["National Democrats cannot only be supportive of D.C. statehood
and D.C. autonomy when it is politically convenient for them. D.C.
laws should be made by D.C. elected leaders."]
[[link removed]]

BIDEN SAYS HE WON’T VETO CONGRESS’ MOVE TO BLOCK D.C. BILL
OVERHAULING THE CRIMINAL CODE  
[[link removed]]


 

Martin Austermuhle
March 2, 2023
DCist
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ "National Democrats cannot only be supportive of D.C. statehood and
D.C. autonomy when it is politically convenient for them. D.C. laws
should be made by D.C. elected leaders." _

President Joe Biden speaks in the Oval Office of the White House,
(Andrew Harnik / AP Photo)

 

In a move that represents a significant setback to D.C.’s ability to
govern itself, President Joe Biden said Thursday that he won’t veto
a Republican-sponsored measure making its way through Congress to
block the sweeping D.C. bill that revises and modernizes the city’s
century-old criminal code.

“I support D.C. Statehood and home-rule — but I don’t support
some of the changes D.C. Council put forward over the mayor’s
objections – such as lowering penalties for carjackings,” tweeted
[[link removed]] Biden on
Thursday morning, after he had told Senate Democrats in a closed-door
session much the same. “If the Senate votes to overturn what D.C.
Council did – I’ll sign it.”

The Republican-led House passed a disapproval resolution on D.C.’s
bill last month, and the Senate is expected to take up the measure
next week. With likely Democratic defections expected in the Senate
— Sen. Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia) already said this week
he would vote with Republicans on the measure
[[link removed]] —
Biden’s veto was seen as the last backstop to stop Congress from
overturning the D.C. bill.

With that backstop now gone, the bill is almost certainly going to be
overturned — marking the first time in three decades that Congress
has taken such a step with a D.C. bill. The House also approved a
separate disapproval resolution on a D.C. bill that would allow
non-citizens to vote starting in 2024
[[link removed]],
but Senate sources tell DCist/WAMU it is less likely that the Senate
will take up the measure.

The news of Biden’s announcement sparked immediate criticism from
some D.C. officials, including Attorney General Brian Schwalb.

“Today has been a sad day for D.C. home rule and D.C. residents’
right to self-governance,” said D.C. Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton.

“Local autonomy and self-determination are fundamental American
values,” he said in a statement. “Any effort to overturn the
District of Columbia’s democratically enacted laws degrades the
right of its nearly 700,000 residents and elected officials to
self-govern — a right that almost every other American has. As the
city’s chief legal officer, I will continue to advocate for D.C.’s
full autonomy. Ultimately, the only way to prevent future
congressional interference in our local affairs is for D.C. to become
the 51st state.”

“National Democrats cannot only be supportive of D.C. statehood and
D.C. autonomy when it is politically convenient for them. D.C. laws
should be made by D.C. elected leaders, and as leaders, we are
standing in solidarity to continue calling on the Senate and the
president to not infringe on D.C.’s autonomy and to respect the
democratic will of our voters,” echoed Councilmember Brooke Pinto
(D-Ward 2), who chairs the council’s judiciary committee.

Biden’s decision marks something of a walk-back from his 2021
statement
[[link removed]] in
which he called D.C.’s lack of voting representation and full
self-government “an affront to the democratic values on which our
nation was founded.” But it reflects a longstanding practice,
including among Democrats, of using D.C. for strategic political
purposes when necessary
[[link removed]].
In 2011, for example, then-president Barack Obama gave in to
Republican demands that the city not be allowed to spend any money
subsidizing abortions for low-income women, prompting anger from city
officials.

It also shows the political potency of the issue of crime and public
safety leading into the 2024 election cycle, when a number of
vulnerable Democratic senators will face voters, and Biden himself
could be on the ballot for a second term. For the past two years,
Republicans have been hammering Democrats as soft on crime.

“Even Biden admits crime is out of control in Democrat-run cities
thanks to the Left’s soft-on-crime agenda,” tweeted
[[link removed]] House Majority Leader Steve
Scalise.

“We had hoped that with more Senate support, we would have been able
to ensure that neither disapproval resolution pending before the
Senate would reach the president’s desk, but with the nationwide
increase in crime, most senators do not want to be seen as supporting
criminal justice reform,” conceded Norton.

