Jerrold Nadler

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Garcia), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2116) to prohibit discrimination based on an individual's texture or style of hair, as amended.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Cherfilus-McCormick), the newest Member of Congress.

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Carter).

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, while racism and discrimination sometimes appear in overt forms, they can also manifest themselves in more subtle ways. One way is through discrimination based on natural hairstyles and hair textures associated with people of a particular race or national origin. As we have discussed on this floor, this is intolerable and it is not taken care of by current law, despite the statements from the other side notwithstanding. The CROWN Act would make explicit that the civil rights laws prohibit such discrimination. It is a matter of basic fairness and justice. Madam Speaker, I urge all Members to support this important legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 55) to amend section 249 of title 18, United States Code, to specify lynching as a hate crime act, as amended.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, the Emmett Till Antilynching Act is long-overdue legislation that would correct a historical injustice by finally specifying lynching as a crime under Federal law. Our Nation endured a shameful period during which thousands of African Americans were lynched as a means of racial subordination and enforcing white supremacy. These violent incidents were largely tolerated by State and Federal officials, and they represent a stain on our Nation's legacy. Today, we acknowledge this disgraceful chapter in American history, and we send a clear message that such violent actions motivated by hatred and bigotry will not be tolerated in this country. The term ``lynching'' generally refers to premeditated public acts of violence--often resulting in death--carried out by a mob in order to punish an alleged transgressor or to strike fear among a targeted group. Throughout history, lynching has been employed as an extreme form of informal group social control and has often been conducted with the display of a public spectacle for maximum intimidation. This legislation is named in honor of Emmett Till, a 14-year-old African-American youth from Chicago, who was lynched in a particularly gruesome fashion while visiting an uncle in Mississippi in 1955. His murder and the antilynching movement that followed set the stage for the creation of the civil rights movement that we recognize today. Though lynching touches all races and religions and occurs throughout the United States, it has been most common in the South and was targeted primarily at Blacks. During the period between the Civil War and World War II, thousands of African Americans were lynched in the United States. These violent incidents profoundly impacted race relations and shaped the geographic, political, social, and economic conditions of African-American communities in ways that are still evident today. The first Federal antilynching legislation was introduced in 1900, almost 120 years ago, by Congressman George Henry White, the only African-American Member of Congress at that time. Unfortunately, neither his bill nor any antilynching bills that were introduced in the decades that followed managed to pass Congress. The Department of Justice has used other laws to prosecute some civil rights-era crimes and hate crimes that were described as lynching in public discourse, but there is no Federal law explicitly prohibiting lynching. Today, we act to correct this historical injustice. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rush) for his leadership on this important issue and for his attention to history. In memory of Emmett Till and in memory of all the victims of lynching throughout our history, I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Garcia).

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Carter).

