[Constitution, Jefferson's Manual, and the Rules of the House of Representatives, 106th Congress]
[106th Congress]
[House Document 105-358]
[Rules of the House of Representatives]
[Pages 391-406]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Rule IX.--QUESTIONS OF PRIVILEGE
[[Page 392]]
Commissioner, individually, in their representative capacity only.
| Sec. 698. Definition of questions of privilege. | 1. Questions of privilege shall be, first, those affecting the rights of the House collectively, its safety, dignity, and the integrity of its proceedings; and second, those affecting the rights, reputation, and conduct of Members, Delegates, or the Resident |
| Sec. 699. Precedence of questions of privilege. | 2. (a)(1) A resolution reported as a question of the privileges of the House, or offered from the floor by the Majority Leader or the Minority Leader as a question of the privileges of the House, or offered as privileged under clause 1, section 7, article I of the Constitution, shall have precedence of all other questions except motions to adjourn. A resolution offered from the floor by a Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner other than the Majority Leader or the Minority Leader as a question of the privileges of the House shall have precedence of all other questions except motions to adjourn only at a time or place, designated by the Speaker, in the legislative schedule within two legislative days after the day on which the proponent announces to the House his intention to offer the resolution and the form of the resolution. Oral announcement of the form of the resolution may be dispensed with by unanimous consent. |
| Sec. 700. Questions of privileges of the House. | The body of precedent relating to questions of privilege includes rulings that span the adoption of standing rule IX in 1880. The rule was adopted ``to prevent the large consumption of time which resulted from Members getting the floor for all kinds of speeches under the pretext of raising a question of privilege'' (III, 2521). In a landmark decision on constitutional assertions of privilege, Speaker Gillett placed significant reliance on the history of rule IX by observing that it ``was obviously adopted for the purpose of hindering the extension of constitutional or other privilege'' (VI, 48). Under House practice, a resolution offered as a question of the privileges of the House is read in full by the Clerk (Oct. 10, 1998, p. ----). |
| Sec. 701. Questions relating to organization. | The privileges of the House also include questions relating to its organization (I, 22- 24, 189, 212, 290), and the title of its Members to their seats (III, 2579-2587), which may be raised as questions of the privileges of the House even though the subject has been previously referred to committee (I, 742; III, 2584; VIII, 2307). Such resolutions include those: (1) to declare prima facie right to a seat, or to declare a vacancy, where the House has referred the questions of prima facie and final rights to an elections committee for investigation (H. Res. 1, Jan. 3, 1985, p. 381; H. Res. 52, Feb. 7, 1985, p. 2220; H. Res. 97, Mar. 4, 1985, p. 4277; H. Res. 121, Apr. 2, 1985, p. 7118; H. Res. 148, Apr. 30, 1985, p. 9801); (2) various questions incidental to the right to a seat (I, 322, 328, 673, 742; II, 1207; III, 2588; VII, 2316), such as a resolution declaring a vacancy in the House because a Member-elect is unable to take the oath of office and to serve as a Member or to expressly resign the office due to an incapacitating illness (H. Res. 80, Feb. 24, 1981, p. 2916); (3) a resolution declaring neither of two claimants seated pending a committee report and decision of final right to the seat by the House (Jan. 3, 1961, pp. 23-25; Jan. 3, 1985, p. 381), including incidental provisions providing compensation for both claimants and office staffing by the Clerk (Jan. 3, 1985, p. 381) and resolu |
| Sec. 702. Questions relating to constitutional prerogatives. | The privileges of the House, as distinguished from that of the individual Member, include questions relating to its constitutional prerogatives in respect to revenue legislation and appropriations (see, e.g., II, 1480-1501; VI, 315; Nov. 8, 1979, p. 31517; Oct. 1, 1985, p. 25418; June 16, 1988, p. 14780; June 21, 1988, p. 15425; Aug. 12, 1994, p. 21655). For a more thorough record of revenue bills returned to the Senate, see Sec. 102, supra. Such a question of privilege may be raised at any time when the House is in possession of the papers (June 20, 1968, Deschler's Precedents, vol. 3, ch. 13, sec. 14.2; Aug. 19, 1982, p. 22127), but not otherwise (Apr. 6, 1995, p. ----). The constitutional prerogatives of the House also include its function with respect to treaties (II, 1502-1537); impeachments and matters incidental thereto (see Sec. 604, supra); bills ``pocket vetoed'' during an intersession adjournment (Nov. 21, 1989, p. 31156); its power to punish for contempt, whether of its own Members (II, 1641-1665), of witnesses who are summoned to give information (II, 1608, 1612; III, 1666-1724), or of other persons (II, 1597-1640); and questions relating to legal challenges involving the prerogatives of the House (Jan. 29, 1981, p. 1304; Mar. 30, 1982, p. 5890), including a resolution responding to a court challenge to the prerogative of the House to establish a Chaplain (Mar. 30, 1982, p. 5890). A resolution laying on the table a message from the President containing certain averments inveighing disrespect toward Members of Congress was considered as a question of the privileges of the House asserting a breach of privilege in a formal communication to the House (VI, 330). For a discussion of the relationship of the House and its Members to the courts, see Sec. Sec. 290-291b, supra. |
