logo
House passes Republican-led bills to repeal D.C. laws on noncitizen voting and policing

House passes Republican-led bills to repeal D.C. laws on noncitizen voting and policing

NBC Newsa day ago

WASHINGTON — The Republican-controlled House is poised to pass a trio of bills this week to repeal Washington, D.C., laws on immigration, voting and policing, even as it has yet to restore a painful a $1 billion cut to the city's budget.
The House passed two of the bills on Tuesday. One would bar noncitizens from voting in local elections in the nation's capital, overturning a D.C. law that was passed in 2022. The other would restore collective bargaining rights and a statute of limitations for D.C. police officers involved in disciplinary cases.
Then, on Thursday, the House is expected to pass a third bill, the District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act, which would require the D.C. government to comply with requests from Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security to share information and detain undocumented immigrants. Under current D.C. law, local authorities do not work with federal immigration officials unless they have a judicial warrant.
All together, the bills represent House Republicans' attempt to assert authority over deep-blue D.C. at a time when the GOP has unified control of the federal government.
' Home rule ' — where the D.C. mayor and city council make their own laws but Congress has the ability to review them — has long been a point of contention. Democrats have pushed in recent years to grant full statehood to D.C., while Republicans have slammed decisions made by local leaders and sought to reverse them.
'D.C.'s City Council made radical decisions in our nation's capital under the Biden-Harris administration, passing local laws that are woefully inconsistent with national standards or constitutional principles,' Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, the chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee who authored the GOP voting bill, said in a statement to NBC News.
'I'm proud that the House is taking action to overturn several of these reckless measures — including my legislation to prohibit noncitizens from voting in local D.C. elections,' he said.
At the same time, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Republican leaders have been dragging their feet on a legislative fix for D.C.'s budget. A government funding bill that Congress passed in March to avert a shutdown included a provision requiring the city to revert back to fiscal year 2024 funding levels, leaving it with a $1.1 billion shortfall.
The move was quickly met with opposition from local D.C. leaders. The Senate voted by unanimous consent in March to undo it and restore D.C.'s authority to use local tax dollars as its leaders see fit. President Donald Trump endorsed the fix, calling on the House to 'immediately' pass that bill in a social media post on March 28.
But months later, Johnson still hasn't held a vote on the bill, prompting criticism from Democrats and D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser.
'It's absurd that the House hasn't taken it up. It's absolutely irresponsible, unfair and beneath the credibility of leadership,' said Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., who represents a congressional district just D.C. 'It's not our money, it's D.C.'s money ... and I don't know why the speaker hasn't put the Senate bill on the floor. It'll pass overwhelmingly.'
'This is a particular egregious example of substituting their judgment for those who are locally elected to govern the District of Columbia,' Hoyer said.
Last month, Johnson told reporters he was in communication with Bowser and that the House would take up the funding fix 'as quickly as possible.' The speaker said that passing Trump's massive domestic policy package had taken up 'all of our energy' and insisted the delay was not for a 'political purpose.'
'We're working on it right now. It's not like we've closed the door to that,' House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., told NBC News on Tuesday. 'But obviously there are other problems we're trying to resolve along the way.'
Bowser's office denounced the GOP bills to revoke DC law and — while noting that D.C. has mitigated the most 'catastrophic' impacts of the budget restrictions — urged Congress to pass the funding fix.
'Mayor Bowser continues to oppose all congressional interference in the lives and affairs of Washingtonians. DC will continue to fight to protect our home rule and self-determination,' a Bowser spokesperson said in an email. 'If Congress wants to be helpful, they should pass the District of Columbia Local Funds Act to fix their damage to DC's FY25 budget.'
Johnson's office had no comment when asked Tuesday when — or whether — he still plans to hold a vote on the funding fix.
Rep. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., the No. 4 in Republican leadership, said, 'I honestly don't know. I haven't heard yes or no,' when asked if the funding fix will come up for a vote.
Other congressional Democrats said Republicans should stay out of D.C. issues.
'It's bad enough, usually, when they're playing in D.C. local, home rule issues,' said Rep. Glenn Ivey, D-Md., whose district abuts Washington. 'But then to do it at a time when they haven't returned the $1.1 billion is especially egregious.'
Immigration has dominated the national political debate this week, with protests erupting in Los Angeles in response to the Trump administration's mass deportation efforts. Republicans said the fight over immigration is a winning issue for the party, and they've continued to lean into it with the legislation on the floor this week.
'If D.C. wants illegals to vote, we've made it clear at the federal level people here illegally should not vote in any elections,' Scalise said.
'We're still the most generous nation in the world in terms of our legal immigration system,' he continued, 'but we have to fix our broken immigration system. And you could just see what's going on in L.A. to prove the point.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Southern Baptist same-sex marriage resolution rings an alarm
Southern Baptist same-sex marriage resolution rings an alarm

