WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Karl Rove, President Bush's longtime political guru, refused to obey an order to testify before a House Judiciary Committee hearing Thursday.
Karl Rove's lawyers says he is immune from a congressional subpoena.
Rove's lawyer asserted that Rove was "immune" from the subpoena the committee had issued, arguing that the committee could not compel him to testify due to "executive privilege."
The panel is investigating allegations that Rove and his White House allies dismissed U.S. attorneys and prosecuted officials who they saw as political opponents.
The panel subpoenaed Rove in May after his lawyer, Robert D. Luskin, made clear the former White House deputy chief of staff would not appear voluntarily.
Luskin responded immediately that Rove still would not appear, prompting a threat of prosecution from the Judiciary Committee chairman, Rep. John Conyers, a Michigan Democrat, and Rep. Linda Sanchez, a California Democrat who chairs the subcommittee on commercial and administrative law.
"A refusal to appear in violation of the subpoena could subject Mr. Rove to contempt proceedings, including statutory contempt under federal law and proceedings under the inherent contempt authority of the House of Representatives," Conyers and Sanchez wrote.
"We are unaware of any proper legal basis for Mr. Rove's refusal to even appear today as required by the subpoena," Sanchez said Thursday morning when Rove failed to show up. "The courts have made clear that no one -- not even the president -- is immune from compulsory process. That is what the Supreme Court rules in U.S. v. Nixon and Clinton v. Jones."
In May, Conyers contrasted Rove's refusal to testify before Congress with his paid work as a commentator for the Fox News Channel and Newsweek magazine.
"Although he does not seem the least bit hesitant to discuss these very issues weekly on cable television and in the print news media, Mr. Rove and his attorney have apparently concluded that a public hearing room would not be appropriate. Unfortunately, I have no choice today but to compel his testimony on these very important matters."
Rove's lawyer cited a letter from the Justice Department saying Rove is "constitutionally immune from compelled congressional testimony." He said Rove is willing to submit to an "informal interview" or to answer written questions about the prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, whose ouster Rove is accused of orchestrating.
"Threatening Mr. Rove with sanctions will not in any way expedite the resolution of the issue," Luskin wrote in a letter to the panel on Wednesday.
Luskin noted in May that his client had already received a separate subpoena from the Senate Judiciary Committee. "While the [House] committee has the authority to issue a subpoena, it is hard to see what this will accomplish, apart from a 'Groundhog Day' replay of the same issues that are already the subject of litigation," the lawyer wrote, referring to a movie in which a person lives the same day over and over again.
Luskin added that "issues of executive privilege and separation of powers" could limit Rove's testimony.
In response, Conyers said the two committees are focusing on different matters, with the House committee delving into the prosecution of the former Alabama governor, a Democrat who lost his bid for re-election in 2002 and was convicted on corruption charges in 2006.
Conyers also noted that other former White House officials have testified under subpoena in the past and have dealt with issues of executive privilege on a case-by-case basis. "Mr. Rove should follow the same course," he said.
Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, called the subpoena "a sham."
The Democratic-controlled Congress has been battling for months to force the White House to disclose information about the firing of the attorneys and the prosecution of Siegelman.
Current and former White House aides have refused to testify, citing executive privilege.
All About Karl Rove • U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary
Karl Rove
Karl Rove, who served as Deputy Chief of Staff to United States President George W. Bush before resigning last year, failed to appear in front of the House Judiciary Committee today, refusing to testify about allegations of misusing his political power.

The congressional panel is trying to determine if Rove had a connection with the prosecution of Don Siegelman, former Democratic governor of Alabama. The committee is also investigating allegations that the former White House adviser dismissed nine federal prosecutors seen as political opponents. Rove has denied ever influencing the decisions of the Department of Justice.

In May, the panel subpoenaed Rove in an attempt to force him to offer testimony. He was scheduled to appear at a committee hearing today, but his lawyer Robert D. Luskin made it clear that he would not attend. Luskin argued that his client was "immune" to the subpoena because of executive privilege, which gives executive officials the right to resist a search from the other two branches of government.

In a letter written to the committee on Wednesday, Luskin said that Rove is "constitutionally immune from compelled congressional testimony", adding that "threatening Mr. Rove with sanctions will not in any way expedite the resolution of the issue." He said Rove would be willing to talk about the Siegelman case as part of an "informal interview", without a transcript and without taking an oath.

Members of the Judiciary Committee argued that executive privilege is not a valid reason to ignore a subpoena. California Rep. Linda Sanchez, who chairs the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law, said at the hearing, "We are unaware of any proper legal basis for Mr. Rove's refusal to even appear today as required by the subpoena." She cited United States v. Nixon and Clinton v. Jones as legal precedents. 

Sanchez, along with the Judiciary Committee chairman, Michigan Rep. John Conyers, said that Rove's refusal to testify could result in prosecution for being in contempt of Congress. "A refusal to appear in violation of the subpoena could subject Mr. Rove to contempt proceedings, including statutory contempt under federal law and proceedings under the inherent contempt authority of the House of Representatives," Conyers and Sanchez wrote.

If the Judiciary Committee votes to pursue these contempt charges against Rove, they would go to the floor of the House, where Speaker Nancy Pelosi would decide whether to proceed with a final vote. The House has already held two of Bush's advisers in contempt for defying a subpoena: White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers. Their case is currently in federal court.

Republicans have accused Democrats of using these cases as political weapons against George W. Bush. Rep. Chris Cannon, a Republican from Utah, said that "if the majority was serious about getting to the bottom of this issue", they would have accepted Rove's offers to discuss the issue on his terms, informally and without a transcript. "The fact that it hasn't is proof that their efforts amount to a partisan stunt," said Cannon.