Over two weeks ago, on September 23rd, Adelita Grijalva won a special election for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, in Arizona's seventh congressional district. She won handily -- by a whopping 39 percent margin -- so the results aren't being contested or undergoing recounts or anything of that nature. She won, plain and simple. It was an emotional victory for her because she will be taking the seat vacated by the death of her father Raúl earlier this year. But she still hasn't been sworn in. She is still just "Representative-Elect Grijalva."

The House speaker has refused to swear Grijalva in. And while their are political reasons for him doing so, this should not be allowed to stand. Her district has been without a representative for too long already, and adding additional weeks to that period is not just frustrating for the people who live there, but it is a dangerous and un-American precedent that is being set. Grijalva is now considering whether to bring legal action to force Mike Johnson to swear her in.

Johnson's position is simply not believable. He is saying that newly-elected representatives in special elections have to wait until the full House meets again -- something he is actively delaying (they were scheduled to get back into session this week, but Johnson decided to extend their vacation). But this is simply not true and there is no history of it ever being true.

In fact, earlier this year two Republicans (Representatives Jimmy Patronis and Randy Fine) were sworn in the day after their special election, even though the House was not fully in session. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Johnson's excuse now is hogwash, since Johnson himself allowed the two to be sworn in.

The House is in a holding pattern for technical parliamentary reasons. They are not officially "in recess," since that almost never happens anymore. Instead, once every couple of days a few House members appear in the chamber and one gavels in a "pro forma" session -- and then immediately gavels the session adjourned. The entire bit of Kabuki theater only takes a moment or two, then everybody leaves and goes back on vacation. Usually these sessions are opened and closed by members from near the D.C. region, so nobody has to fly in or anything.

Grijalva is demanding that she be sworn in during one of these pro forma sessions, which is not an unreasonable thing to ask (since that's exactly what happened earlier this year for Patronis and Fine). Johnson is refusing to do so. His story now is that the House won't be back in session until the government shutdown is ended -- which is not required by law in any way (they continue to get paid, and nothing is stopping them from meeting). Furthermore, Johnson says he's not going to swear Grijalva in until the shutdown ends. But it shouldn't be up to the speaker's whim. That's where the "dangerous and un-American" part comes in. The people in Arizona who voted overwhelmingly for Grijalva are being denied representation for purely political reasons. Grijalva cannot set up district offices to respond to constituent problems until she is sworn in.

Yesterday, Johnson said something that he had to walk back. He was being interviewed on CNN and responded to a question about swearing in Grijalva, "We'll schedule it, I guess, as soon as she wants." Now he swears he didn't mean it, and instead meant when the House is back in full session... whenever that happens (which, again, Johnson fully controls).

This isn't just some shutdown sideshow battle, however. There's another purely political reason why Johnson is refusing to swear Grijalva in. As things stand, a "discharge petition" has been circulated that -- once signed by a majority of the House -- will force Johnson to hold a vote on a bill that would force the Trump administration to release all the Epstein files. And the petition currently has 217 signatures -- which is one shy of what it needs. Grijalva has said she intends to sign it, which would push it over the top and force the House floor vote within a very short period of time -- which is something Johnson does not want to happen.

Grijalva has a theory why Johnson continues to refuse to swear her in:

[Representative-Elect Adelita] Grijalva, for her part, said that she thinks [House Speaker Mike] Johnson is trying to buy time to convince one of the four Republican lawmakers who signed the Epstein petition -- Reps. [Thomas] Massie [Kentucky] ; Lauren Boebert, Colo.; Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ga.; and Nancy Mace, S.C. -- to remove their names. None of them have shown signs of wavering.

"I don't think that he's been successful, which is why I believe that this dragging of feet is happening," she said.

She's not the only Democrat who believes this. The two Democratic senators from Arizona got into a confrontation with Johnson today, and explicitly accused him of stalling to avoid the discharge petition:

Senators Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego, the two Democrats from Arizona, strode across the Capitol on Wednesday afternoon and parked themselves in front of the Speaker Mike Johnson's office.

They were there to hold a news conference publicly criticizing Mr. Johnson for keeping the House out of session during the government shutdown and refusing to seat Representative-elect Adelita Grijalva, the Democrat who won a special election last month in their state.

What they got instead was a heated confrontation with Mr. Johnson himself.

As Mr. Gallego was calling Mr. Johnson a disgrace and trying to pin the blame on him for the shutdown, the Republican speaker came striding out of his suite at the center of the Capitol to greet them.

"Oh, hey gentlemen," Mr. Johnson said calmly.

Mr. Gallego immediately started grilling Mr. Johnson on why he was refusing to seat Ms. Grijalva, who is poised to provide the final signature needed to force a floor vote on whether to demand that the Trump administration release the Epstein files.

"You don't want her to be on the Epstein discharge petition," Mr. Gallego pressed him.

"Totally absurd," Mr. Johnson shot back. "You guys are experts at red herrings and distraction."

The speaker professed to be "happy she got elected," noting that Ms. Grijalva would be filling the seat of her father, former Representative Raúl Grijalva, who died in March. But he claimed that because of the shutdown, his hands were tied and he could not seat her.

"We need the lights turned back on," he said. "We encourage both of you to go open the government."

There is no such rule for swearing in a duly elected member of Congress. The House can continue to operate even in the event of a government shutdown, and lawmakers may be sworn in even when the chamber is not formally in legislative session.

Democrats should continue to turn up the heat on Johnson. This is a completely separate issue from the government shutdown, period. The two have nothing to do with each other at all. Johnson is trying to make up some sort of historical precedent or tradition out of whole cloth. It does not exist, and never has, period.

Johnson's explanation for why he swore two Republicans into office during a pro forma session doesn't hold any water at all:

In a Wednesday interview with NewsNation, Johnson said these procedures were unique exceptions made because the date for swearing the lawmakers in had already been set prior to the session's cancellation, and because the representatives-elect had flown in their families. Asked whether Grijalva flying in her family would prompt him to swear her in, Johnson insisted that Congress hasn't yet scheduled the ceremony because it's in pro forma. He then called the controversy a distraction.

Adelita Grijalva should pounce on this. She should immediately book travel for her entire family to Washington D.C. and hold a press conference to let Johnson know when she'll be arriving. Then if he still refuses to swear her in, she should hold another press conference on the steps of the U.S. Capitol to demand what is rightfully hers. She can make a very emotional case, since this seat was made vacant by the death of her father. She can easily weave this into her plea that her election be respected by the speaker. And she's already making the case that this is a dangerous precedent for all of us: "I’m seriously concerned with the precedent that the delay in swearing me in is setting for future races across the country. If the speaker doesn't want to swear us in, he doesn’t have to? We cannot just ignore the will of the people."

Other Democrats should join her at this press conference, or press the issue on their own. If the timing of swearing in new members is entirely up to the speaker, what would there be to stop him (or her) from refusing to swear in members after a full congressional election? That is why this is such a serious precedent, and why Democrats should be leaning as hard as they can on Johnson to relent.

The message is an easy one for Democrats to state: "End the political games. Swear her in! Now!"

-- Chris Weigant

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant