Civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis and Rep. John Larson led the 25-hour sit-in over the summer when Democrats commandeered the House floor. | AP Photo Top Democrats vow war against GOP 'sit-in' response

A handful of senior House Democrats — including the leaders of the caucus' high-profile gun control sit-in last June — are promising to fight back against a GOP push to punish lawmakers for similar protests in the future.

Demonstration organizers Reps. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and John Larson (D-Conn.) in a letter to Speaker Paul Ryan Thursday evening likened a newly proposed House rule to fine lawmakers up to $2,500 for live-streaming floor protests to “Putin’s Russia.” Friday morning, several senior Democrats on the House Judiciary and House Rules committees will release a statement calling the pitch an "unconstitutional gag rule," according to a draft of the statement obtained by POLITICO.


“This kind of strong-arm tactic is what one might see in Putin’s Russia, but is incredibly disheartening to see proposed in the U.S. House of Representatives,” Lewis and Larson wrote Thursday evening.

“House Republican leadership, as one of its first priorities for the incoming Congress, seeks to impose a modern day and unconstitutional gag rule to restrict the First Amendment rights of members to protest and engage in other forms of expression on the House floor as well as deny them due process," reads the statement by House Judiciary Ranking Member John Conyers (D-Mich.), House Rules Ranking Member Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), Judiciary subpanel chairmen Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), and Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.).

The rules change, they continued, "clearly is intended to undermine the rights of members in the minority to freely express their views on the House floor, which is a critical means by which members communicate to the American public."

Civil rights icon Lewis and Larson led the 25-hour sit-in last June, when Democrats commandeered the House floor, protesting Ryan’s refusal to allow a gun-control vote following the deadly Orlando nightclub shooting. When Republicans closed down the House, thus shutting off the public C-SPAN videolink, Democrats used their cell phones to film the scene, which went viral online and on national television.

There has always been a rule against video streaming on the floor with items like cell phones. Republicans were furious that Democrats defied those rules and have been brainstorming a way to stop Democrats from doing something similar in the future by adding a punishment mechanism to the rule. The newly proposed rules change, which must be approved by the full House during a vote next Tuesday, would sanction members for taking photos or videos on the House floor by giving the sergeant-at-arms the power to fine lawmakers up to $2,500. The change, while not retroactive, is a direct response to lawmakers using their phones to live-stream the sit-in.

A number of former House lawyers from both parties told POLITICO the pitch might raise constitutional questions because the House typically must vote to sanction lawmakers. The new proposal essentially delegates this power to a single House official and does not appear to give lawmakers the right to appeal the verdict.

Larson and Lewis compared the rules change, which will be voted on next Tuesday, to Putin's stronghold on Russia.

“I know they’re enamored with Russia as of late but this is not the time to become Putin-esque,” Larson said in an interview.

The two lawmakers encouraged Ryan to abandon the proposed rules change and instead pursue a bipartisan solution.

“When you last met with us after the sit-in, we walked away from that meeting hopeful that some sort of progress could be made. We believe you are an honorable man, and like us, an ardent institutionalist,” Larson and Lewis wrote.

“While we agree with the need to maintain protocol on the House floor—this kind of proposal is unprecedented and amounts to a gag order without due process or the ability to members to contest sanctions,” they added.

Conyers, Slaughter, Cohen and Nadler in their statement Friday will call the rule "particularly egregious" because it's being implemented "in the complete absence of hearings or input from legal experts, let alone the Minority." They wrote that it would have a "chilling effect" on members' free speech.

In addition to citing the speech and debate clause and the First Amendment, the group in its statement evokes the 27th Amendment, which prohibits laws that decrease a member's salary from taking effect until the new Congress has begun. It also cites due process rights to contest the fines before they're automatically deducted from lawmakers' salaries.

“Rather than ensuring greater transparency and promoting full and fair debate, the House Republican Leadership has chosen to do the very opposite by authorizing ‘speech police’ to restrict the First Amendment right of the Minority to express their dissent on the House floor," the statement says. "Surely this could not happen on the floor of the U.S. House, given that we’re sworn to uphold the Constitution.”

Ryan’s office did not respond to a request for comment but spokeswoman AshLee Strong defended the proposed change earlier this week. Strong dismissed questions about the constitutionality of such a change, saying the proposal “will help ensure that order and decorum are preserved in the House.”

Larson said Democrats aren’t going to back down and didn’t rule out another sit-in, although he made clear that idea hasn’t been discussed broadly within the caucus.

“Let us hope that reasonable minds prevail. I don’t think Democrats are going to sit idly as the majority abuses its authority,” he told POLITICO. “Who knows? We might even have to protest this,” he added.