The Herald Scotland

time3 hours ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Southern Baptist same-sex marriage resolution rings an alarm

That's a lot of animosity packed into one declaration. But it's one that Republicans seem increasingly interested in supporting. What's scary is that there are now efforts to bring same-sex marriage back to the Supreme Court with the intention of overturning Obergefell v. Hodges. Republicans in the Idaho House of Representatives has passed a resolution to ask the Supreme Court to overturn the decade-old ruling. Eight other state legislatures introduced similar measures affecting the legality of same-sex marriage. It's not just outrageous that so many legislative officials are trying to do away with gay marriage. It's terrifying to the LGBTQ+ people you know. The Southern Baptist resolution is a harrowing sign of the legal fight that could be around the corner. Opinion: A trans athlete won in California. Her peers cheered - and exposed the truth. Polling says gay marriage is popular. Do Republicans care? Same-sex marriage still has majority support in the United States, according to polling. In a Gallup survey conducted in May 2025 , 68% of respondents say same-sex marriages should have the same rights as traditional marriages, compared with 29% of people who disagreed. While that's a hopeful number, there are some caveats. Support for gay marriage has decreased from 71% in 2023. Republican support has dropped to 41% from 55% in 2021 and 2022, and is now the lowest it's been since 2016. Opinion: Republicans are going after marriage. LGBTQ+ people like me tried to warn you. Now that a denomination with nearly 13 million members is coming out against gay marriage, I fear that we will continue to see a decline in support. Even if gay marriage retains support, the Supreme Court already went against popular opinion when it overturned Roe v. Wade. In his opinion on that issue, Justice Clarence Thomas said he believed the court should reconsider Obergefell. He said the quiet part out loud. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. What happened to 'love thy neighbor'? Guess not if they're LGBTQ? While I grew up within a different denomination, my childhood in North Carolina was spent around Southern Baptists. I have attended their services; I have been to their funerals. I know LGBTQ+ people who were raised in their churches, and my heart breaks for them and their families. While Christianity has become burdened by dogma and interpretations, the most important lesson, the one that is universal, regardless of your denomination, is that you're supposed to love your neighbor as you love yourself. To me, this means wanting them to have the same rights as you have, including in your marriage. It is shameful that Southern Baptists have lost sight of this message and instead want to advocate for fewer rights for LGBTQ+ people. But it's not surprising given where Trump's Republican Party is trending on the topic. Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeno on X, formerly Twitter: @sara__pequeno

GOP student loan overhaul is getting closer to becoming law
GOP student loan overhaul is getting closer to becoming law

