Between Defiance and Survival: How Washington is Navigating Republican Rule
Photo via Wikimedia Commons
RYAN LI: In 2023, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser spoke at a "Hands Off D.C." rally. Now, as Republicans control Congress and the White House, she is adopting a quieter approach to protect the District’s autonomy.
On Tuesday, Jan. 21, the District of Columbia joined 23 other Democratic states and cities in suing the White House to block President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at ending birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants. Yet publicly, Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and Attorney General Brian Schwalb, both Democrats, have remained conspicuously silent on the case, declining all media requests for comment. While this radio silence may seem unusual for a district government that has vocally expressed its opposition to Republicans’ policies in the past, further investigation reveals these actions as part of a greater strategy to preserve the District’s home rule, especially under a fully Republican-controlled Congress.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution established the District of Columbia as a federal entity, designed to house the newly formed federal government and insulate it from undue state influence due to its location. Consequently, Congress retained ultimate legislative authority over the District, a power structure that persists today.
With the passage of the 1973 D.C. Home Rule Act, Congress allowed the District to form a city council and elect a mayor, but it also preserved Congress’s ability to override local legislation, impose laws without Council approval and revoke home rule entirely, placing the District back under direct congressional control. No other state or city can have its government legally revoked by Congress: the District’s unique political status is especially precarious with a Republican trifecta in government.
In the hyper-Democratic city—where Kamala Harris won 90% of the vote in the 2024 presidential election—leaders have learned to navigate a fine line, balancing opposition to Republican policies with the need to avoid provoking Congress into potentially revoking home rule.
Instead, Mayor Bowser and city council are likely focusing on opposing President Trump through less advertised means. During Trump’s first term, Mayor Bowser loudly championed the District’s status as a sanctuary city, yet she has made no mention of this since Trump’s second inauguration, even in light of the President’s executive order on ending birthright citizenship. While the District is lending support to lawsuits aiming to block this order, it is letting other states and cities, that are not under the direct jurisdiction of Congress, lead the way and heed much of President Trump’s ire. Washington may be aiming to lay low for now in an act of self-preservation.
This approach suggests a calculated strategy–quiet resistance in the face of existential risk. But this begs the question: in such a left-leaning city that has made its opposition to the Republican Party clear, how can the Council continue to stand up for its citizens’ values without getting shut down altogether? This is the tightrope that Mayor Bowser and the D.C. Council must walk for the next four years. Too much silence and inaction could allow President Trump to more easily impose his conservative vision onto the District, or even be seen as a tacit approval of his actions. However, too much visible opposition may lead to calls by more hotheaded Congressional Republicans to punish the District for speaking out of line.
Mayor Bowser appears to have selected a third option: opposing Trump in the shadows while limiting opposition publicly. It’s a bold strategy, but for Washington, the stakes couldn’t be higher.
Ryan Li is a freshman in the College studying public policy with a minor in economics. He is interested in electoral politics and the fight against poverty.