House Speaker Mike Johnson faced a barrage of tough questions after Democrats accused him of stalling the swearing-in of Rep.-elect Adelita Grijalva to block a crucial vote tied to the Jeffrey Epstein files. Johnson has denied the charge, insisting his decision is procedural, not political, but his explanations have drawn increasing scrutiny.
Grijalva, who won a Sept. 23 special election in Arizona to fill her late father’s seat, promised to be the deciding 218th signature on a bipartisan petition to force a House vote on a bill compelling the Department of Justice to release its full investigative files on Epstein. The measure would bypass leadership and put the issue directly on the floor, a move Trump reportedly opposes.
Johnson, a loyal Trump ally, has refused to convene the House to swear Grijalva in, citing procedural timing. “We’re going to give her the oath as soon as we return to legislative session,” he told Fox Business. “That is the rules of the House. I am following the Pelosi precedent.”
Johnson pointed to former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who in 2021 waited 25 days to swear in Republican Rep. Julia Letlow after a special election. He also noted that Pelosi delayed other swearing-ins during recess periods. But those cases differed: Letlow requested her own swearing-in date, and Johnson himself has previously sworn in lawmakers outside of a regular session.
When pressed about that contradiction during a tense ABC interview with Jonathan Karl, Johnson looked uncomfortable. Karl reminded him that he had personally sworn in GOP members Randy Fine and Jimmy Patronis under similar circumstances. “What about the Johnson precedent?” Karl asked. Johnson sidestepped the question.
Democrats argue that Johnson’s refusal to hold even a brief pro forma session, a short meeting that would allow Grijalva to take the oath, proves the delay is political. The Senate, meanwhile, continues to hold votes on spending bills, making Johnson’s claim that the House cannot meet ring hollow.
Johnson has also tried to deflect attention by claiming the Epstein files are already being released. “There’s 43,000 pages now out there, you have the flight logs, the financial ledgers, the phone logs, and the daily calendar of Epstein now that are out there,” he told Fox Business. “So that’s a red herring.”
In reality, the House Oversight Committee released about 33,000 pages in September, but most of the documents were duplicates or already public. The bipartisan bill at issue would require full transparency on the Justice Department’s remaining materials, including witness interviews and unreleased correspondence.
Adding to the criticism, Johnson’s office has offered inconsistent explanations, including that Grijalva’s family “wasn’t in town” or that she “doesn’t know how it works around here.” Those remarks, seen as patronizing, have only fueled Democratic anger.
The standoff comes as the government remains partially shut down and the House has failed to negotiate a spending bill. Even as the Senate votes on Republican budget proposals, Johnson has refused to reconvene the House.
For now, the speaker appears boxed in. Swearing in Grijalva could hand Democrats and moderate Republicans the numbers needed to force a vote on the Epstein files, but delaying the process risks deepening perceptions that he’s using procedural tricks to protect Trump from political fallout.
