Posted on 10/21/2025 3:24:51 PM PDT by CFW
Arizona's Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes and Arizona Democratic Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva sued the House of Representatives on Tuesday over its failure to seat the recently elected lawmaker.
The lawsuit fulfills a threat Mayes made to House Speaker Mike Johnson last week over the delay. Grijalva won a special election last month.
[link to lawsuit]
"This case is about whether someone duly elected to the House – who indisputably meets the constitutional qualifications of the office – may be denied her rightful office simply because the Speaker has decided to keep the House out of “regular session," Mayes argued in the lawsuit.
"If the Speaker were granted that authority, he could thwart the peoples’ choice of who should represent them in Congress by denying them representation for a significant portion of the two-year term provided by the Constitution," she continued. "Fortunately, the Constitution does not give that authority to the Speaker—or anyone else."
(Excerpt) Read more at justthenews.com ...
Swear in does not need a hyphen.
Democrats cheered when Pelosi did it?
Hypocrisy much.
No Federal court is going to interfere with the House’s parliamentary procedures. That’s a core separation of powers issue.
What is the Pelosi Precedent?
The House can refuse to seat any one as I read the Constitution.
“Swear in does not need a hyphen.”
You should send a note to “Just the News” and let them know.
Johnson isn’t refusing to swear anyone in. The House is simply not in session.
But... but... but... EPSTEIN!! /sarc
You lose .... House makes its own rules and procedures. Wasting your time.
APPARENTLY THAT NEWS HAS NOT YET REACHED ARIZONA.....
Speaker Johnson should let this lawsuit play out. It should only take a year or two to go through the courts.
Or...the broad could just wait until the House is back in session.
Vote Republican: We're the same as Pelosi now!
Three Branches and Separation of Powers
The U.S. Constitution establishes three branches: legislative (Congress), executive (President), and judicial (Supreme Court/federal courts). They are separate but co-equal, with checks and balances.
Congress Controls Its Membership
Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution gives each House of Congress the authority to judge the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members:
“Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members…”
This has historically been interpreted to give Congress broad discretion. Courts are generally reluctant to interfere in these internal disputes.
Relevant Supreme Court Precedent
In Powell v. McCormack (1969), the Supreme Court clarified that while Congress cannot exclude a member who meets the Constitutional qualifications (age, citizenship, residency), it can control procedural rules—for example, who gets seated, how committees operate, or how they manage internal disputes.
So, if the issue is procedural (e.g., delay in swearing in), courts may be limited in what they can enforce. If the issue were outright exclusion of a duly elected, qualified member, the Court could step in—but even then, Congress retains significant leeway.
Special Circumstances vs. Broad Discretion
The fact that this is a special election might not change the underlying principle. The House has historically delayed seating members for various reasons (certification disputes, contested elections, procedural disagreements).
Practical Likelihood
Lawsuits like this rarely succeed unless Congress is clearly violating a constitutional requirement. The courts usually defer to Congress’s own judgment unless it’s an obvious violation of the Constitution.
The most likely outcome is political pressure: media coverage, public opinion, or negotiations may push the House to seat the member sooner rather than a court order.
Bottom line: Legally, the odds that the courts will force the House to seat Grijalva are low. Constitutionally, Congress has strong authority to manage its membership. The lawsuit may succeed in raising pressure or drawing attention, but a direct court intervention is unlikely.
It would be like a court deciding the House's seniority system has a "disparate impact" on black representatives. LOL
Thomas Masshole will likely chime in to support the Commie any minute now.
Justice for Che Grijalva!
>>“Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members…”
Has the House certified the special election? Once back in session, just make a motion that Arizona failed to prove the validity of the results to the House’s satisfaction.
If the Speaker did swear her in, what would she do? Go home? Take the day off? Sit in her office and play video games?
Democrat judges interefere with EVERYTHING!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.