New D.C. Home Rule Bill Extends Congressional Review to 60 Days, Allows Piecemeal Disapproval, and Blocks Resubmissions

Okay, let's talk about the 'District of Columbia Home Rule Improvement Act of 2025.' If you live or work in D.C., or just care about local control, this one's a big deal. This bill isn't just tweaking the rules; it's fundamentally shifting how much say Congress has over what D.C. can do, from laws to executive orders.

The Clock Just Got Longer

Right now, when D.C. passes a law, Congress gets 30 days to review it. This bill, under Section 2, doubles that to a uniform 60 days. So, imagine you're a small business owner in D.C. and the Council passes a new local tax incentive program. Instead of potentially seeing that go into effect after a month, you're now waiting two months to see if Congress decides to step in. And get this: the special, faster 30-day review period that used to exist for laws dealing with criminal penalties? Gone. Those now also get the full 60-day treatment. It also means that if D.C. passes an emergency act, and then tries to extend it or pass something 'substantially the same,' that extension is subject to the full 60-day review, closing a potential loophole.

Picking Apart the Pieces

This is where it gets really interesting, and potentially a bit messy. Currently, if Congress wants to disapprove a D.C. law, it's usually an all-or-nothing deal. They either block the whole thing or let it pass. But Section 4 changes the game. It allows Congress to disapprove specific provisions of D.C. laws. Think about that: the D.C. Council could pass a comprehensive bill on, say, housing reform, and Congress could just yank out one or two clauses they don't like, leaving the rest of the bill potentially hobbled or incoherent. For D.C. residents, this means even a locally popular, well-crafted law could be surgically altered from afar, undermining the original intent.

New Targets: Executive Orders and Regulations

It's not just D.C. laws that are on the table anymore. Section 5 gives Congress the power to disapprove executive orders and regulations issued by the D.C. Mayor or other executive agencies. Every single one of these has to be sent to Congress, and they can't take effect for at least 60 days. So, if the Mayor issues an executive order to streamline a permit process for local construction, Congress now has a 60-day window to block it. This adds a whole new layer of federal oversight to the day-to-day operations of D.C.'s local government, potentially slowing down administrative actions that directly affect businesses and residents.

No Take-Backs, No Do-Overs

Section 6 and Section 7 are pretty straightforward but have significant implications. Once the D.C. Council sends an Act to Congress for review, Section 6 says they can't withdraw it. It's in the system, whether they change their mind or not. And if Congress does disapprove a D.C. law? Section 7 prohibits the D.C. Council from sending another law that's 'substantially the same' unless a new federal law specifically authorizes it. For D.C. residents, this could mean that if Congress rejects a local initiative—say, a new approach to public safety—the D.C. Council can't even try a slightly modified version to address the same issue without federal permission. The term 'substantially the same' is pretty vague, which could open the door to broad interpretations by Congress to block future D.C. legislative efforts.

Annual Check-Ins with Congress

Finally, Section 8 requires the D.C. Council Chair and the Mayor to appear at least once a year before Congressional committees to report on the 'state of the District.' While this might sound like standard oversight, combined with all the other changes, it feels less like a collaborative check-in and more like an annual progress report to a strict supervisor. For D.C. residents and officials, this bill represents a significant tightening of the leash, making it harder for the District to govern itself without federal intervention.