Attorney General Candidate Manuel Rivera
Accuses the Washington, D.C., Attorney
General’s Office of Conflicts of Interest
The candidate for attorney general of the nation’s capital questions the multimillion-dollar contracts of the Attorney General’s Office and alleges possible ties between its officials and private companies. He calls for an investigation into the awarding of contracts and demands greater transparency.
By José Lebeña | October 19, 2026
Manuel Rivera, the Republican candidate for Attorney General of Washington, D.C., who was born in Puerto Rico, has made transparency and oversight of public contracts central pillars of his campaign. He accuses the current Attorney General’s Office of maintaining possible conflicts of interest with private companies, questions multimillion-dollar legal contracts, and casts doubt
on the results of certain settlements related to the rental market.
In this interview with Metro World News, Rivera explains his allegations, advocates for greater accountability, and outlines his positions on immigration, security, and political representation in the U.S. capital ahead of the November 3 elections.
Why do you want to become Attorney General of Washington, D.C.?
—The first question people usually ask me is why I want to be attorney general, but there is another question they almost never ask me: why I am a Republican.
I was a Democrat for many years. I ran in a primary for the Rhode Island General Assembly when I was in my early twenties. Back then, it was possible to be conservative within the Democratic Party and liberal within the Republican Party. Today, politics is so polarized that it seems there is no longer room for those positions. I want to contribute to changing that dynamic, at least in Washington, D.C., and also attract independent voters.
You have also mentioned possible conflicts of interest involving Uber. What is the basis for this?
—There are significant corporate interests, and citizens have the right to ask whether the decisions of a public official may be influenced by those interests. In this case, I question the relationship between the law firm where the current attorney general worked and Uber, a company with interests in the electric bicycle sector operating in Washington, D.C. Tony West, Uber’s chief legal officer and the brother-in-law of Kamala Harris, former Vice
President of the United States, must also be mentioned. That family relationship and his position at the company form part of the political context that has been mentioned, but what must be examined are the specific ties, the decisions made, and whether any conflict of interest existed.
Have you requested an investigation into these contracts and possible
connections?
—I have requested a congressional investigation into the Washington, D.C., Attorney General’s Office, particularly regarding how contracts are awarded.
I believe there must be transparency and that the law must be applied equally, regardless of whether a decision affects a company or a personal relationship.
You have also questioned legal contracts worth up to $177 million. What are you demanding?
—I have denounced multimillion-dollar contracts awarded to a law firm that, as I have pointed out, employs a former official of the Attorney General’s Office itself. There are questions that must be answered by the office of the current attorney general, Brian L. Schwalb: what relationship exists between that firm and the office, whether that relationship influenced the decisions, what alternatives were considered, and whether more favorable fees
were negotiated for the city. The residents of Washington, D.C., deserve explanations. That is why I have called for these matters to be investigated.
Amid protests in major cities over housing prices and rents, what do you propose to address the problem of rents and the power of large real estate companies?
—The attorney general must guarantee a balance between tenants and landlords. In many cities, renters face price increases and business practices that may harm them. In Washington, D.C., the current attorney general has filed lawsuits against owners of residential buildings. However, I question whether the settlements reached provide sufficient compensation to the people affected.
In one of the cases I mention, the settlement reportedly amounted to one million dollars and affected approximately 9,000 apartments. We must analyze how much that amount represents per housing unit and what benefits tenants actually receive. My concern is that settlements are announced and revenue is obtained for the city, but the people who were harmed do not receive the money to which they are entitled. The Attorney General’s Office must explain how compensation is distributed, who the beneficiaries are, and what mechanisms exist to ensure that victims receive compensation.
Do you believe the Attorney General’s Office is being used as a political
platform?
—That is another one of my criticisms. The office must represent all residents of Washington, D.C., whether they are Republicans, Democrats, independents, or unaffiliated with any party. I also believe there must be transparency in the awarding of contracts and in the application of the law. People or companies cannot be treated differently because of their political, professional, or
personal relationships. The law must be applied equally to everyone.
You have decided not to participate in the public campaign financing program.
Why?
—I disagree with taxpayers’ money being used to finance political campaigns. I believe those resources could be devoted to other priorities, such as youth programs, job training, or public services. My opponent, according to the figures I have cited, has received considerable campaign financing through the public contribution system. I have decided to compete without receiving government money for my campaign. It is a decision based on my principles and my disagreement with that financing model.
