Rand Paul has Fauci attorney escorted out of Senate Homeland Security hearing

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) had Dr. Anthony Fauci’s attorney escorted out of a Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing, according to a report published July 29, 2026. The incident occurred while Fauci was appearing before the committee.

The New York Post reported that Fauci’s defense lawyer, David Schertler, was removed from the hearing room by Capitol Police after Paul raised an objection during the proceedings. The report framed the episode as Paul’s motion resulting in Schertler being escorted out while the hearing was ongoing.

Paul’s action took place in the context of Fauci’s testimony, with the committee session continuing after the attorney’s removal. The report did not, in the information provided, include the specific allegation or procedural basis Paul cited on the record for why the attorney should be removed.

The Capitol Police involvement underscores that the removal was handled as a security and courtroom-order matter rather than a change to testimony timing alone. In the report’s description, Schertler left the room under escort rather than being removed by committee staff without police presence.

The hearing’s setting, the Senate committee charged with oversight and federal administration, means the incident also highlights how disputes over participation can carry real-world consequences in federal proceedings. Even when disagreements arise during testimony, removing counsel can affect how a witness is represented and how the exchange between senators and witnesses proceeds.

The report offered no additional verified details in the material provided about whether the attorney was later allowed to return, whether any procedural objections were entered for the record, or whether the committee issued any formal statement addressing the incident.

Legal and procedural questions that can follow such an event include whether the removal complied with the committee’s rules for witness and counsel participation, and whether the record reflects the stated rationale for removal. Absent a transcript or committee statement in the available information, those points remain unresolved based on the single report.