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, and I am prepared to close.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, with this legislation, we can right a great historical wrong by finally specifying lynching as a crime under Federal law, more than 120 years after the first antilynching bill was introduced in Congress. Although this proposal should have been law a long time ago, it is never too late to do the right thing. The shameful era when lynchings were commonplace in this country-- particularly in the South--is thankfully over, but we have seen disturbing echoes of this gruesome practice in recent years--most recently in the brutal murder of Ahmaud Arbery. This legislation sends a clear message that such violent actions motivated by hatred and bigotry will not be tolerated in this country. The Nation is in the midst of a national conversation and a national awakening on issues of race and justice. As we reckon with our past and look to the future, it is important that we place lynching where it properly belongs--in criminal code alongside other hate crimes that have caused so much pain and suffering over the years. I want to thank Congressman Bobby Rush for his tireless efforts in bringing this legislation forward and all the other Members whose efforts have paved the way for passage of this bill today. Madam Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I rise, along with Zoe Lofgren, Chair of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship, to thank Betsy Lawrence for her service to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Betsy came to the Committee as part of a distinguished career working to advance the rights of immigrants and their families. She had previously worked for more than a decade at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, where she held several different positions, including Associate Director of Education, Associate Director of Liaison, and Director of Government Relations. Before joining AILA, Betsy was an associate attorney at Van Der Hout LLP. She earned her B.S. from Northeastern University and her J.D. from the University of San Francisco School of Law. Betsy joined the Committee on the Judiciary as Counsel to our Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship in February 2019--an especially busy time as we prepared to advance a robust immigration reform agenda and conduct meaningful oversight of the Trump Administration's anti-immigrant policies. Betsy quickly proved herself to be an invaluable member of our immigration team, and we were pleased to promote her to Chief Counsel of our Immigration Subcommittee at the beginning of this Congress. During her tenure here, Betsy played a pivotal role in ensuring House passage of numerous bills to provide for a more humane and just immigration system, including the American Dream and Promise Act, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act, the National Origin-Based Antidiscrimination for Nonimmigrants (NO BAN) Act, and the Access to Counsel Act. She was also heavily involved in our investigation into the Trump Administration's ``zero tolerance'' or family separation policy, our efforts to include meaningful immigration reform in the reconciliation process, and our work to ensure immigration provisions were included in the America COMPETES Act of 2022. Despite our polarized political climate, Betsy and her team successfully worked to pass several bills into law, including the Citizenship for Children of Military Members and Civil Servants Act and the HOPE (Honoring Our Promises through Expedition) for Afghan SIVs Act of 2021. The Committee is deeply proud of her record of accomplishment. The country has been fortunate to have Betsy working hard within the halls of Congress to reform our broken immigration system, undo the harms caused by the last administration, and ensure the expedient issuance of special immigrant visas to those who served side by side with American troops in Afghanistan. Although we will miss her greatly, we know she will continue to make her country proud as she transitions to her new role in the Biden-Harris Administration. We thank Betsy for her service to the Committee and wish her the best of luck with this new chapter.

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I rise to thank John Williams for his service to the House Committee on the Judiciary. John came to the Committee as merely the last step in a distinguished career in public service. He previously worked for various offices on Capitol Hill, including for former Representative Baron Hill of Indiana, the House Committee on Rules, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. He has also held positions at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the IMPAC 2000 redistricting project, and, most recently-before rejoining us on the Hill-at the Federal Communications Commission. John received his bachelor's degree from the University of Virginia, his Ph.D. from the University of Chicago, and his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center. John joined the Committee on the Judiciary as Senior Counsel and Parliamentarian in November 2019, as the House was in the midst of its first impeachment inquiry into then-President Trump. His knowledge of House procedure and parliamentary rules were critical as we navigated the first Presidential impeachment in two decades--and again a year later as we conducted the second impeachment of that same president. John has played an integral role advising me, our subcommittee chairs, and staff over the course of more than 75 committee hearings and more than 100 bill votes in committee and on the House floor. John also worked especially closely with our subcommittees as we participated in several reconciliation processes this Congress. John's knowledge and counsel have been invaluable as we have worked to deliver tangible results for the American people over the past two years. His guidance has helped us move dozens of bills through both chambers of Congress and to the President's desk. We will miss John's work ethic and counsel as he takes the next step in his career. We thank John for his service to the Committee and wish him the best of luck with this new chapter.

Mr. NADLER

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Johnson).

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin), another distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 45 seconds. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Buck), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law. This amendment simply clarifies that H.R. 4445 does not amend current law outside of the Federal Arbitration Act. It reflects the bipartisan input of several of my colleagues in the House and Senate, including the bill's sponsor, Congresswoman Bustos. Importantly, this amendment would protect the rights of survivors of sexual harassment by ensuring that they have a choice of litigating or arbitrating any case relating to the conduct that is alleged to constitute sexual harassment under applicable law. It does so by making clear that anything related to sexual harassment or assault as currently defined by law is covered by this bill. This would include retaliation or any other misconduct that gives rise to the underlying claim alleging a violation of these laws and reflects an important compromise struck to protect these cases. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Bustos), the sponsor of the bill.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 900, I call up the bill (H.R. 4445) to amend title 9 of the United States Code with respect to arbitration of disputes involving sexual assault and sexual harassment, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 4445.