Listen to the article
In a heated exchange that highlights ongoing partisan tensions in Congress, Rep. Julia Letlow (R-LA) publicly refuted ABC News journalist Jon Karl’s attempt to fact-check House Speaker Mike Johnson regarding the delayed swearing-in of Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva.
The controversy centers on Speaker Johnson’s decision to postpone the oath of office for Grijalva, a Democrat recently elected to fill the Arizona congressional seat left vacant by her late father. Grijalva has suggested that Johnson’s delay is politically motivated, claiming he is stalling because she has pledged to be the crucial 218th signature needed to release the Jeffrey Epstein files.
During a Sunday interview with Karl, Johnson defended his position by invoking what he called “the Pelosi precedent,” referencing the time it took to swear in Rep. Letlow when she was elected to fill her late husband’s seat during the COVID-19 pandemic. “Nancy Pelosi took 25 days to swear her in,” Johnson asserted.
Karl immediately challenged this characterization, suggesting that Letlow herself had requested the later date for her swearing-in. “Because my understanding is, that was the date that actually the representative-elect, Letlow, at the time, requested,” Karl said during the exchange.
This prompted Letlow to issue a clarification on social media platform X on Monday. “I did not request a delayed swearing-in,” she wrote. “My preference was to begin serving immediately after my special election.” She added a pointed criticism of Democrats, urging them to “quit with these political games and reopen the government so we can conduct the people’s business.”
The exchange highlights the procedural maneuvering that often occurs in a closely divided House, where every vote matters. With razor-thin margins between the parties, the timing of when a new member can cast votes becomes strategically significant.
Karl continued to press Johnson during the interview, noting that the Speaker had quickly sworn in two Republican representatives immediately after their elections. “You swore in two Republicans the day after their election,” Karl pointed out, suggesting inconsistency in Johnson’s approach.
Johnson countered by explaining that those cases were exceptions due to specific circumstances. “There was an exception for two Floridians earlier in this Congress. But the reason was, they were duly elected. They had a date set. They flew in all their friends and family and the House went out of session unexpectedly,” he explained.
When Karl asked if Grijalva could be sworn in if she brought her friends and family, Johnson maintained his position that the situation was different because “she was elected after we went out of session.”
This procedural dispute takes place against the backdrop of a government shutdown now in its 20th day. The shutdown largely revolves around disagreements over healthcare benefits in the continuing resolution needed to fund government operations.
The timing of Grijalva’s swearing-in has taken on additional significance due to her stated intention to sign the petition related to the Epstein files. The controversial files are believed to contain information about high-profile individuals connected to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
As the government remains partially closed and essential services continue to be affected, this procedural battle underscores the deep partisan divisions that continue to hamper effective governance in Washington. With each side accusing the other of playing politics, resolution of both the swearing-in controversy and the broader shutdown remain uncertain.
Verify This Yourself
Use these professional tools to fact-check and investigate claims independently
Reverse Image Search
Check if this image has been used elsewhere or in different contexts
Ask Our AI About This Claim
Get instant answers with web-powered AI analysis
Related Fact-Checks
See what other fact-checkers have said about similar claims
Want More Verification Tools?
Access our full suite of professional disinformation monitoring and investigation tools
8 Comments
This partisan back-and-forth over parliamentary procedures is frustrating to see. At the end of the day, the American people deserve a functional Congress that can put politics aside and focus on the real issues facing the country. I hope cooler heads can prevail and a resolution be found.
Well said. Partisan gamesmanship often obscures the actual substance of governance. A return to civility and good-faith problem-solving would go a long way.
This seems like a complex situation with conflicting claims. I’ll be interested to see if impartial fact-checkers can shed more light on the precedents and timelines involved. Maintaining public trust in the integrity of the political process is crucial.
Agreed, objective analysis from credible sources will be important here. Partisan posturing often obscures the real issues at stake.
The delayed swearing-in of a newly elected representative is concerning, as it impacts the representation of their constituents. I hope the relevant parties can work quickly to resolve this issue and ensure all duly elected members of Congress can take their seats without unnecessary delay.
Delays in congressional swearing-ins are always concerning, as they can impact the functioning of government. I hope the parties can work constructively to resolve this issue and avoid unnecessary political theater. Transparency and good-faith cooperation will be essential.
This is an interesting partisan debate over a delayed congressional swearing-in. I’m curious to see how the facts shake out – it sounds like there may be some disputed context around the ‘Pelosi precedent’ that Speaker Johnson cited. I’ll be watching to see if this gets resolved amicably or becomes a bigger political flashpoint.
Agreed, the details around the ‘Pelosi precedent’ will be key here. It’s important that the facts are established clearly, regardless of partisan leanings.