Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my heartfelt gratitude to Jo-Ann Yoo for her lifetime of public service on behalf of the AAPI community in my district and the entire city of New York.

This year, Jo-Ann will retire after 13 years as executive director of the Asian American Federation, an organization dedicated to supporting the 1.5 million Asian-American community members in New York City.

Under Jo-Ann's leadership, the AAF played a leading role in combating the horrific rise in anti-Asian hate in 2020, organizing and ensuring local community response to provide safety to AAPI New Yorkers.

Jo-Ann testified at a public briefing held by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights on the Federal response to anti-Asian hate, and she serves on New York City's Advisory Board on Implementation of Racial Justice Commission, working to end hate and discrimination of all kinds in our city.

Jo-Ann leaves behind a lasting legacy of spirit, courage, determination, and advocacy that will be felt for decades to come. Thanks to Jo-Ann, New York City is a better and far more tolerant place.

Mr. Speaker, I hereby remove my name as cosponsor of H.R. 6887 and H.R. 6598.

Madam Speaker, due to travel delays, I was not able to be present to vote on the passage of H.R. 8932, the FAFSA Deadline Act. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 465.

Madam Speaker, nearly 1 year ago today, I was awoken by sirens in my Tel Aviv hotel and quickly sheltered in a stairwell as rockets from a terrorist organization intent on destroying Israel and all Jewish people flew toward my family and me. My kids are still struggling from that traumatic day.

It has now been 354 days since that terrorist group, Hamas, launched the most barbaric, genocidal, and murderous sneak attack on Israel in its history, killing 1,200 people, including more than 40 Americans.

It has been 354 days since more than 250 people were brutally and illegally captured and taken hostage in the tunnels of Gaza, where four American citizens remain today, as well as approximately 100 more.

The violence in Gaza could end today--today--if Hamas would simply release the hostages they illegally hold. The path toward peace and prosperity for both Israelis and Palestinians begins with the immediate return of the hostages. Bring them all home now.

Mr. Speaker, 24 years ago next week, the Food and Drug Administration approved the use of mifepristone, authorizing it as a safe and effective means for women to end a pregnancy through medication. In the ensuing two decades, there has been no evidence that it

is not effective, nor that it is dangerous in any way.

It is actually safer than Tylenol, and millions of women have exercised their right to control their own bodies by using it. Naturally, in their quest to control women's bodies, Republicans have fought tooth and nail to prohibit access to mifepristone.

Women's healthcare is not some abstract concept. It is a human right. When Republicans criminalize reproductive freedom, women die, as we learned this week about two women in Georgia.

On this 24th anniversary of mifepristone's FDA authorization, which remains the law of the land, I call on pharmacies around the country to continue to distribute this safe and effective medication to women who want it.

Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member for yielding.

Mr. Chair, I rise today to discuss the next installment of Republican hypocrisy in the 118th Congress. This one relates to anti-Semitism.

My Republican colleagues have spent months haranguing university presidents for failing to protect Jewish students on college campuses, and on this, I agree. Many university presidents have failed to show appropriate moral clarity and leadership, but let me ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Does the removal of a university president actually change the facts on the ground? Does it make Jewish students safer? The answer is unequivocally no, and certainly not in the near term.

I have spoken to Jewish students all around the country, and they remain scared and afraid as anti-Semitic encampments and protests have grown more threatening and even violent.

Despite all of their lipservice about combating anti-Semitism, this Republican bill makes it significantly more difficult for universities to keep Jewish students safe.

Under the guise of ending wokeness on college campuses, this bill would strip universities of their ability to enforce reasonable restrictions on campus protests. It limits time, place, and manner restrictions and allows for no-notice spontaneous protests, including anywhere on campus, such as Hillels.

That is right. The bill makes it easier for agitators and others to come onto college campuses and engage in anti-Semitic protests or encampments. Once again, all talk, no action from my Republican colleagues.

The most effective way for the Federal Government to combat anti- Semitism on campus is through the enforcement of the title VI antidiscrimination law by the Office for Civil Rights in the Department of Education, which requires universities to remedy any violations that make Jewish students or any other students unable to safely and securely get the education that they deserve.

Since October 7, OCR has opened more than 150 investigations into campus anti-Semitism, but they don't have anywhere near the resources to fully pursue those investigations--never mind that Donald Trump's Project 2025 wants to eliminate the Department of Education altogether, including the Office for Civil Rights.

If Republicans truly cared about Jewish students, as they say, they would support my Showing Up for Students Act, which would increase funding for OCR so that we can actually combat anti-Semitism on the ground at universities around the country. Yet, not a single Republican has cosponsored this bill--not one.

