Jerry Nadler

No President can be allowed to violate his or her constitutional duties, nor can any President be allowed to obstruct a congressional investigation or hide crimes.

I believe the Nixon case established the very ironclad principle that discussions regarding criminal acts are not privileged.

It is certainly the case that conversations about criminal actions are not official White House business, without question.

I have stated repeatedly that this Committee is... pursuant to finding out--to determining whether we should vote Articles of Impeachment against the President.

The plain import of what I said was that he is violating the law by refusing to answer these questions.

You are also proving our point for the American people to see. The President is intent on obstructing our legitimate oversight.

What we're doing is very clear, it's been very clear, it continues to be very clear. The Speaker has backed us at every point along the way.

This is a formal impeachment proceeding.

An impeachment inquiry is when you consider only impeachment. That's not what we're doing. We're investigating all of this.

I'm especially troubled by the President's attempt to obstruct Congress' investigation and prevent the American people from learning the truth about what he's done.

I strongly disagree with the White House's assertion of absolute immunity.

We will not be daunted by the coverup.

The President announced his desire to, quote, 'fight all the subpoenas,' unquote.

No one is above the law, not even the President of the United States.

This is a coverup, plain and simple.

I thank Congresswoman Maloney for yielding and for all her work over the years on this issue. It is hard to believe it has been 18 years. Like many New Yorkers, 9/ 11 seems both long ago and immediate, a memory and something I live with…

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and let me express my appreciation to you for hosting us at the field hearing on voting rights in Memphis last week.

These kinds of voting restrictions have a disproportionate negative impact on racial and language minority voters, and contrary to what we just heard, disparate impact is very, very much a very useful evidentiary tool.

Since the Supreme Court's disastrous 2013 decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which effectively gutted the most critical enforcement provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the preclearance requirement, we have seen a troubling trend.

A Federal court ultimately put a stop to this practice because of the 'differential treatment inflicted on a group of individuals who are predominantly minorities' but had acted just 4 days before the election and only after a prolonged…

The committee has been greatly concerned about CBP's attempts to restrict the number of people seeking asylum at ports of entry through metering.

I want to begin thanking my esteemed colleague, Representative Escobar, for welcoming us to El Paso.

Why do we not see lawsuits against local governments for the violation of civil rights under color of law?

So there should be some requirement that before anybody is purged there has to be a death notice or something from the Post Office for a change of address notice sent to the--sent to the--whoever is doing the elections?

Thank you for giving me the privilege of testifying about discriminatory barriers in voting.