| Sec. 703. Questions relating to official conduct. | The privileges of the House include certain questions relating to the conduct of Members, officers, and employees (see, e.g., I, 284, 285; III, 2628, 2645-2647). Under that standard, the following resolutions have been held to constitute questions of the privileges of the House: (1) a resolution directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to investigate illegal solicitation of political contributions in the House Office Building by unnamed sitting Members (July 10, 1985, p. 18397); (2) a resolution establishing an ad hoc committee to investigate allegations of ``ghost'' employment in the House (Apr. 9, 1992, p. 9029); (3) a resolution to further investigate the conduct of a Member on which it has reported to the House (Aug. 5, 1987, p. 22458); (4) a resolution directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to report to the House the status of an investigation pending before the committee (Nov. 17, 1995, p. ----; Nov. 30, 1995, p. ----); (5) a resolution appointing an outside counsel (Sept. 19, 1996, p. ----; Sept. 24, 1996, p. ----); (6) a resolution to commit other matters to an outside counsel already appointed by the committee (June 27, 1996, p. 15917); (7) a resolution directing the committee to release the report of an outside counsel (Sept. 19, 1996, p. ----; Sept. 24, 1996, p. ---- ); (8) a resolution making allegations concerning the propriety of responses by officers of the House to court subpoenas for papers of the House without notice to the House, and directions to a committee to investigate such allegations (Feb. 13, 1980, p. 2768); (9) a resolution making allegations of improper representation by counsel of the legal position of Members in a brief filed in the Court and directions for withdrawal of the brief (Mar. 22, 1990, p. 4996); (10) a resolution making allegations of unauthorized actions by a committee employee to intervene in judicial proceedings (Feb. 5, 1992, p. 1601); (11) a resolution directing the Clerk to notify interested parties that the House regretted the use of official resources to present to the Supreme Court of Florida a legal brief arguing the unconstitutionality of congressional term limits, and that the House had no position on |
| Sec. 704. Questions relating to integrity of proceedings. | The privileges of the House include questions relating to the integrity of its proceedings, including the processes by which bills are considered (III, 2597-2601, 2614; IV, 3383, 3388, 3478), such as the constitutional question of the vote required to pass a joint resolution extending the State ratification period of a proposed constitutional amendment (Speaker O'Neill, Aug. 15, 1978, p. 26203). Privileges of the House also include: (1) resignation of a Member from a select or standing committee (Speaker Albert, June 16, 1975, p. 19054; Speaker O'Neill, Mar. 8, 1977, pp. 6579-82); (2) newspaper charges affecting the honor and dignity of the House (VII, 911); and (3) the conduct of representatives of the press (II, 1630, 1631; III, 2627; VI, 553). |
| Sec. 705. Questions relating to comfort and convenience. | The privileges of the House include questions relating to the comfort and convenience of Members and employees (III, 2629-2636), such as resolutions concerning the proper attire for Members in the Chamber when the temperature is uncomfortably warm (July 17, 1979, p. 19008); as well as questions relating to safety, such as resolutions requiring an investigation into the safety of Members in view of alleged structural deficiencies in the West Front of the Capitol (July 25, 1980, pp. 19762- 64); and direct |
| Sec. 706. May not effect change in rules. | A motion to amend the Rules of the House does not present a question of privilege (Speaker Cannon, sustained by the House, thereby overruling the decision of March 19, 1910 (VIII, 3376), which held such motion privileged (VIII, 3377)), and a question of the privileges of the House may not be invoked to effect a change in the rules or standing orders of the House or their interpretation (Speaker O'Neill, Dec. 6, 1977, pp. 38470-73; Sept. 9, 1988, p. 23298; July 30, 1992, p. 20339; Jan. 31, 1996, p. 1887), including directions to the Speaker infringing upon his discretionary power of recognition under clause 2 of rule XVII (former clause 2 of rule XIV) (July 25, 1980, pp. 19762-64), for example, by requiring that he give priority in recognition to any Member seeking to call up a matter highly privileged pursuant to a statutory provision, over a member from the Committee on Rules seeking to call up a privileged report from that committee (Speaker Wright, Mar. 11, 1987, p. 5403), or by requiring that he state the question on overriding a veto before recognizing for a motion to refer (thereby overruling prior decisions of the Chair to change the order of precedence of motions) (Speaker Wright, Aug. 3, 1988, p. 20281). Similarly, a resolution alleging that, in light of an internationally objectionable French program of nuclear test detonations, for the House to receive the President of France in a joint meeting would be injurious to its dignity and to the integrity of its proceedings, and resolving that the Speaker withdraw the pending invitation and refrain from similar invitations, was held not to present a question of the privileges of the House because it proposed a collateral change in an order of the House previously adopted (that the House recess for the purpose of receiving the President of France) and a new rule for future cases (Jan. 31, 1996, p. 1887). A resolution collaterally challenging the validity or fairness