Eleanor Holmes Norton: “My good friend Mr. Meadows speaks as if he didn't speak up for the Congress of the United States with its awesome power…”

“My good friend Mr. Meadows speaks as if he didn't speak up for the Congress of the United States with its awesome power, then Congress would be stripped of its power by the District of Columbia-- please. If there is any concern here about this bill, the one thing my good friend should not do is to base it on what lawyers say. The latest and most definitive, on what lawyers say is a court of law. I want to indicate what happened, because the matter was first in the Federal district court, then appealed to the Federal court of appeals. The Federal court of appeals heard oral argument and received briefs. It looked at this--and we don't know why--but they sent it to a local D.C. court. That court heard at every single argument Mr. Meadows has raised and found for the District of Columbia. And that is the definitive word on the law, unless what he is saying is: Je suis the law, or, I am the law. Well, maybe you are, but you are the kind of law that led the Framers to rebel against England. No respect for local law. You speak of the Diggs Compromise. What you didn't say is that some compromise had to be reached because the Senate, in its home rule bill, gave the district control over its local budget.…”