I thank my friend from Louisiana for a very substantive and dignified debate on this subject, which I know attracts strong views across the aisle. I want to restate some essential points for people to keep in mind. One is that what we are talking about is local elections in the District of Columbia, so the question is who will get to vote for the school board members and the councilmembers and who will get to vote for the neighborhood advisory commissioners. That is an institution that I think is unique to the District of Columbia, where neighborhoods have elected representatives who get to weigh in on things like the times that bars close, restaurant licenses, and stuff like that. That is really what we are talking about here. The people in D.C. have only one nonvoting Delegate for the District of Columbia, no voting representation here, no voting representation in the Senate, so the noncitizens, the 500 or so who are registered today, can't even vote for Eleanor Holmes Norton. It goes to the question of local elections. I am certain that most Members of Congress and most Americans certainly didn't expect that the House of Representatives would be spending so much time debating this relatively minute matter and, I daresay, trivial matter in the context of all the national emergencies and crises we are facing today, but it does seem to be part of an election year assault on the District of Columbia. It is a lot easier to kick D.C.…
On the recordMay 23, 2024
Share
More from Jamie Raskin
Jul 24, 2026
It seems Republican Members of Congress are lashing out because they just realized their communications with the White House became presidential records preserved at the National Archives as required by the Presidential Records Act.
Jul 24, 2026
But success on the merits is not the goal. It is meant to harass Jack Smith. It is meant to please their Fox News viewership. It is meant to whitewash their own participation in a scheme to overthrow our elections.
Jul 16, 2026
“In every other part of the federal government, taking lavish gifts from interested parties is called corruption—but at the Supreme Court, it’s bizarrely been treated as a job perk.





