Congressional Disapproval of District of
Columbia Laws Under the Home Rule Act
Updated April 17, 2023
The District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act, as amended (also
known as the “District of Columbia Home Rule Act”), establishes a special parliamentary mechanism by
which Congress can disapprove laws enacted by the District of Columbia.
Under Section 602(c) of the act, with few exceptions, the chair of the DC city council must transmit a
copy of each act passed by the council and signed by the mayor, as well as enactments stemming from
ballot initiatives or referenda, to the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate. The law in
question is to take effect upon the expiration of a specified “layover” period following the date the law
was transmitted to Congress unless it is first overturned by a joint resolution of disapproval. The act
establishes special “fast track” procedures that the Senate might use to consider such a disapproval
resolution.
The length of the congressional layover period for DC laws differs based on the type of law enacted. Any
law codified in Titles 22 (Criminal Offenses and Penalties), 23 (Criminal Procedure), or 24 (Prisoners and
Their Treatment) of the DC Code must lie over for 60 days before going into force. All other DC laws
become effective upon the expiration of a period of 30 calendar days or upon the date prescribed by the
act itself, whichever is later. Calculations of these 30- and 60-calendar-day layover periods exclude
Saturdays, Sundays, federal holidays, and days on which neither the House nor the Senate is in session
because of an adjournment sine die or pursuant to an adjournment resolution.
Under the act, any Member of the House or Senate may introduce a joint resolution disapproving a law of
the District of Columbia at any time after the law has been submitted to Congress but before the
expiration of the layover periods described above. The act stipulates the text of a disapproval resolution.
All joint resolutions, when introduced, are referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability in
the House and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs in the Senate.
Once a joint disapproval resolution is referred, a committee may choose to mark it up but may not report
committee amendments to it. For those joint resolutions aimed at DC laws codified in the DC criminal
code, a discharge mechanism is potentially available. For such acts, if a committee to which a disapproval
resolution has been referred has not reported it by the expiration of a 20-calendar-day period after its
introduction, a privileged motion to discharge the committee of it or any joint resolution aimed at the
same DC law is in order. The motion to discharge is debatable for one hour, equally divided, and can be
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN12119
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
Congressional Research Service
2
made only by an individual favoring the legislation. The motion is no longer available after the committee
has reported a disapproval resolution with respect to the same DC law. For enactments not affecting the
DC criminal code, there is no discharge motion available, and the committees would have to report a joint
resolution for it to reach the calendar.
In both the House and Senate, once a committee has reported or been discharged from further
consideration of a joint resolution, a non-debatable motion to proceed to consider the measure is in order
and may be made by any Member. This motion to proceed may be made even if a previous motion to the
same effect has been defeated. The motion to proceed may not be amended, nor may a vote on it be
reconsidered. A motion to postpone the motion to proceed is in order but is not debatable. Should the
House or Senate agree to consider by simple majority vote, the joint resolution would be pending before
the respective chamber and debatable for up to 10 hours, equally divided. A non-debatable motion to limit
debate below 10 hours is in order. The joint disapproval resolution may not be amended or recommitted,
and a vote thereon may not be reconsidered. All appeals from decisions of the chair made during
consideration of the joint resolution are to be decided without debate. Passage of a joint resolution is by
simple majority vote. It appears that passage and presentment of a joint resolution of disapproval to the
President must occur before the expiration of the layover period in order to invalidate that DC law.
The Home Rule Act disapproval mechanism does not cover consideration of a joint resolution of
disapproval after its initial passage in its chamber of origin. In recent practice, House-passed disapproval
resolutions have been referred to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
upon receipt, and it appears the Senate views the fast-track procedures of the act (including the motion to
discharge in the case of criminal code enactments) as applying to the received House measure.
Should a joint resolution of disapproval pass the House and Senate but be vetoed by the President, any
attempt to override that veto would take place under normal House and Senate procedures.
The disapproval procedure has been used infrequently, and the chambers would likely have to interpret
how some of its facets operate in practice—a decision each would potentially make in consultation with
its Parliamentarian. The parliamentary provisions of the act are considered to be rules of the House and
Senate, and each chamber is free to establish how a disapproval resolution is considered in that chamber
by unanimous consent or by a special rule reported by the House Committee on Rules.
The Home Rule Act disapproval procedure is one method that Congress might use to invalidate a
proposed DC law. It is not, however, the only way Congress might undertake such disapproval. Although
Congress has successfully used the parliamentary disapproval mechanisms of the Home Rule Act on four
occasions since passage of the act in the early 1970s, including once in the 118th Congress, it has far more
frequently influenced actions of DC through the regular lawmaking process, including the appropriations
process.
Author Information
Christopher M. Davis
Analyst on Congress and the Legislative Process
Congressional Research Service
3
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN12119 · VERSION 3 · UPDATED