Unconstitutional, but whatever.
Ugh!
Want representation? Easy Peary.
Return the land to Maryland just as some has been returned to Virginia.
Problem solved.
F - that!
More democrat malarkey.
Statehood of china?
TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Let Texas and Hawaii secede and you get to pick two welfare leeching states to make up for them.
And, here comes the “overwhelm the system” strategy, straight out of Rules for Radicals.
Hit “the system” with such an unbelievable, overwhelming amount of </explitive_deleted> and the whole thing will crash.
THAT is their plan. And unless our so-called “leaders” WAKE. UP. and start to realize that we are under an attack like this country has never seen before, the bad guys may just succeed.
They don't have the votes without nuking the filibuster, and they don't have the votes to nuke the filibuster. Manchin and Sinema have already outright stated they won't nuke the filibuster for D.C. statehood.
What took him so long? Patently against the Constitution. 10 square miles etc....
Return the non-federal property and neighborhoods to DC.
Look at section 224 of HR1 - it explicitly provides for amending the Constitution. That is not a simple process of a majority vote, so a simple majority vote here shouldn’t do the trick.
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings
This one is vague enough on what can be done with the district that a Supreme Court challenge is definitely necessary. The problematic phrase: "To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District" would seemingly be a roadblock for any local authority to have jurisdiction over the Federal government's responsibility to exercise legislative authority over the district.
Of course, that Constitution thing never stopped a Democrat...
Why stop with DC? Why not LA? Detroit? Chicago? /sarcasm
If we still had a Constitution they would need an amendment.
Too bad Marion Barry croaked, he would have made the perfect Senator from DC.
You can’t make it a State by ‘bill’... it would require a Constitution Amendment.
Here we go.
Here we go.
Statehood vote only requires a simple majority vote in Congress, meaning 51 votes in the Senate. Of course there is the requirement of 60 votes to shut down a Senate filibuster, but that is an internal Senate rule and it only requires 51 votes to abolish the filibuster for statehood.
I think Senate Dems in swing states will be very leery of statehood for DC, but it is a real possibility.
Actually Dems could grant statehood to Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam and any other territory or locale with a simple majority vote in Congress. Talk about a requirement of a 3/4 majority in Congress or Constitutional Amendments is just wrong, granting statehood is very simple, the major exception being you can’t carve new states out of an existing state (meaning no new states from California for example). Dems could easily separate out a portion of DC from Capitol Hill, the White House etc and grant statehood.