District of Columbia residents aren’t entitled to voting representation in the U.S. House of Representatives, the Supreme Court ruled, affirming a lower court decision.
The case is Castañon v. United States, court file 20-1279. The ruling, which summarily affirmed a lower court decision, came on Oct. 4. There were no oral arguments.
In the brief unsigned order, Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch indicated they would dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. They didn’t elaborate.
Referring to the nation’s capital that at the time the Constitution was ratified in 1788 had yet to be created, that provision gave Congress the power “To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of Particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States.”
“We recognize that District residents’ lack of the congressional franchise is viewed by many, even most, as deeply unjust, and we have given each aspect of Plaintiffs’ claims most serious consideration, but our ruling today is compelled by precedent and by the Constitution itself,” the opinion stated.
However, Washington residents aren’t completely shut out of self-governance. There is an elected District Council that takes care of day-to-day local government matters, subject to the possibility of a joint resolution of disapproval being passed by both houses of Congress, something that rarely happens. The 23rd Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1961, gave the District three votes in the electoral college in presidential elections.
Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), who is a nonvoting member of the House, said she was “disappointed” by the Supreme Court ruling.
“In 2016, D.C. residents voted overwhelmingly for statehood, and the House has passed my D.C. statehood bill twice since June 2020. We have record support for D.C. statehood in the Senate, and we have never been closer to statehood.”