Opinion ID: 2334650
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Legislative Power

Text: This appeal does not require an extended discussion of legislative power in the District of Columbia. In brief, the United States Constitution vests in Congress the power to legislate for the District of Columbia in all cases whatsoever. U.S. CONST. art. I, § 8, cl. 17. It is often said that Congress has plenary power to legislate for the District. See, e.g., Palmore v. United States, 411 U.S. 389, 397, 93 S.Ct. 1670, 36 L.Ed.2d 342 (1973). However, in 1973 Congress enacted D.C.Code § 1-201.01 et seq., popularly known as the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, delegating some, but not all, of its legislative powers to the Council of the District of Columbia while retaining ultimate legislative authority over the District. See D.C.Code § 1-206.01. See also District of Columbia v. Greater Washington Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO, 442 A.2d 110, 113 (D.C.1982). The Home Rule Act contains several limitations on the power delegated to the Council. D.C.Code § 1-206.02 (2001), formerly D.C.Code § 1-233 (1981). Most importantly for this case, Congress declared that [t]he Council shall have no authority to . . . enact any act to amend or repeal any Act of Congress . . . which is not restricted in its application exclusively in or to the District. D.C.Code § 1-206.02(a)(3). Under certain circumstances the citizens of the District may exercise legislative power directly. For example, the qualified registered voters of the District of Columbia generally may approve through initiative any law that the Council may enact through legislation. D.C.Code § 1-204.101(a), formerly D.C.Code § 1-281(a) (1981); Convention Ctr. Referendum Comm. v. District of Columbia Bd. of Elections and Ethics, 441 A.2d 889, 897 (D.C.1981) (en banc) (plurality opinion) (absent express or implied limitation, the power of the electorate to act by initiative is coextensive with the power of the legislature to adopt legislative measures); id. at 921 (concurring opinion of Newman, C.J., joined by Pryor, J.) (incorporating by reference the rationale of the opinion Chief Judge Newman wrote for the division majority, see 441 A.2d 871, 876 (D.C.1980) (the power of the electorate to propose laws through the initiative is co-extensive with the power of the legislative branch of government to pass legislative acts, ordinances, and resolutions)). Nevertheless, the power of initiative is subject to certain additional limitations, including that an initiative may not appropriate funds. D.C.Code § 1-204.101(a). See District of Columbia Bd. of Elections and Ethics and District of Columbia (Campaign for Treatment) v. District of Columbia, 866 A.2d 788, 793-94 (D.C.2005); Hessey v. District of Columbia Bd. of Elections and Ethics, 601 A.2d 3, 16 (D.C.1991) (en banc). Additionally, an initiative may not be administrative in nature. Hessey v. Burden, 615 A.2d 562, 578 (D.C.1992).