The process of overhauling D.C.’s criminal code started 16 years
ago
[[link removed]],
and has since spawned thousands of pages of public record highlighting
problems with the existing code, originally drafted by Congress in
1901, and suggesting changes. The revisions included clarifications to
criminal offenses that prosecutors and public defenders alike said
were needed, new grades of sentences to better match the severity of
crimes, and the removal of out-of-date provisions that referenced
steamboats and prohibited the playing of ball games on D.C. streets.

But the overhaul also lowered some maximum penalties for violent
offenses
[[link removed]] like
carjacking and robbery, largely to better match the actual sentences
that judges were handing down. (The maximum sentence for armed
carjacking is 40 years, but D.C. judges on average hand down sentences
of 15 years. The revised criminal code set the new maximum sentence at
14 years.) It also eliminated mandatory minimum sentences for
everything but first-degree murder, reinstated the right to a jury
trial for people charged with misdemeanors, and granted people who
have served 20 years in prison the chance to ask a judge for a
sentence reduction.

While those changes drew some debate among those charged with
rewriting the code — including the U.S. Attorney for D.C. and the
Public Defender Service — those same participants said that the
years-long effort made significant improvements and should be passed
into law. The D.C. Council did so unanimously, though Mayor Muriel
Bowser vetoed the overhaul
[[link removed]],
saying certain provisions would “send the wrong message” at a time
when some violent crimes have spiked in the city.

The council ultimately voted to override Bowser
[[link removed]],
but many of her criticisms of the bill started picking up steam
amongst Republicans in Congress, who saw an opportunity to put
Democrats on the defensive by deriding the overhaul as “soft on
crime” and a threat to the millions of Americans who visit the city
annually. When the House voted to block the bill, the Republican
majority was joined by 31 Democrats.

D.C. officials, led by the council’s 13 lawmakers and Schwalb,
loudly protested the move on the Hill to block the city’s bill,
saying it was a local matter and that Republicans were merely playing
politics with an easy target whose residents did not vote for them and
cannot throw them out of office. (Bowser was more muted in her
objections to congressional interference, though she did propose a
bill to increase some penalties in the revised code
[[link removed]].)

Some local officials and advocates also argued that the changes to
D.C.’s criminal code mirrored similar reforms in dozens of states,
and that the changes wouldn’t go into effect until Oct. 2025 anyhow
— meaning the current crimes would be prosecuted under the current
code. And they noted that should Congress block the revised criminal
code from taking effect, it could leave D.C. with its existing
outdated criminal laws.

“Don’t override the legislation,” said D.C. Council Chairman
Phil Mendelson last month. “If you do, you’re setting back the
District… you’re putting back in place an outdated and archaic
criminal code that’s considered the worst in the country.”

Advocates of the overhaul say that if Congress does block the bill, it
will also be throwing out a number of new criminal offenses not
currently on the books, as well as increased penalties for other
offenses that were included in the revisions. The revised code, for
example, increases penalties on the use of assault weapons and on
shooting someone with the intent to kill, and creates a new
stand-alone offense to allow prosecutors to charge people who fire
guns in public but not specifically at someone.

“The ‘tough-on-crime’ lawmakers from other states should
understand that they just voted for D.C. to continue to have one of
the worst criminal codes in the United States,” said Patrice Sulton,
director of the D.C. Justice Lab and an attorney who worked on the
commission that helped revise the code. “They should understand that
the offense definitions and penalties in our current code — the code
they are voting to keep — are absolutely absurd. And, they should
know that they have just done a great disservice to victims of crime
in the District of Columbia.”

Should Congress end up blocking the D.C. bill, it remains unclear what
the next steps would be for the years-long process to modernize the
city’s criminal code.

“The Revised Criminal Code Act is badly needed legislation, passed
unanimously twice by our duly elected legislature,” said D.C.
Councilmember Charles Allen (D-Ward 6). “It is a comprehensive
package of extensively debated and meticulously crafted legal reforms,
developed over nearly two decades. But this is not about the bill or
what it actually does; this is about manufacturing ‘tough on
crime’ rhetoric at our expense with the outcome of being stuck with
an outdated criminal code that makes the District less safe and less
fair. Defending those without power matters, and past pledges of
support for DC Statehood couldn’t ring more hollow.”

* DC statehood
[[link removed]]
* criminal justice reform
[[link removed]]
* Democratic Party
[[link removed]]
* Democratic Rights
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]