By Mary Gay Scanlon
U.S. Representative (PA-05)
One of the great virtues, and occasional frustrations, of our representative democracy is that each of the 435 elected members of the House of Representatives and 100 members of the Senate brings with them a diversity of experience, viewpoints, and talents — all with the goal of creating a more perfect union.
It can be easy for some to dismiss the importance of representation in our politics, but consider this: When I was first sworn in, I was (for a brief time) the only woman representing Pennsylvania in Congress and only the eighth woman to represent the Commonwealth in our federal government since its founding. I was proud to bring the experience of being a woman, and a mother, to an institution in which, even now, only one quarter of our elected officials are women. Thanks to the wave of female representatives that the 2018 election brought to Congress, we are finally moving legislation that addresses the needs and concerns of women and families.
In addition to my experiences as a woman and mother, there is another attribute that serves me well in the People’s House. I am particularly proud to bring to Congress the perspective and legacy of being a Philadelphia lawyer. As we have navigated the tumultuous events of the past few years, I find myself frequently drawing upon Philadelphia’s historic role in the framing of our Constitution and its modern legacy in advancing the rule of law.
Obviously, Philadelphia’s historic role in creating “a government of laws, not men” was critically important during both impeachments of the 45th president. As vice chair of the Judiciary Committee for the first impeachment, I sought to highlight the debates and decisions made by the framers at Philadelphia’s Constitutional Convention and in the Federalist Papers. While the opinions and decisions of the founding fathers may not excite daily contemplation, outside of a history class or recent Broadway musical, I felt an unexpected kinship with our nation’s founders. I was awed by the responsibility of parsing their understanding of when Congress should exercise its power to impeach.
That experience left me grateful and with heightened respect for the discernment of the framers in anticipating the evil that men might do. It is no small feat that the system of checks and balances they created more than two centuries ago is still functioning — still protecting both individuals and our representative government.
Of course, Andrew Hamilton, the original “Philadelphia lawyer,” earned that moniker in 1763, before the Constitution was even drafted, for his successful representation of John Peter Zenger against criminal charges for refusing to disclose the sources of articles critical of the British government that he published in his newspaper. I had the occasion to raise Hamilton’s legacy and the Zenger trial last June in a Judiciary Committee hearing to address abuse of the subpoena process. As we examined instances in which the government had sought to discover a reporter’s sources for articles critical of the Trump administration, I cited Hamilton’s argument about the critical importance of a free press to preserve individual liberty by “exposing and opposing tyrannical power by speaking and writing truth.” It was striking that almost 300 years after the Zenger trial, we were still addressing that same issue.
While Hamilton may have been the first Philadelphia lawyer, he was far from the last. Each of us is part of a long line of advocates for the rule of law and the public interest with roots in the City of Brotherly Love. That brotherly (and sisterly) love extends into the courtroom, where generations of jurists and lawyers have fought to assure access to justice, push for legal reform, and vindicate human and civil rights on behalf of our fellow Americans.
Perhaps more than any other American city, Philadelphia boasts a robust public interest legal community whose accomplishments include securing access to the ballot, recognizing the rights of children to SSI and special education, developing programs that are national models for pro bono representation, and the prevention of eviction and homelessness, and representation of immigrants fleeing poverty and persecution around the world. The 35 years I spent working with the Philadelphia public interest bar has been invaluable as I advocate for children and families, immigrants, and other vulnerable constituents, in Congress.
Almost as soon as we began providing constituent services in my congressional office, I realized that many of the constituents seeking assistance from my office had the same issues as the clients with whom I worked at Community Legal Services, the Support Center for Child Advocates, the Homeless Advocacy Project and Philadelphia VIP. This observation has guided both my policy work and my focus on developing resources that all elected representatives can use to leverage the skills of legal services providers in their constituent services programs. As co-chair of the bipartisan House Caucus on Access to Legal Aid, I proudly promote the ideals of the Philadelphia lawyer — our passion to act as public servants and guardians of access to justice. Through this caucus, I’ve worked to deepen my colleagues’ understanding of the importance of legal representation in a variety of contexts, and to gain support to expand funding for legal services around the country.
None of what I’ve accomplished in Congress would have been possible without my experience as a Philadelphia lawyer. It is my honor to uphold the legacy of the Philadelphia lawyer through my service in Congress.
