# Does Adelita Grijalva have any recourse? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 14, 2025, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965 "2025-10-14T17:23:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2025, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/1 "2025-10-14T17:23:48Z")
To catch you up: Adelita Grijalva was elected to the House of Representatives in a special Arizona election, 3 weeks ago. Speaker Mike Johnson is dragging his feet in swearing her in to her seat. His stated reason is that he can’t do so during the shutdown; this is a lie. The actual reason is that she will be the 218th signatory to the discharge petition calling for the release of the Epstein files. How can she get Johnson to do his job? Does she have to go to court? ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2025, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/2 "2025-10-14T17:25:27Z")
A sworn-in member would have to move a Point of Order that she should be seated. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2025, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/3 "2025-10-14T17:26:19Z")
Which can only happen when the House is in session, I presume. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2025, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/4 "2025-10-14T17:31:12Z")
Yep. I think they next meet as a body on Saturday. ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2025, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/5 "2025-10-14T17:33:46Z")
Compounding the issue is that Johnson has sworn in Republican members when the House has not been in session (including this year). When pressed on this, he feebly said that that was because they’d already made the appointment and had their families present. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2025, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/6 "2025-10-14T17:47:42Z")
Arizona’s Attorney General is preparing to sue to have Grijalva rightfully seated. > **[Attorney General Mayes Sends Demand Letter to Speaker Johnson Urging Him to...](https://www.azag.gov/press-release/attorney-general-mayes-sends-demand-letter-speaker-johnson-urging-him-seat)** > > PHOENIX – Today, on the day of the formal certification of Arizona's special election, Attorney General Kris Mayes has sent a demand letter from the state of Ari ---
**Author:** ![ratatoskK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ratatoskk/32/2987_2.png) [@ratatoskK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ratatoskK)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2025, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/7 "2025-10-14T18:14:26Z")
No, actually it’d been done before (and recently) out of session. Sorry don’t have the cite now but it was on Rachel Maddow (I think). ETA: I see Superdude has already made the same point. ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2025, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/8 "2025-10-14T18:32:19Z")
[Here’s a Yahoo article](https://www.nj.com/politics/2025/10/trump-republican-receives-blunt-fact-check-as-swearing-in-of-new-democrat-drags-on.html) about Jim Jordan being fact-checked on CNN about it. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2025, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/9 "2025-10-15T01:09:43Z")
Fact-checking Jim Jordan essentially consists of checking if his lips are moving. With the House out of session Adelita Grijalva’s only recourse is to petition the Supreme Court for application to the emergency (‘shadow’) docket to adjudicate whether Mike Johnson refusing to expeditiously swear in the duly elected Representative-Elect Grijalva is dereliction of his duty to ensure fair representation to the voters of Arizona. (I see that the Arizona Attorney General is also threatening litigation on the basis of “Congresswoman Grijalva has been unable to assist constituents impacted by recent flooding disasters in Arizona”, which may give standing or at least vested interest in seeing that Rep-Elect Grijalva is sworn in.) Unfortunately, the Supreme Court’s ‘shadow docket’ is quite packed for, uh, reasons, and even if the court were inclined to weigh against Speaker Johnson’s refusal to follow procedure, they probably will not do so promptly, nor is it clear what recourse Rep-Elect Grijalva would have if Speaker Johnson ignored the Supreme Court’s order since the only real authority over the Speaker of the House is the body of House members itself who would have to vote to remove him from the Speakership (or censure or impeach) and replace him with a new Speaker. In other words, in all practical sense, Rep-Elect Grijalva has no resource save to appeal to the basic decency and respect for democratic norms of the Republican majority to demand fair treatment for her and the constituents she represents. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2025, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/10 "2025-10-15T01:46:45Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > appeal to the basic decency and respect for democratic norms of the Republican majority Good one!😂 Sen Gallego (D-AZ) was on MSNBC tonight and when asked about this impasse he said “Speaker Johnson is a little creep.” I’m all for civility but sometimes you gotta call ‘em like you see ‘em. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2025, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/11 "2025-10-15T01:51:30Z")
> [@jsc1953](#): > > Sen Gallego (D-AZ) was on MSNBC tonight and when asked about this impasse he said “Speaker Johnson is a little creep.” > > I’m all for civility but sometimes you gotta call ‘em like you see ‘em. I mean, that is a more civil observation than anything I’ve said about Johnson in the last month. And, to be frank, the smug little near-smile he always has on his face while declaring the current kurfluffle as a “Democrat shutdown” makes me think he’s getting some kind of perverted sexual pleasure from all of this. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![DMC](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dmc/32/18049_2.png) [@DMC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMC)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2025, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/12 "2025-10-15T01:59:20Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > Fact-checking Jim Jordan essentially consists of checking if his lips are moving. In this case, he only had to pretend to be unaware of something, and if there is one area where Gym Jordan excels, it is in looking the other way. ---
**Author:** ![Toxgoddess](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Toxgoddess](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Toxgoddess)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2025, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/13 "2025-10-15T02:02:23Z")
I’ve seem it claimed that although the Constitution says a member shall be sworn in, it doesn’t say by who. Traditionally it’s the Speaker but it doesn’t have to be. Perhaps one of the other Arizona reps would be happy to oblige. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2025, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/14 "2025-10-15T02:06:36Z")