The Herald Scotland

time3 hours ago

  • The Herald Scotland

GOP student loan overhaul is getting closer to becoming law

Read more: Republicans propose massive overhaul of student loans, Pell Grants The Senate's version of the legislation is less aggressive than the bill that Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives introduced in late April. While it will likely be further watered down due to congressional budget rules, the scope of the legislation indicates big changes will be enacted soon to how Americans pay for college. Student loan caps proposed When President Donald Trump asked Republicans to find billions of dollars in federal spending cuts, GOP lawmakers in the House drew up measures to eliminate or dramatically curb many student loan programs. In April, they proposed cutting subsidized loans altogether for undergraduates. When students take out a federal direct subsidized loan, the government pays the interest while they're in school (and for a short grace period after the students complete their studies). That idea didn't survive in the Senate version of the bill, which was expected to be slightly more moderate than the House proposal. Read more: Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned Other elements of the House version remain, however. Like the House bill, the Senate measure proposes cutting the number of student loan repayment plans to just two. That change would kill President Joe Biden's Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE, program, which former Education Secretary Miguel Cardona repeatedly called the "most affordable repayment plan ever." SAVE has been stalled in court for months, placing roughly 8 million people in forbearance. The Senate bill would also dramatically curb lending for graduate students and parents (though at lower caps than House Republicans wanted). Ben Cecil, a senior education policy advisor at Third Way, a center-left think tank, said he was pleased to see the bill appeared to make compromises. "These loan limits are much more reasonable," he said. Melanie Storey, president of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators, said she was "relieved" some of the "most harmful" provisions of the House bill had been nixed. "Still, there are several concerning aspects of this bill that would ultimately make college less affordable for students," she said, including changes that "may drive borrowers to riskier private loans, which are not available to all borrowers." Less concern over Pell Grants One of college access groups' biggest criticisms of the initial bill was a significant change to Pell Grants, federal subsidies that help lower-income students pay for college. House Republicans wanted to increase the number of credits students would need to take each semester to be eligible for Pell Grants. The Center for American Progress, a progressive think tank, estimated that two out of three Pell recipients could've lost their grants or received smaller ones if that requirement were enacted. The Senate version takes a softer approach, codifying a provision to more fully exclude higher-income students qualify for Pell funds. At the same time, the bill expands Pell Grants in ways that could waste money, according to critics such as Sameer Gadkaree, president of The Institute for College Access & Success, a college affordability group. "While the Senate nixed most of the House's proposed cuts to the Pell Grant program and averts a looming funding shortfall, it regrettably threatens the program's long-term stability by extending Pell eligibility to unaccredited programs that are unlikely to pay off for students," Gadkaree said in a statement. New accountability rules One of the biggest distinctions between the House and Senate versions of the bill is that they lay out two entirely different sets of new accountability rules for colleges. The House proposal would fine colleges for leaving students on the hook for unpaid student loan debt. The Senate's framework suggests taking federal financial aid away from college programs if they can't prove that students who graduate are earning more than they would have without a degree. Mike Itzkowitz, who served in the Education Department under President Barack Obama, said that concept has bipartisan support. "I don't know anyone who would be willing to fork over their time to take on loans to earn less than a high school graduate," he said. But it's possible that particular provision won't survive special Senate rules. To avoid needing the support of Democrats, Republicans are trying to pass Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill" using the budget process. That strategy comes with challenges. However, the bill must only make changes that spend money or save money. Significant reforms to college oversight might go too far, said Jon Fansmith, the senior vice president of government relations at the American Council on Education, the main association for colleges and universities. "This process isn't designed to do complicated policymaking," he said. "I really do worry about rushing something through without understanding what we're doing." Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @

Trump 'gold card' is open for business. Waitlist is open
Trump 'gold card' is open for business. Waitlist is open

The Herald Scotland

time3 hours ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Trump 'gold card' is open for business. Waitlist is open

Trump has said that he is not seeking approval from Congress as he is not providing gold card buyers with citizenship - only a path to citizenship. The path to citizenship requirements for card buyers are unclear and White House officials have said more details will be provided soon. The most common path to U.S. citizenship through naturalization is being a lawful permanent resident for at least five years. It requires the applicant to be least 18 years old when they apply, be able to read, write, and speak basic English (depending on age) and be of "good moral character." Trump has described the card, which he has also dubbed the Trump card, as "somewhat like a green card, but at a higher level of sophistication." "FOR FIVE MILLION $DOLLARS, THE TRUMP CARD IS COMING!," President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social on June 11. "Thousands have been calling and asking how they can sign up to ride a beautiful road in gaining access to the Greatest Country and Market anywhere in the World." The website shows an image of the gold-colored card, emblazoned with a likeness of Trump's face, and asks a few questions including name, region, email address and if an applicant is applying for themselves or as a business. The new website asks interested people to fill out a form that specifies eight regions: Europe, Asia (including Middle East), North America, Oceania, Central America, South America, Caribbean and Africa. Other countries also offer immigration programs that offers permanent residency or citizenship to foreign investors in exchange for investment. Portugal, for example, offers residency and a path to EU citizenship after five years. When he first floated the idea in February, Trump said the card would replace the "EB-5" immigrant investor green card visa program, The EB-5 visa allows immigrant investors the option to invest between $800,000 and $1.05 million to obtain a green card. The investment money is used to help create or preserve U.S. jobs. "Wealthy people will be coming into our country by buying this card," Trump said in February. "They'll be wealthy, and they'll be successful, and they'll be spending a lot of money, and paying a lot of taxes and employing a lot of people." "It's a road to citizenship for people and essentially people of wealth or people of great talent where people of wealth pay for those people of talent to get in," he said. Swapna Venugopal Ramaswamy is a White House correspondent for USA TODAY. You can follow her on X @SwapnaVenugopal

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store