Washington, D.C., is governed predominantly by Democrats. Do you believe that concentration of power encourages corruption?
—I believe a democracy needs political competition. When a single party controls practically all institutions, the capacity for oversight is reduced, and problems of transparency and accountability may arise. Washington, D.C., has a particular characteristic: its residents pay federal taxes but do not have
full representation in Congress. There are also restrictions on how certain elected positions are distributed among the parties. I believe citizens should have more options and that minority parties should be able to compete
effectively.
What relationship would you maintain with the White House if elected?
—My proposal is to build bridges with the federal government and negotiate directly when there are common interests. It does not matter whether the president is Republican or Democrat. If there are matters on which
Washington, D.C., and the White House can work together, they should do so.
I do not believe permanent confrontation is a useful strategy. The city needs to solve concrete problems and seek agreements whenever possible.
You have spent decades working on immigration matters. What would that
experience bring to the Attorney General’s Office?
—I have been working in immigration matters for approximately 40 years. I have also handled criminal cases, family cases, civil lawsuits, and appeals, including before the Supreme Court. I believe immigration laws must be enforced while respecting people and guaranteeing humane
treatment. At the same time, I believe political messages must be responsible. Encouraging people to confront immigration officers can put them in danger.
How do you assess the immigration policy of the U.S. administration?
—I believe it was irresponsible to create expectations for years, especially during the previous administration, among people who did not necessarily meet the requirements to remain in the United States. During my work, I have assisted people who arrived convinced that they would be able to establish themselves in the country. Some sold their businesses or properties, went into debt to pay smugglers, and later had to face immigration proceedings for which they had no viable legal pathway. Those experiences led me to question the immigration policy of that previous administration of Joe Biden.
I also believe the authorities must have adequate training to enforce the law.
The system must guarantee due process, but people need realistic information about their legal options.
What do you think about the protests against ICE and the deployment of the National Guard?
—I believe some political positions can put people in danger when they encourage them to confront the authorities. However, the actions of officers must also comply with the law. In a context of such polarization, the administration may end up applying the rules in an overly restrictive manner, forcing many people to turn to the courts. The problem is that not everyone has the money to litigate for years or take a case all the way to a federal court of appeals.
You also question the right to birthright citizenship in Puerto Rico. What is your proposal?
—I have worked on matters related to U.S. citizenship and have defended cases involving people who wanted to renounce it. Congress is now debating the possibility of modifying the rules on birthright citizenship in certain territories. I want to introduce an amendment so that this discussion includes Puerto Rico.
My proposal is that Puerto Rico be able to develop its own immigration system and better manage who enters its territory. I also believe an immigration policy could be designed to meet labor needs in sectors such as agriculture and construction. It is a proposal that would require legal changes and would have to be analyzed in detail.
What do you think about the questioning of mail-in voting and early voting?
—I believe voting should be simple for citizens, but there must also be mechanisms to protect electoral integrity. I am not against mail-in voting. However, I believe it is necessary to establish safeguards to prevent identity theft, duplicate voting, or pressure on voters. I also support requiring identification at polling places, as happens in Washington, D.C. Regarding voting by people who do not have U.S. citizenship, a distinction must be made between federal and local elections. Washington, D.C., passed a law allowing certain noncitizen residents to vote in local elections. Each jurisdiction has its own rules.
Are you concerned that the presence of ICE or the National Guard at polling places could deter voters?
—To give a definitive answer, I would have to know the details and analyze the legal justification for the deployment. If the presence of officers is intended to intimidate people who have the right to vote in an election, I would oppose it. In Washington, D.C., where noncitizen residents can vote in certain local elections, I do not believe there is justification for using ICE for that purpose. It must also be considered that immigrants can vote in elections in their countries of origin from the United States. If they are afraid to leave their homes for fear of being detained, their participation may be affected.
What would be your priority if you become Attorney General of Washington,
D.C.?
—Transparency, accountability, and the equal application of the law.
The office must not become a political platform. It must work for all residents, investigate matters that require investigation, and explain how it makes its decisions. Citizens have the right to know how contracts are awarded, how the rules are enforced, and what results are obtained from the lawsuits filed by the city. That would be the approach of my administration.
Source: José Lebeña, Metro World News, October 19, 2026. Translated literally from the
Spanish-language article provided, excluding advertisements, navigation elements, and unrelated
recommended articles