Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes has filed a federal lawsuit against House Speaker Mike Johnson, demanding that he either seat Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva or permit her to be sworn in by someone else. The lawsuit, filed in Washington, D.C., centers on Johnson’s refusal to move forward with Grijalva’s swearing-in ceremony, which he claims is blocked by procedural rules and his broader strategy to delay Senate actions. Mayes, in the legal filing, emphasized that constitutional rights should not be leveraged for political leverage, stating, ‘Constitutional rights cannot be used as a bargaining chip.’ This legal action follows a previous warning from Mayes to Johnson last week, in which she threatened legal repercussions if the speaker did not expedite Grijalva’s swearing-in by the end of the week.
Johnson, however, dismissed the lawsuit as ‘patently absurd,’ accusing Grijalva of using legal threats to secure national media attention. He told reporters, ‘We run the House. She has no jurisdiction. We’re following the precedent,’ highlighting his assertion that the House holds the authority to determine procedural matters. Grijalva, a Democrat, had won a special election on September 23 to replace her late father, Rep. Raúl Grijalva, who previously represented Arizona’s 7th Congressional District. Her victory came amidst a political standoff in the House, where Johnson had sent the chamber home on September 19 over funding disputes, leading to an impasse in government operations. Johnson has vowed to swear in Grijalva only after the Senate votes to reopen the government, a move he claims is necessary to align with his strategic goals. Meanwhile, Grijalva has criticized Johnson for the delay, arguing that the delay has prevented her from effectively serving her constituents due to the lack of resources in her district’s office. She stated at a joint press conference with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, ‘Every moment that passes that I’m not able to provide constituent services… I cannot bring the issues forward that they sent me here to do.’ This dispute underscores the broader tensions within Congress over procedural control and legislative priorities, with the situation likely to gain more attention as the session progresses.