Protests and political representation are often seen as substitutes. This idea underlies prominent theories that explain democratization as a way to prevent uprisings, and receives empirical support from historical enfranchisement episodes. Using the recent legislation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in India -- a law perceived to disenfranchise Muslims -- and the subsequent CAA protests, we show that representation can also play a complementary role in facilitating protests. Employing a close election regression discontinuity design we find that having a Muslim state representative significantly increased the likelihood of a CAA protest in their constituency, but did not affect the likelihood of other protests. The result is not driven by party identity or incumbency of the legislator. This complementarity is weaker in states with a higher share of Muslim legislators, especially when they are in the state's ruling coalition, possibly because in this case legislators can directly influence public policy.