Mr. Chair, instead, in the last budget, Republicans insisted on cutting funding for OCR, further hampering OCR's ability to fight anti-Semitism.

I, once again, ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to stop using anti-Semitism as a political weapon and join us to actually solve the problem. If you care about anti-Semitism on college campuses, you must oppose H.R. 3724 and instead join my Showing Up for Students Act so Congress can be part of the solution, not the problem.

Mr. Speaker, this morning at Ground Zero, we observed the 23rd anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on American soil.

I was living in Lower Manhattan that day, and I will never forget watching the second plane hit the South Tower and then seeing the soot- covered people walking up Hudson Street. I will never forget the overwhelming patriotism that New Yorkers and Americans around the country displayed in the face of that evil.

Our Nation owes a debt of gratitude to the first responders who returned day after day to Ground Zero, looking for signs of life and clearing the rubble, and to the survivors who helped rebuild and transform the city in Lower Manhattan.

Now it is our turn to take care of them. That is why Congress must pass the bipartisan 9/11 Responder and Survivor Health Funding Correction Act to permanently address the funding shortfalls in the World Trade Center Health Program.

Just like our military veterans, we owe it to the 9/11 survivors and first responders, who are true American patriots, to get this bill across the finish line.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the Republicans' desperate attempt to, yet again, use the official business of the House of Representatives to do the partisan, political bidding of Donald Trump.

My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have spent most of this Congress wasting our time and taxpayer money on a bogus sham impeachment investigation of President Biden that yielded no evidence of wrongdoing, much less any high crime or misdemeanor.

It was obvious that that phony effort was solely designed to provide election fodder for Trump in advance of November's election, and recently the chairman of the committee overseeing that investigation even admitted as much.

Now that President Biden has selflessly and patriotically passed the torch to Vice President Kamala Harris, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are scrambling to help Donald Trump's electoral chances by using our time here today on a blatantly false resolution about Vice President Harris.

The title of this resolution is ``Strongly condemning the Biden administration and its Border Czar, Kamala Harris's, failure to secure the United States border.''

There is one problem. There is no such thing as a border czar, nor was Vice President Harris ever named the border czar. The entire premise of this resolution is simply false.

Not surprisingly, the resolution makes no mention of the border security bill that the Biden-Harris administration negotiated with Senate Republicans that would have comprehensively addressed the problems at the border, nor does it say anything about Donald Trump's decision to sabotage and kill that bipartisan bill because it would have solved the problems that this resolution complains about.

Now, why did he do that?

It is precisely because he wanted his minions in the House to introduce useless and deceptive resolutions like this one to help his campaign. While Republicans continue to play politics with the border, the Biden-Harris administration did not stop trying to solve the problems facing the administration. They used what limited authority they have to control the border, and it is working.

This resolution cites statistics from May of 2024 that there were 170,723 encounters at the border; however, the resolution does not include numbers from the next month, June of 2024, which cut encounters by more than one-half, to 83,536.

While my Republican colleagues continue to put politics over solutions, this administration and House Democrats will continue to put people over politics to address the issues facing the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this false, inaccurate, and deceptive resolution.

Disability Pride Month, commemorated in July, is a time to highlight the history, achievements, experiences, and struggles that the disability community has experienced.

From battling for greater public accessibility to ensuring government officials recognize the specific needs of the community, disability advocates have often had to fight to obtain the representation they deserve.

One of these great advocates is Mike Schweinsburg who has worked toward better and greater representation and inclusion in my district, New York-10 in New York City, for nearly two decades.

Mike has advised mayors, agencies, elected officials, national politicians, and everyone in between on the disability community's pressing needs, working to ensure that New Yorkers with disabilities are never left without a voice.

For two decades, Mike has been an integral part of the 504 Democratic Club, the Nation's first and largest club advocating for the civil rights of people with disabilities.

I am truly honored and blessed to work alongside him to ensure that everyone in New York City and our country gets the proper representation they deserve.

Mr. Speaker, there is so much to cover here from my friends on the other side of the aisle.

First, I address something that my colleague from Wisconsin said when he said that the Constitution lays out very clearly in Article I the powers of Congress. I would ask him or any of my colleagues on the other side if you could point me to where in the Constitution it confers subpoena power on Congress. You won't be able to because it is something established by the Supreme Court that is derivative from Congress' power to legislate.

The Supreme Court has set forth exactly what a congressional subpoena is authorized to do. In a recent case, which you may remember, the Trump v. Mazars case, Donald Trump sued his accountant to prevent them from providing documents to Congress pursuant to a subpoena. Congressional authority, that is what we are worried about here.

