Eric Swalwell resigns from Congress on April 14, 2026, citing false allegations and a refusal to support expulsion without due process. C-SPAN's Student Cam competition highlights second-place winners Murillo Dos Santos, Sami Youssef, and Zeb Unger for "The King's Court," which critiques President Trump's use of armed agents, suppression of protests, and attacks on press freedom. Experts Naftali Ben-David, Thomas B. Griffith, and Mary McCord argue that law must supersede presidential power, warning that the administration's targeting of officials like Jim Comey and Letitia James, alongside unlawful U.S. attorney appointments, erodes public trust in the justice system after 250 years. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
Source
|
Time
Text
Rule of Law and Leadership00:08:59
I am deeply sorry to my family, staff, and constituents for mistakes and judgment I've made in my past.
I will fight the serious false allegations made against me.
However, I must take responsibility and ownership for the mistakes I did make.
I am aware of efforts to bring an immediate expulsion vote against me and other members.
Expelling anyone in Congress without due process within days of an allegation being made is wrong.
But it's also wrong for my constituents to have me distracted from my duties.
Therefore, I plan to resign my seat in Congress effective at 2 p.m. Eastern Time on April 14th, 2026.
I will work with my staff in the coming days to ensure they are able, in my absence, to serve the needs of the good people of the 14th Congressional District.
Signed sincerely, Eric Swalwell.
Under Clause 5D of Rule 20, the chair announces to the House that in light of the resignation of the gentleman from California, Mr. Swalwell, the whole number of the House is 431.
This year, as we mark the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, C-SPAN's Student Cam documentary competition invited students to create short films exploring themes from American history, the rights and freedoms rooted in this founding document, and pressing issues of today, from the economy and immigration to criminal justice, education, and health care.
Nearly 4,000 students from 38 states and Washington, D.C. took part in this year's competition.
Throughout this month, we're proud to showcase our top 21 winners.
This year's second prize high school East winners are Murillo Dos Santos, Sami Youssef, and Zeb Unger, 11th graders from Montgomery Blair High School in Silver Spring, Maryland, where our local partner is Comcast.
Their winning documentary is titled The King's Court about how President Trump's actions test the rule of law and public trust in American Democratic Institutes.
We're seeing a president send armed agents into cities.
We're seeing people's efforts to protest be challenged.
We're seeing attacks on freedom of the press.
We're seeing a certain personalization of the justice system.
And so I think even after two and a half centuries, we're seeing some of these debates that were really crucial at the time that the country was founded being revived in a very stark, very dramatic, very confrontational way that we haven't seen in any of our lifetimes.
My name is Naftali Ben-David.
I'm senior political correspondent for the Washington Post.
I've been in journalism for about 40 years.
The founders of this country wanted there to be equal treatment under the law.
Not a law decided by a king, but a law that was decided based on the facts.
The rule of law is not just about words on paper.
The rule of law is about the character of the people who are charged with enforcing the law.
In our country, law is king.
The king isn't king.
The president isn't king.
Law is king, and that's what has been our hallmark as a people, and it's what's made us successful.
I'm Thomas B. Griffith.
I was a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit.
I was a conservative Republican who was appointed to be the chief legal officer of the United States Senate.
The Constitution and the founders clearly envisioned a situation with three major branches of government that were essentially co-equal.
There's a situation now where the White House seems to be a lot more powerful than either Congress or the judiciary.
What we are seeing with this executive is, I don't care so much about the other two branches.
You know, I'm the president, I've got these powers, and if it's not explicit in the Constitution, he's frequently said it's inherent in the Constitution, and he can do things regardless of whether they tread on the powers of the judiciary.
All of the lawyers in the Department of Justice are lawyers for the American people.
They represent the American people.
He has loyalists at the top leadership positions, and they happily comply with his requests, as when Attorney General Pam Bondi welcomed him to the Department of Justice.
We are so proud to work at the directive of Donald Trump.
It is.
That's probably the first time an Attorney General has ever said that they work at the direction of the president.
When I went into court for those many years, what I would say is, I'm Mary McCord.
I'm here on behalf of the United States, not on behalf of the president.
In 2016, I declared, I am your voice.
Today I add, I am your warrior, I am your justice.
And for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution.
I am your retribution.
Donald Trump campaigned for reelection on the argument that when he was in charge again, he would make people who had hurt him politically pay for it.
President Trump openly calls for the prosecution of people who are his political or personal adversaries.
You know, he had this social media post saying that people like former FBI Director Jim Comey, like New York Attorney General Letitia James, like California Senator Adam Schiff, are, quote, guilty as hell, and urging the Justice Department to prosecute them.
That's not a thing we usually see in the American system.
Donald Trump wants people to comply and obediently prosecute the individuals he wants prosecuted.
And the people that he's chosen to do it often have no experience as prosecutors.
There are certain rules that apply to acting appointments, and he's tried to circumvent those.
And so in multiple states now and jurisdictions, there's been challenges to those U.S. attorneys who have been unlawfully appointed.
When we hear public officials criticize the rulings of judges that they don't like and use phrases like, we're experiencing a judicial coup or judicial insurrection, A, that's not accurate, that's inaccurate, and B, that's dangerous.
In recent months, we've seen a handful of radical left judges effectively try to overrule the rightful powers of the president.
Well, there's always been certain lines that presidents and other political figures, for that matter, have respected.
I mean, rarely do they take off after judges with insults and attacks and characterizations of their decisions.
No crime.
I have a crooked judge.
He's a totally conflicted judge.
No, we have a process in place.
Those decisions can be appealed and they will be appealed.
Some judges have suggested that they think the administration has walked right up to the line of flouting judicial orders and disregarding them.
A judge says there is probable cause to hold the Trump administration in contempt in regards to the case of deporting Venezuelan migrants, despite that judge's order in his court to turn the plane around.
He feels that as the president of the United States, which he views as the most powerful country in the world, he just doesn't have to abide by the rule of law.
If he does it, that is the law.
I mean, I do think there's a risk that people of all political perspectives will start to lose faith and lose trust in the justice system and in the government.
And once that happens, I think there's a real risk to the system as we have seen it for 250 years.
You need that trust, you need that faith, you need that feeling of investment from all parts of the citizenry in order for the system to work.
And if you start losing that faith and losing that trust, it's hard to say what's going to come next.
Be sure to watch all of the winning entries on our website at studentcam.org.
C-SPAN, bringing you democracy unfiltered.
You're watching C-SPAN.
Democracy Unfiltered.
C-SPAN brings you democracy unfiltered in real time.
Democracy doesn't take sides, neither does C-SPAN.
In a world full of opinions, C-SPAN gives you direct access to the people and institutions that shape our nation.
Unfiltered coverage of Congress as laws are debated and decided.
Live proceedings from the United States Supreme Court.
Presidential speeches, briefings, and historic moments as they happen.
No commentary, no spin, no agenda.
Just the democratic process presented in full without interruption so you can watch the debates, hear every word, and make sure you're not going to be able to do