House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) has had enough of waiting around on Dr. Kevin O'Connor, the White House physician under now former President Joe Biden. On Thursday night, just as he's been making clear that he would do, Comer officially subpoenaed O'Connor.
In sharing the subpoena itself over X, Comer made a reference to the use of the autopen his Committee is investigating. "No autopen was used in the signing of this subpoena," Comer shared, also using the siren emoji.
🚨 I gave Joe Biden’s doctor a simple choice: cooperate or be subpoenaed.
— Rep. James Comer (@RepJamesComer) June 4, 2025
I’m now sending a subpoena.
The American people demand answers and @GOPoversight is working swiftly to get them. https://t.co/7fPxP9m9US
🚨No autopen was used in the signing of this subpoena.
— Rep. James Comer (@RepJamesComer) June 5, 2025
I expect Dr. Kevin O’Connor, President Joe Biden’s physician, to appear for a deposition on June 27, 2025, as part of @GOPoversight's investigation into the cover-up of Joe Biden’s decline & unauthorized use of the autopen. pic.twitter.com/4qzsyFuOY9
The 4-page cover letter accompanying the subpoena gives the date of June 27 for when O'Connor is to appear. "You refused the Committee’s request. However, to advance the Committee’s oversight and legislative responsibilities and interests, your testimony is critical. Accordingly, please see the attached subpoena for testimony at a deposition on June 27, 2025," Comer's cover letter lays out.
The letter also began by reminding O'Connor, just as Comer has done plenty of times before, how Biden's physician claimed he was supposedly healthy. This was even as the then president refused a cognitive test and the White House continuously lacked transparency in matters to do with the president's health.
"On May 22, 2025, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform requested that you—because of your role as former Physician to the President for President Joe Biden— appear for a transcribed interview on June 25, 2025, broadly regarding the circumstances surrounding your assessment in February 2024 that former President Biden was 'a healthy, active, robust 81-year-old male, who remains fit to successfully execute the duties of the Presidency.' Among other subjects, the Committee expressed its interest in whether your financial relationship with the Biden family affected your assessment of former President Biden’s physical and mental fitness to fulfill his duties as President. Given your connections with the Biden family, the Committee sought to understand if you contributed to an effort to hide former President Biden’s fitness to serve from the American people," the cover letter began by mentioning.
The subpoena's cover letter also provides insight into what O'Connor's lawyers have tried to argue, which Comer claims "lack merit." For instance, O'Connor's lawyers have tried to cite legal and ethical obligations, as well as the "physician-patient privilege." Comer further explains that O'Connor's lawyers only selectively cited a relevant law, D.C. Code § 14-307. It turns out there's limited exceptions, which do fit this instance:
In the Federal courts in the District of Columbia and District of Columbia courts, the following individuals [physicians] shall not be permitted, without the written consent of their client or of the client’s legal representative, to disclose any confidential information that the individual has acquired in attending the client in a professional capacity and that was necessary to enable the individual to act in that capacity, whether the information was obtained from the client the client’s family, or the person or persons in charge of the client
As Comer further explains:
The plain language of this Section is clear: it only limits a physician’s ability to disclose confidential patient information in “Federal courts in the District of Columbia and District of Columbia courts.” The D.C. Court of Appeals has affirmed this interpretation, stating that the law creates “an evidentiary privilege only, and extends no further than the courtroom door.” Congress is not a court; this Section therefore in no way precludes you from appearing and testifying regarding your role as Physician to former President Biden.
There's more explanations as to why the other excuses are moot, such as how ethical concerns are "overridden" by the subpoena. This one is pretty clear, as the American Medical Association code explains, "[p]hysicians who testify as fact witnesses in legal claims involving a patient they have treated must hold the patient’s medical interests paramount by … protecting the confidentiality of the patient’s health information, unless the physician is … legally compelled to disclose the information" and may decline to testify "unless ordered to do so by legally constituted authority." As Comer reminds for good measure, "The Committee and Congress are legally constituted authorities and have issued a duly authorized subpoena compelling your testimony."
"Even putting aside the threshold question about the applicability of non-constitutional privileges in legitimate constitutional congressional oversight, this privilege assertion is not supported in federal law. This privilege is not recognized at federal common law nor is it included in the Federal Rules of Evidence," Comer also notes when it comes to privilege.
But, Comer still had more to write for added measure about the reasons why O'Connor ought to testify, and the potential implications involved.
"The Committee seeks information about your assessment of and relationship with former President Biden to explore whether the time has come for Congress to revisit potential legislation to address the oversight of presidents’ fitness to serve pursuant to its authority under Section 4 of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment or to propose changes to the Twenty-Fifth Amendment itself. This investigation also continues to inform the Committee about whether additional reforms or enhancements to financial disclosures of White House employees, including the Physician to the President, are necessary," Comer writes towards the end.
The day after Biden's disastrous debate from June 27, 2024 against now President Donald Trump on CNN led to calls coming in the very next day for the 25th Amendment to be used, in this case by Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), though others followed with such a call. Even the top Democrats who ultimately forced Biden out of his reelection bid were reportedly considering using it against Biden when he was president. And, as Comer's letter referenced, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) proposed legislation to have an independent commission on presidential capacity.
As Comer explained to Fox News' Sean Hannity on Wednesday night, this is more formal than the transcribed interviews Comer has asked former White House staffers to take part in, and had also given O'Connor the opportunity to partake in. All will be under oath, though.
The chairman had called upon O'Connor to testify during the 118th Congress and had also sought to compel him through a subpoena, but such a move was blocked by the Biden White House.
🚨BREAKING🚨
— Rep. James Comer (@RepJamesComer) June 4, 2025
I'm expanding the investigation into the cover-up of President Joe Biden’s mental decline and unauthorized use of the autopen. Today, I'm calling on additional former Biden staff to appear before Congress:
Ronald Klain, former Chief of Staff
Michael Donilon,… pic.twitter.com/JSkjSunq9M
Join the conversation as a VIP Member