Well, the Supreme Court reiterated that there must be a legitimate legislative purpose in order for a congressional subpoena to be valid.

Mr. Speaker, I asked in our Oversight Committee when we debated this: What is the legitimate legislative purpose that any one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle can identify to justify a contempt finding here where they have the substantive information of the recording included in the transcript and everything else requested in that subpoena was provided to them? Nonetheless, they are insisting on getting the audio of that transcript that they have.

Mr. Speaker, not surprisingly, in the Oversight Committee, which has no jurisdiction over this anyway, they offered nothing. I did hear in the Judiciary Committee my friend from North Carolina, who is here, refer in a subsequent hearing to demeanor evidence as a legitimate purpose for this subpoena.

Mr. Speaker, demeanor evidence sounds like sophisticated legal speak that is very esoteric and only for trial lawyers, but really it is completely irrelevant to Congress' legislative role because we don't try cases. There is no trial here. There is no demeanor evidence. As much as you may want to prosecute Joe Biden, there is no congressional prosecution of Joe Biden, and his demeanor evidence is no legitimate basis for this subpoena.

Mr. Speaker, you of course know, and I don't even think you would argue, that there is a legitimate legislative purpose to use the audio recordings in a political ad to support your dear leader, Mr. Trump, so that clearly falls outside of the range.

Of course, my friends on the other side of the aisle should refocus from demeanor evidence to basic concepts, like due process or executive privilege, because the President of the United States asserted executive privilege over this audiotape. You may not like it. You may not agree with it, but you have no authority to determine that that is not a correct assertion of the executive privilege.

Do you know who else doesn't have authority to determine that? The Attorney General, who you are trying to hold in contempt. Due process.

You are going to fine someone $10,000 without notice or an opportunity to be heard? You are going to say: We are going to fine you, and you have no opportunity to make a defense, and there is no neutral adjudicator?

You can go to court all you want, and that is where you went, and that is where you belong. That is why this resolution is so bogus. I have a warning for you, my friends: You will reap what you sow.

In June of 2019, then-President Donald Trump said he would defy all congressional subpoenas. That is exactly what he did. During the first impeachment investigation, every single executive branch agency defied a lawful subpoena from Congress.

The State Department was subpoenaed. The Defense Department was subpoenaed. Not a single document was received.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to whoever one day is the Republican Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense to be held in inherent contempt and fined $10,000.

There were more than a dozen witnesses who refused to comply with the subpoena, and I am not even talking about the five House Republicans who defied subpoenas in the last Congress that were determined by a court to be lawful and who would also be subject to inherent contempt because, of course, if this case where the audiotape is not provided, then blowing off a subpoena is definitely contempt.

You ought to be careful about the precedent you are setting because it is going to hurt you and your dear leader far more than us.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding. I am sorry for this body that you have had to endure such hypocritical conduct in silencing you. Luckily, I am not silenced, and I am happy to respond to some of the bogus and egregious allegations from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle.

First, my friend from Georgia expounded upon the weaponization of the Department of Justice by President Biden. It was interesting to me that she mentioned that the Department of Justice is apparently, under Joe Biden's direction, persecuting Catholics. Joe Biden is Catholic, so that is an interesting weaponization of the Department of Justice.

You would think that if someone were going to weaponize the Department of Justice for political purposes that he would intervene or interfere in a prosecution of his own son, but, no, he didn't do that. In fact, the only people who intervened and interfered in that investigation were my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, who inappropriately and improperly intervened in an ongoing Federal criminal case by urging a judge to reject the plea agreement in the Hunter Biden case.

Now, they say we are here because congressional power must be protected. Apparently, congressional power is meaningless if it is used against their buddies, Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, who completely blew off a congressional subpoena and had no basis, no rationale, no defense for not showing up. They are in jail not because of inherent contempt. They are in jail because they were convicted of a crime, because they blew it off.

Now, you can say what you want about the January 6th Committee. You can say it was unlawful. Federal judges determined it to be lawful.

If your excuse as to why you did not comply is that you did not receive service of the subpoena, it is laughable.

Finally, I would like just to point out that the basis they have mentioned about why they need this recording, one of my colleagues said, was to determine whether President Biden was able to answer questions before him and why the special counsel did not pursue charges. It is not a legitimate legislative purpose for Congress to second-guess Federal prosecutorial discretion. You may want it, but you have no legitimate reason for it.

If your argument is that executive privilege is waived, maybe it is, but you don't get to decide that. A court decides it.

