Kastigar v. United States

The power to compel individuals to testify before grand juries and in courts is well settled. However, this power is not absolute and is subject to a variety of exemptions, most notably the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. In this case, the defendants asserted that, at a minimum, a statute must afford them full transactional immunity in order to comply with the Fifth Amendment privilege. The Court rejected this argument, stating “that such immunity from use and derivative use is coextensive with the scope of the privilege against self-incrimination, and therefore is sufficient to compel testimony over a claim of the privilege.” Transactional immunity, on the other hand, provides a defendant a much broader protection than does the Fifth Amendment privilege, in that a defendant is afforded full immunity from prosecution. “While a grant of immunity must afford protection commensurate with that afforded by the Fifth Amendment privilege, it need not be broader.” In sum, the Court concluded “the immunity provided by 18 U.S.C. § 6002 leaves the witness and the prosecutorial authorities in substantially the same position as if the witness had claimed the Fifth Amendment privilege. The immunity therefore is coextensive with the privilege and suffices to supplant it.”