Jamie Raskin

The amazing thing is that the majority chose to reenter this maze when your report was perfectly clear on its findings.

A lot of my constituents are baffled why, at a moment when the U.S. Government is separating thousands of children and parents at the border in a way that threatens to make us an international pariah, the Judiciary Committee and the…

I look forward to your testimony today, Mr. Inspector General. I hope our conversation can be the beginning of the end of this long preoccupation with Secretary Clinton.

No, too many of my Republican colleagues instead seem stuck in a perpetual Trump campaign rally, shouting 'lock her up' with the rest of the crowd, hoping that the public won't notice how little they have accomplished with their time in…

I suspect that if the majority were actually motivated by the sensitivity of classified information in the Clinton case they would have also said something by now about the highly sensitive Israeli operation revealed to Russian officials…

Are we really going to sit here, 70 Members of the Congress of the United States of America, in 2018 and have a hearing that just repeats the hearings the Senate had yesterday on Hillary Clinton's emails?

We need you to stand up to President Trump. We need you to join us in telling him that we reject this mean policy.

House Republicans have done little or nothing to secure our next election from foreign attack; or to push back against the Attorney General's unprecedented refusal to defend in court the key protections of the Affordable Care Act; or to…

I suspect it has something to do with the way Republicans have squandered their opportunity to govern and the consequences of abdicating that responsibility.

This was a policy invented, implemented, and executed by President Donald Trump.

We will not intentionally separate children from their parents. We will not do that. We are better than that.

The House of Representatives is going to use its full arsenal of constitutional weapons to gain compliance.

I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it. The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 5 minutes. There was no objection.

I thank Mr. Khanna so much for his very moving statement that he made. I yield now to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), my colleague, who has been a terrific champion for economic equity and social justice in our country. I am…

I thank Ms. Moore for that powerful testimony. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal), my colleague.

Can I just submit something for the record, a Law Review article?

But don't you think the proper road to go for those who want to put a citizenship question and want to impose the citizenship requirement for voting, which has never been there, is to amend the Constitution?

As I understand it, your argument is that the Constitution forecloses the ability to ask about the presence of noncitizens in the country.

Its conduct is disgusting, immoral, and hypocritical.

Its intent is to frighten people in immigrant communities from participating in the census.

The conduct of the decennial census was never supposed to be a political function.

Adding an unvetted citizenship question to the census will not only undermine the Constitution's mandate.

If the administration truly wanted to strengthen enforcement of the Voting Rights Act, it would push legislation to address the Shelby County decision and restore the Voting Rights Act to its full effectiveness.

This assertion seems like a thinly veiled pretext to exclude immigrants and racial minorities from being counted, literally and figuratively.

The census must count, quote, "the whole number of persons," unquote.