempt during the last hearing, but House Republicans say she knew the consequences of her actions.

The House Oversight Committee originally brought Lerner in to testify last May under subpoena, though her lawyer told the committee she’d take the Fifth.

She shocked the committee room, however, giving a defiant speech proclaiming her innocence and claiming she had neither broken any laws or rules. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), a lawyer by trade, immediately objected, arguing that a witness cannot make such a statement without being cross-examined.

The incident triggered a heated legal debate that came down along party lines, with Republicans claiming Lerner waived her right and Democrats claiming she didn’t. Lawyers also disagree on the matter.

“I counted 17 separate factual assertions … that is a lot of talking about somebody who wants to remain silent!” Gowdy said of her opening statement when the same debate erupted Thursday. “What are you fearful of, Ms. Lerner?”

The committee voted last summer that she waived her right with the opening statement.

Over the months, Lerner’s lawyer and the committee would barely keep contact.

But when Oversight decided in March to bring Lerner back under subpoena, her attorney and the committee began negotiating how and when Lerner might come back to testify and answer questions.

The negotiations fell through, however, when Lerner’s lawyer asked for a week delay on the hearing and didn’t get it right away.

Lerner invoked her Fifth Amendment right again at that hearing.