Rep. Mike Lawler and Rep. Jamie Raskin clashed during a Tuesday House Judiciary Committee hearing on U.S. immigration policy after Lawler used the moment to argue that sanctuary cities like New York and Chicago protect criminals. The exchange erupted into publ
Tuesday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing didn’t just run hot—it broke out into a full. no-look argument between two lawmakers who clearly weren’t done speaking after the gavel. By the time the chamber hit its tipping point, Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) and Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) were shouting at each other over U.S. immigration policy in a scene that left the room scrambling for order.
The clash began with Lawler stepping in as a guest to introduce a witness. He didn’t treat the moment like a quick preface. Instead. he launched into a statement claiming that cities “like New York and Chicago blatantly disregard existing law and provide safe harbor to criminals.” Committee members cut him off and reminded him he was supposed to introduce a witness. not deliver a political speech.
Lawler continued anyway. He returned to an argument he has been highly outspoken about: the murder of Sheridan Gorman by an undocumented migrant. He rattled off multiple opportunities—described as times when the murderer could have been apprehended by authorities and deported before the murder—turning the introduction into a condemnation of the policies he says made the tragedy possible.
When one of the committee members called for order—“Point of order, this is not an introduction, it is a speech”—Raskin snapped back from the other side of the moment. “You all should be ashamed of yourselves!” he declared.
Raskin went further, speaking over members as they tried to bring the hearing back into line. “Her mother is here precisely because you have failed to do your jobs. You wonder why we had four hearings? It’s because you don’t understand the consequence of sanctuary policy.”
Lawler insisted he wasn’t just offering talking points. He said introducing his constituent required sharing the details of Gorman’s death, telling the room, “You may not want to hear the details,” adding, “It may be an inconvenience to you, but these details matter.”
As the Chairman pressed again for Lawler to stick to an introduction and stop. Lawler complied only in form. not in substance. He called it “shameful that we are here. ” not because it was the fourth hearing. but because. he said. the committee needed those repeated hearings for people to understand “the real-life consequences of the disastrous sanctuary city policies.” He then framed the emotional demand as personal and parallel—arguing that the same outrage some members felt about Renée Good and Alex Pretti should also be directed toward Sheridan Gorman.
Raskin wasn’t having it. “I do feel that outrage!” he said.
Lawler cut back immediately: “You do not!”
The argument spilled into open hostility. As both men began pointing at each other—fully yelling over committee members—Raskin demanded, “Do you feel the outrage about Alex Pretti and Renée Good?”
Lawler responded with an escalation of his own: “You should be ashamed of yourself!” He also repeatedly called Raskin a “disgrace.” Raskin fired back just as aggressively. saying. “You don’t belong on this committee. you should get the hell out of here!” and accusing Lawler of not understanding the committee’s rules and the constitution. describing him as “full of it.”.
By the end. Lawler stormed off amid condemnation of his “outrageous outburst.” The hearing’s official business was swallowed by the reality of what the moment had turned into: a public. confrontational fight over sanctuary policy. immigration enforcement. and what lawmakers owe a grieving family when the cameras are rolling.
House Judiciary Committee Mike Lawler Jamie Raskin sanctuary cities immigration policy Sheridan Gorman deportation Alexandria Pretti Renée Good CSPAN
Sounds like they just can’t act like adults.
So Lawler was basically like “sanctuary cities protect criminals” and Raskin is yelling back? I mean… everyone does the most in hearings now. Why was the hearing about immigration but somehow the whole room was screaming.
Wait, I thought sanctuary cities were illegal? Like aren’t they just against the law and that’s why everything is chaotic? If the mother is there then yeah I get being mad but it also seems like they’re using the case as ammo and not even answering questions. Also the article cut off mid thought right?
It’s wild how this turned into a shouting match over who’s “failed their jobs.” Like both of them sound ridiculous, but Lawler mentioning a specific murder case makes it feel less about policy and more about revenge politics. Meanwhile Raskin yelling “you all should be ashamed” doesn’t exactly help. I swear every Judiciary hearing turns into WWE now.