The Washington PostDemocracy Dies in Darkness

Bowser says Congress shouldn’t interfere as it weighs nixing two D.C. bills

February 4, 2023 at 6:00 a.m. EST
D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser. (Carolyn Van Houten/The Washington Post)
5 min

Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) on Friday said Congress should stay out of the city’s business as the House prepares to take up a pair of disapproval resolutions next week targeting D.C. legislation, including the city’s sweeping overhaul of its criminal code. But she also acknowledged she shared concerns with some lawmakers on the Hill who have expressed uneasiness about the District’s effort to remake its century-old code.

D.C.’s major criminal code revision — which includes reductions of maximum sentences for certain crimes, and which Bowser opposes — is one of two bills that the House will seek to block next week through disapproval resolutions. The other is a bill allowing noncitizens to vote in local D.C. elections.

Bowser, like other D.C. leaders, has long decried any congressional interference in local laws and affairs. But her ardent opposition to certain facets of the criminal code overhaul raised questions about where she stands on Congress’s attempt to block the revised code from becoming law.

“We don’t want any interference on our local laws. But I also know that there’s a lot of concern in our city,” Bowser said of the code revisions. She added: “Quite frankly, members of Congress have expressed similar concerns. There’s a lot of people that don’t agree with what the council did, they’re happy I spoke up against it.”

The disapproval resolutions will mark the first test this Congress of the strength of Republicans’ threats to intervene in D.C. affairs, and the first time a disapproval resolution has gone to the floor since 2015. They’re part of a decades-long history of congressional intervention in D.C. matters. Congress has oversight of D.C. legislation thanks to a provision in the Constitution, meaning Congress has the final say on local policy. And with Republicans newly in control of the House, D.C. has been bracing for exactly this type of intervention. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), in a message she sent to members of Congress this week, strongly urged them to “vote NO on these profoundly undemocratic and paternalistic resolutions.”

“The nearly 700,000 D.C. residents, a majority of whom are Black and Brown, are worthy and capable of self-government,” she wrote. “Congress, which is not accountable to D.C. residents, should not interfere with legislation duly enacted by the duly elected D.C. government. Members of Congress should not substitute their policy judgment for the judgment of D.C.’s elected officials.”

The fates of the disapproval resolutions in the Democratic-controlled Senate are more uncertain. But some critics, including D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D), have feared Bowser’s veto of the criminal code overhaul could give Republicans ammunition to ramp up support to block the bill, both among their own party and possibly among moderate Democrats who may share Bowser’s views. The council voted 12-1 to override her veto last month.

Bowser has taken aim at changes to the code that would reduce the maximum penalties for some serious crimes, as well as another provision that would restore the right to jury trials in almost all misdemeanor cases. She and some top law enforcement officials argue that these new provisions would overburden the courts and send the wrong message about public safety. Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, which oversees the District, has echoed some of the criticisms about reducing penalties, calling the criminal code overhaul a “pro-criminal bill.”

Supporters of the code revisions note the law does not take effect until 2025 and that the jury trial expansion would be phased in gradually, giving time for local courts to adapt. The proposed sentencing changes, proponents of the bill say, also align more closely with penalties that judges already impose for these offenses.

When WTOP asked D.C. Police Chief Robert J. Contee III what his message would be to members of Congress as the criminal code overhaul remains under federal review, he explained that he looks at reducing certain maximum penalties through the perspective of those most affected by the crime.

“Review it through the lens of you being a victim,” Contee said. “Would you be satisfied with the outcome if you were the person on the receiving end of that crime? If your loved one was the person on the receiving end? When you are very close to that pain, it feels a whole heck of a lot different than when you are removed from that.”

Bowser said Friday she would introduce local legislation that would address her concerns before Congress votes on the disapproval resolutions, adding she hopes the council “will stand with me in advancing those recommendations through the legislative process.”

Other local lawmakers have publicly released forceful statements condemning congressional intervention.

“It is deplorable that Republicans in Congress are attempting to substitute their judgement and completely disregard the government of the District of Columbia by attempting to overturn our laws,” Mendelson said in a statement Friday. “Congress delegated home rule to us 50 years ago and have had no hand in our public safety and should not now seek to interfere piecemeal. Keep your hands off our Home Rule.”

Council member Brianne K. Nadeau (D-Ward 1), who led the bill to allow noncitizens to vote in local elections, said she thought Republicans used to loudly consider “the idea of local independence in setting their own laws as sacrosanct.”

“We in the District of Columbia do not agree with many of the laws set in Kentucky, Little Rock, and many other states and cities,” she said. “Unless those laws violate the constitution or federal law, Congress does not overrule them.”