Skip to main content

Norton Not Surprised D.C. Resident Will Not Be Retried for Arrest at Congressional Hearing

April 19, 2016

WASHINGTON, D.C.—The office of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) learned today that District of Columbia resident Adam Eidinger will not be retried after being arrested for unlawful entry at a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee (OGR) markup of a bill to overturn a D.C. anti-discrimination law. Norton had been prepared to testify at Eidinger’s first trial, but was not called as a witness. After Eidinger’s first trial resulted in a hung jury, Norton indicated that she was prepared to testify at any retrial because she was present at the OGR markup where Eidinger was arrested.

“I was sitting on the committee dais, almost directly in front of several D.C. residents who came to a rare committee markup of a resolution of disapproval to overturn a D.C. anti-discrimination bill,” Norton said. “The D.C. bill barring discrimination against employees, their spouses and dependents based on their reproductive health decisions is now law. As an eyewitness, I saw several D.C. residents rise to protest with signs, most of whom I knew, and saw them peacefully leave the committee room. I also saw Adam Eidinger, who was sitting beside them, remain seated and silent throughout their demonstration. Adam was asked to leave the room on instruction of committee staff, but refused because he had not protested, but was nevertheless arrested by Capitol Police. I hope that the arrest did not mean that congressional committees can exclude the public without cause because that would raise serious constitutional issues. The transparency of our proceedings in the House is the trademark of the ‘People’s House.’ Considering that controversial matters affecting the District often come before committees, many of them before OGR in particular, Members and staff should expect D.C. residents to be in the committee room to witness proceedings involving their local laws. Interrupting congressional business is, of course, never to be condoned. But neither a Member of Congress nor a staff member may simply exclude members of the public for merely observing proceedings or those who, for whatever reason, Members or staff believe may become disruptive. The Supreme Court indicated long ago that prior restraint of constitutional rights is unconstitutional.”