As explained in thread I started in FQ, the House adopted a rule that only the speaker can swear in a member. What would serve them right, assuming the Dems control the house in 2027, is refuse to swear in any of the Republican members-elect. That would guarantee that Scotus would rule the current rule unconstitutional and that anyone can swear in a member. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2025, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/15 "2025-10-15T02:08:35Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > the only real authority over the Speaker of the House is the body of House members itself who would have to vote to remove him from the Speakership (or censure or impeach) A Representative or Senator cannot be impeached as they are legislative officers, not civil officers and they can be removed by a 2/3 vote of their respective House. This was decided by the impeachment of Sen. Blount. > [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > That would guarantee that Scotus would rule the current rule unconstitutional and that anyone can swear in a member. That would be a tough pull (though not impossible) since the Constitution allows the House to make their own rules. They might have to expand upon the ruling in _Powell v McCormack_ and rule that not swearing in a member immediately is excluding the member. > [@Toxgoddess](#): > > Perhaps one of the other Arizona reps would be happy to oblige. Invalid under the law 2 USC 25. > Oath of Speaker, Members, and Delegates > At the first session of Congress after every general election of Representatives, the oath of office shall be administered by any Member of the House of Representatives to the Speaker; and by the Speaker to all the Members and Delegates present, and to the Clerk, previous to entering on any other business; and to the Members and Delegates who afterward appear, previous to their taking their seats. Although it would make an interesting Constitutional question as SCOTUS typically rules against adding more requirement than the Constitution does. If she does it, it would force the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2025, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/16 "2025-10-15T02:15:35Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > A Representative or Senator cannot be impeached as they are legislative officers, not civil officers and they can be removed by a 2/3 vote. I stand corrected. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2025, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/17 "2025-10-15T18:40:56Z")
The Arizona Attorney General is [threatening legal action against Mike Johnson.](https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/10/14/congress/adelita-grivalja-mike-johnson-legal-threat-00607890) From the above link (more specifically, from the letter the Attorney General sent, which can be found at the link): > [@](#): > > The effect of your failure to follow usual practice is that Arizona is down a representative from the number to which it is constitutionally entitled. And the more than 813,000 residents of Arizona’s Seventh Congressional District currently have no representation in Congress. The “loss of a Representative to the United States Congress undoubtedly satisfies the injury-in-fact requirement of Article III standing.” Dep’t of Com. v. United States House of Reps., 525 U.S. 316, 331 (1999). The question of entitlement to a seat in the House is justiciable and is not a political question. Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486, 522 (1969); see Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 217 > > The House and its leadership have acted ultra vires and in violation of the Constitution. > > “[T]he Constitution leaves the House without authority to exclude any person, duly elected by [her] constituents, who meets all the requirements for membership expressly prescribed in the Constitution.” > > Powell, 395 U.S. at 522. > > The House’s power to exercise control over its membership is limited to its role as the “Judge of the Elections; Returns and Qualifications of its own Members.” Id.; see U.S. Const. art. 1, § 4. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2025, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/18 "2025-10-16T13:25:13Z")
That’s what I was thinking- wouldn’t the State that she represents part of have to sue? They’re the ones who have standing in Federal courts for that, I’d think. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2025, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/19 "2025-10-17T02:01:42Z")
There is another way of looking at it. Namely that the member-elect **is** a representative as soon as their state certifies the election. In fact, no other interpretation makes sense since they do elect the speaker. They are required to swear an oath but they are members even before they do. Just as LBJ was considered to be president the minute JFK was declared dead. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2025, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965/20 "2025-10-17T02:43:27Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > Namely that the member-elect **is** a representative as soon as their state certifies the election. In fact, no other interpretation makes sense since they do elect the speaker. They are required to swear an oath but they are members even before they do. They are an elected official representing their district or state but are not able to vote or otherwise act within the body of Congress until being sworn in. > [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > Just as LBJ was considered to be president the minute JFK was declared dead. Lyndon B. Johnson was already sworn in as Vice President, and took over as Acting President per Article 2, Section 1, Clause 6: > **[Succession Clause for the Presidency](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-2/section-1/clause-6/succession-clause-for-the-presidency)** The 25th Amendment clarifies this as well as providing for a process of filling a vacancy in the Office of the Vice President, as well as a process for transfer in the case that they declare themselves “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office” (Section 3), or are adjudicated by the “ Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office” (Section 4): > **[25th Amendment](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxxv)** Inauguration and swearing of the Vice President into a vacancy confirms that they are the permanent President but they essentially have all powers and authority of the Presidency while they are the Acting President. Stranger [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-adelita-grijalva-have-any-recourse/1023965.md?page=2)