Mr. Speaker, this is a political stunt solely designed to placate and support Donald Trump, their nominee for President. They are making sure that they do everything possible to provide him with fodder for his campaign because there is no basis for any contempt, much less inherent contempt, and it is shameful that you have stood here trying to call

upon congressional power and separation of powers when you refuse to do so for any Republican, including your own colleagues who defy subpoenas right, left, and center. Be careful because what goes around comes around.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for the time and for his leadership and clarity on what is truly important and what is not.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the Republican's national appliance

protection day and this specific bill, the Refrigerator Freedom Act.

That is right. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle are using their majority and our precious floor time to protect kitchen appliances.

They are not trying to protect women's reproductive freedom. No. They are actually trying to take away a woman's freedom to control her own body.

They are not trying to protect voting rights so that every eligible voter can vote. No. This week we actually will also be voting on a bill that is trying to make it more difficult for poor and rural Americans to vote.

They are not trying to protect Americans' freedom to be who they want to be and marry whomever they want. No. Their Project 2025 platform intends to erase marriage equality for all Americans.

They are not trying to protect our children from their new leading cause of death in this country, guns. Nope. They are trying to protect every Americans' right to turn a semiautomatic weapon of war into an even deadlier automatic weapon of war.

That is right. Instead of reproductive freedom, Republicans are focused on refrigerator freedom.

In closing, I do want to give my friends on the other side of the aisle credit for one thing: They are certainly consistent. Just as they want to take our country back to the 1950s where White Christian men were in complete control, they also want to take our appliance technology back to the 1950s, as well.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Pride month and honor an LGBQTIA+ community leader in New York's Tenth District, Sean Eldridge.

Sean is the founder and President of Stand Up America, a progressive advocacy organization founded in response to Donald Trump's unprecedented assault on our democracy.

Today, the group is over two million members strong and works to expand voting rights and build a more inclusive democracy that's responsive to the needs of the American people. Prior to founding Stand Up America, Sean was a leader in the fight to pass marriage equality nationwide, serving as the Political Director of the advocacy group Freedom to Marry. Sean has been on the forefront of progressive issues for over a decade, and is a true leader in the fight for equal rights for all. I'm honored to recognize his outstanding contribution to democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Pride Month and honor an LGBQTIA+ community leader in New York's Tenth District, Jan Lee.

Jan Lee is a dedicated community organizer, activist, small business owner, and lifelong New Yorker. He is a third-generation resident of Manhattan's Chinatown and has been organizing his community since the 1990s, advocating for Chinatown's post-9/11 recovery, the reopening of Park Row, and representing the community's interests with regard to the borough-based jail.

For far too long, Manhattan's Chinatown has not received the recognition, services and representation that its residents have deserved.

Jan's work has begun to change that. From his community activism to helping manage the apartment buildings that have been in his family for over 100 years, Jan's commitment to his community is inspiring. I'm proud to call Jan a friend and partner as we continue to revitalize Chinatown and give the community the attention it deserves.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Pride Month and honor an LGBQTIA+ community leader in New York's Tenth District, Rosy Mota.

Rosy Mota is a public servant, activist, and advocate for her community in Sunset Park and around the country. Rosy is the Director of Policy for the Latino Commission on AIDS, a nationwide group dedicated to addressing the unique needs of her community.

At the commission, she advocates for health policy that prioritizes the needs of Latino Americans across the country. In the past 18 months, Rosy led a team of twelve community health workers in the North Bronx dedicated to improving health outcomes in this underserved community.

Currently, Rosy is helping newly arrived migrants in our City navigate our health system and receive the care that they need. Rosy is also the treasurer for Sunset Park's industrious Community Board 7, giving her community a voice in City government and ensuring its needs are met. It is a great honor to recognize Rosy's tireless advocacy on behalf of her community and our great City.

Mr Speaker, I rise today to commemorate Pride Month and honor an LGBQTIA+ community leader in New York's Tenth District, Marquis Jenkins.

Marquis is a community activist with deep roots on the Lower East Side, a lifelong organizer dedicated to building solidarity around issues affecting underprivileged Americans. He has worked at the NAACP to combat issues around criminal justice, he has directed organizing at WE ACT to advance issues of environmental justice, and he is currently director of organizing at Common Justice, a nonprofit dedicated to advancing solutions to violence and addressing issues in our criminal justice system. Marquis has never forgotten the NYCHA public housing complexes where he grew up, and first entered activism at the age of 17 when he ran for resident association president at Bricetti Plaza.

Marquis's dedication to the Lower East Side is evident to everyone who knows him, and our district is lucky to get to call him ours. I thank Marquis.