of an adopted rule of the House by delaying its implementation was held not to give rise to a question of the privileges of the House (Speaker Foley, sustained by tabling of appeal, Feb. 3, 1993, p. 1974). A resolution directing that the party ratios of all standing committees, subcommittees, and staffs thereof be changed within a time certain to reflect overall party ratios in the House was held to constitute a change in the Rules of the House and not to constitute a proper question of the privileges of the House (the standing rules already providing mechanisms for selecting committee members and staff) (Jan. 23, 1984, p. 78). On the other hand, although the Rules of the House establish a procedure for fixing the ratio of majority to minority members on full committees and also provide that subcommittees are subject to the direction and control of the full committee (clause 1 of rule XI), a question of the privileges of the House is raised where it is alleged that subcommittee ratios should reflect full committee ratios established by the House and failure to do so denies representational rights at the subcommittee level (Oct. 4, 1984, p. 30042). A resolution alleging that a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance |
| Sec. 707. As distinct from privileged questions. | The clause of the rule giving questions of privilege precedence of all other questions except a motion to adjourn is a recognition of a well- established principle in the House, for it is an axiom of the parliamentary law that such a question ``supersedes the consideration of the original question, and must be first disposed of'' (III, 2522, 2523; VI, 595). As the business of the House began to increase it was found necessary to give certain important matters a precedence by rule, and such matters are called ``privileged questions.'' But as they relate merely to the order of business under the rules, they are to be distinguished from ``questions of privilege'' which relate to the safety or efficiency of the House itself as an organ for action (III, 2718). |
| Sec. 708. Questions of personal privilege. | The privilege of the Member rests primarily on the Constitution, which gives to him a conditional immunity from arrest (Sec. 90, supra) and an unconditional freedom of debate in the House (III, 2670, Sec. 92, supra). A menace to the personal safety of Members from an insecure ceiling in the Hall was held to involve a question of the highest privilege (III, 2685); and an assault on a Member within the Capitol when the House was not in session, from a cause not connected with the Member's representative capacity, was also held to involve a question of privilege (II, 1624). But there has been doubt as to the right of the House to interfere for the protection of Members, who outside the Hall, get into difficulties not connected with their official duties (II, 1277; III, 2678; footnote). Charges against the conduct of a Member are held to involve privilege when they relate to his representative capacity (III, 1828- 1830, 2716; VI, 604, 612; VIII, 2479); but when they relate to conduct at a time before he became a Member they have not been entertained as of privilege (II, 1287; III, 2691, 2723, 2725). While questions of personal privilege normally involve matters touching on a Member's reputation, a Member may be recognized for a question of personal privilege based on a violation of his rights as a Member, such as unauthorized printed alterations in his statements made during a subcommittee hearing |
| Sec. 709. Precedence of questions of privileges of the House. | The body of precedent relating to the precedence of questions of privilege spans both the adoption of standing rule IX in 1880 and its amendment to require notice in certain cases in 1993. |
| Sec. 711. Precedence of questions of personal privilege. | When a Member proposes merely to address the House on a question of personal privilege, and does not bring up a resolution affecting the dignity or integrity of the House for action, the practice as to precedence is somewhat different. Thus, a Member rising to a question of personal privilege may not interrupt a call of the yeas and nays (V, 6051, 6052, 6058, 6059; VI, 554, 564), or take from the floor another Member who has been recognized for debate (V, 5002; VIII, 2459, 2528; Sept. 29, 1983, p. 26508; July 23, 1987, p. 20861), but he may interrupt the ordinary legislative business (III, 2531). A Member may address the House on a question of personal privilege even after the previous question has been ordered on a pending bill (VI, 561; VIII, 2688). Under modern practice, a question of personal privilege may not be raised in the Committee of the Whole (Sept. 4, 1969, p. 24372; Dec. 13, 1973, p. 41270), the proper remedy being that a demand that words uttered in the Committee of the Whole be taken down pursuant to clause 4 of rule XVII (former clause 5 of rule XIV); yet a breach of privilege occurring in the Committee of the Whole relates to the dignity of the House and is so treated (II, 1657). A question of personal privilege may not be raised while a question of the privileges of the House is pending (Apr. 30, 1985, p. 9808; May 1, 1985, p. 10003). A committee chairman rose to a question of personal privilege based on press accounts containing statements impugning his character and motive by alleging intentional violation of rules as chairman of a committee conducting an investigation (May 12, 1998, p. ----). |
| Sec. 712. Questions of privilege in relation to quorum. | During a call of the House in the absence of a quorum, only such questions of privilege as relate immediately to those proceedings may be presented (III, 2545). See also Sec. 1024, infra. |