Questions of Privilege in the House

Questions of Privilege in the House

Questions of Privilege in the House
Updated October 2, 2023
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
98-411

link to page 3 link to page 3 link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page 4 Questions of Privilege in the House

Contents
Questions of the Privileges of the House .................................................................................. 1
Questions of Personal Privilege ................................................................................................ 1
Floor Action on Questions of Privilege ..................................................................................... 2

Contacts
Author Information .......................................................................................................................... 2
Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... 2
Key Policy Staff .............................................................................................................................. 3

Congressional Research Service

Questions of Privilege in the House

The House of Representatives distinguishes between privileged business and questions of
privilege. Privileged business relates to the order or priority of business before the House and is
defined in House rules and precedents as business that has precedence over the regular order of
business and so may supersede or interrupt other matters that might be called up or pending
before the House. Questions of privilege constitute one form of privileged business. Clause 1 of
House Rule IX recognizes two kinds of questions of privilege: questions of the privileges of the
House and questions of personal privilege.1
Questions of the Privileges of the House
Under Rule IX, clause 1, questions of the privileges of the House are “those affecting the rights of
the House collectively, its safety, dignity, and the integrity of its proceedings.” For example,
questions relating to the seating of Members and the organization of the House at the beginning
of a Congress have been held to raise questions of the privileges of the House, as have questions
relating to the health and safety of Members and staff. Other subjects giving rise to questions of
the privileges of the House include the presence on the House floor of unauthorized persons, the
conduct of those in the press gallery, the integrity of the Journal, the protection of House records
and files, the accuracy of House documents and records, the integrity and regularity of an
electronic vote, and the attempted bribery or corruption of Members.
The Speaker determines whether a question that a Member has raised does in fact qualify under
the House’s precedents as a question of the privileges of the House. Two of the general principles
that guide the Speaker in making these determinations are stated in House Practice. First, a
question of the privileges of the House “may not be raised to effect a change in the rules of the
House or their interpretation;”2 and second, a Member “may not by raising a question of the
privileges of the House under Rule IX thereby attach privilege to a question not otherwise in
order under the rules of the House”3 (in other words, make a question a matter of privileged
business).
Questions of Personal Privilege
Clause 1 of Rule IX defines questions of personal privilege as “those affecting the rights,
reputation, and conduct” of Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner individually in
their representative capacity. Under this rule, a Member may rise to a question of personal
privilege on the floor to respond to criticism of integrity specifically in relation to his or her
representative capacity. Again, it is the Speaker who determines whether an allegation or
statement gives rise to a question of personal privilege. According to House Practice, the
allegation or statement must refer to an individual Member and must reflect directly on the
Member’s integrity or reputation. “Mere statements of opinion about or general criticism of his
actions as a Member ... or his voting record or views ... do not constitute grounds for a question of
personal privilege.”4
Members have raised questions of personal privilege to respond to allegations about matters such
as misuse of public funds, conflicts of interest, abuse of the franking privilege, corruption and

1 For more information see Charles W. Johnson, John V. Sullivan, and Thomas J. Wickham Jr. House Practice: A
Guide to the Rules, Precedents, and Procedures of the House (Washington, DC: GPO, 2017), chapter 42, pp. 729-754
(cited in this report as House Practice).
2 House Practice, chapter 42, §3, p. 736.
3 Ibid., chapter 42, §3, p. 733.
4 Ibid., chapter 42, §16, p. 749.
Congressional Research Service

1

Questions of Privilege in the House

bribery, criminal conspiracy or perjury, violation of the securities laws, and knowingly making a
false statement with the intent to deceive. Members may rise to questions of personal privilege to
respond to such public criticisms, whether made by other Members or, for example, in private
publications. A question of personal privilege, however, “may not be based on language uttered
on the floor of the House in debate,” according to House Practice, because House rules provide a
different recourse for such a case: a timely demand that the objectionable words be taken down.5
Floor Action on Questions of Privilege
A Member raises a question of the privileges of the House in the form of a resolution. The
Member rises on the floor and states, “Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of the privileges of the
House, and I offer a resolution which I send to the Clerk’s desk.” The text of the resolution is
read. If it is the majority leader or the minority leader who offers the resolution, the Speaker
immediately rules as to whether it constitutes a valid question of privilege. If the question is
raised by any other Member, consideration of it may be deferred until a time and place within the
next two legislative days that the Speaker designates in the legislative schedule. When that time
arrives, the Speaker then decides whether the resolution raises a valid question of privilege.
If the Speaker determines that the resolution does raise a valid question of privilege, the House
proceeds to consider the resolution under the one-hour rule, with the time for debate equally
divided between the resolution’s proponent and either the majority leader or the minority leader,
as the Speaker determines. The House may agree to order the previous question on the resolution;
if so, the House proceeds to vote on the resolution without amendment or further debate. If the
previous question is not ordered, debate may continue under the one-hour rule, and the Member
controlling the time may propose an amendment to the resolution. Motions to table or refer the
resolution, or to postpone its consideration, are also in order.
A Member raises a question of personal privilege simply by stating that he or she is rising on the
floor for that purpose. A question of personal privilege is not raised by resolution. The Speaker
then asks the Member to explain the grounds on which the question is based. If the Speaker
determines that the Member has raised a valid question of privilege, that Member is recognized
immediately to speak for one hour. After this hour for debate, the House takes no further action
on the matter. No vote occurs, because there is no question for the House to decide.

Author Information

Elizabeth Rybicki, Coordinator

Specialist on Congress and the Legislative Process

Acknowledgments
This report was written by James V. Saturno. The analysts listed in the Key Policy Staff table are available
to answer questions on the topic.

5 Ibid., chapter 42, §17, p. 749. See CRS Report R45866, Words Taken Down: Calling Members to Order for
Disorderly Language in the House.
Congressional Research Service

2

Questions of Privilege in the House

Key Policy Staff
Area of Expertise
Name
Phone
Email
Legislative Procedure
Christopher M. Davis
7-0656
cmdavis@crs.loc.gov
Legislative Procedure
Michael Greene
7-9188
mgreene@crs.loc.gov
Legislative Procedure
Valerie Heitshusen
7-8635
vheitshusen@crs.loc.gov
Legislative Procedure
Jane A. Hudiburg
7-0276
jhudiburg@crs.loc.gov
Legislative Procedure
Mark J. Oleszek
7-7084
moleszek@crs.loc.gov
Legislative Procedure
Elizabeth Rybicki
7-0644
erybicki@crs.loc.gov
Legislative Procedure
James V. Saturno
7-2381
jsaturno@crs.loc.gov
Legislative Procedure
Sarah Solomon
7-1475
ssolomon@crs.loc.gov

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
98-411 · VERSION 10 · UPDATED
3