Allison Bailey/NurPhoto/Zuma; Andi Rice/CNP/Zuma
Washington, DC stands out as a refuge for reproductive rights: Unlike the 20-plus states that have moved to restrict abortion since the US Supreme Court’s June 2022 Dobbs decision, DC has no mandated waiting period for abortion, no parental notification laws, and no limits based on gestational age.
But DC is also unique in its status as the nation’s capital, which makes its governance susceptible to federal meddling. Congress and past presidential administrations have used their constitutional power to override the local government on everything from marijuana sales to sentencing limits for car-jacking.
With the arrival of a Republican-dominated House and Senate, whose members have expressed interest in reducing DC’s already limited ability to self-govern, as well as the homecoming of a President who has sworn to “take over” the District, the continuance of widely accessible abortion access in DC isn’t necessarily doomed—but it’s also not guaranteed. “Every time we have a hostile administration, the question comes up: What will they try to do to abortion access?” says DC Abortion Fund development director Alisha Dingus.
Reduced abortion access wouldn’t merely affect the 679,000 people who call DC home, but also thousands of people across the East Coast who have found the city to be their most accessible option: In addition to the lack of restrictions, D.C. is a not-terrible drive from abortion-restricted states like West Virginia and Georgia. Plus, there are plenty of flights to and from the DC region’s three airports. Presently, more than 70 percent of abortions provided in the District are for non-residents.
“We’ve seen an influx of people seeking abortion care from other parts of the country like Texas and Florida and Georgia, where draconian bans have resulted in deaths,” Laura Meyers, CEO of Planned Parenthood Metropolitan DC tells Mother Jones. “The District of Columbia and the surrounding region play a crucial role in providing care for the rest of the country.”
I blame the uncertainty on James Madison. In Federalist No. 43, Madison wrote that it was an “indispensable necessity” for the federal government to have “complete authority” over its future district; secondarily, he added, residents of the district should have a separate legislature “for local purposes.”
Today, that power sharing system is reflected by a popularly elected mayor and 13-member council, plus several layers of federal oversight. Most notably, all local legislation passed by the D.C. government remains subject to congressional approval.
You don’t have to look far back in history to see Congress wield its power here. Most notably, the city council unanimously passed a years-in-the-making bill that sought to modernize city crime laws in 2022. Facing an upcoming election season and concerns over appearing too soft on crime, 81 senators, 250 members of the House, and President Joe Biden all supported the resolution that killed the DC reform bill in 2023. Republicans also tried, but failed, to block DC from banning right turns at red lights in 2024.
Congress can also insert itself into DC’s governance by attaching what are known as “riders” to federal budget bills. Both parties have attempted to add riders forcing policy priorities on hot-button issues like guns and diversity initiatives through quid-pro-quo compromises, but Republicans have been especially keen to use riders on local DC matters.
For instance, riders forbidding the sale of marijuana in DC have succeeded multiple years, despite District residents having approved a referendum to legalize pot in 2014. (Weed dispensaries have circumvented the federal meddling by “selling” $30-plus pencils, stickers, and artwork painted by dogs, and then gifting customers THC products to accompany their non-marijuana purchases.)
Riders have curtailed abortion, too. The Hyde Amendment—which was a rider in 1976—blocks federal funds from being used on abortions. Seventeen states make up for this by using state funds to cover abortion services for low-income residents, but DC does not allow this: That’s because former President Barack Obama made that compromise with then-Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) in a budget bill deal to avoid a government shutdown.
“John, I’ll give you DC abortion,” Obama said in 2011.
For now, Meyers and the rest of the team at Planned Parenthood Metro DC are hopeful that the federal government won’t interfere with DC’s self-rule, but are nevertheless preparing themselves to fight for the continuation of reproductive rights in the District. Should DC abortion access be obstructed anyway, Meyers points out that the bordering states of Maryland and Virginia will be able to absorb some patients who would otherwise seek care in DC
“In our region, we are fortunate to have other states with that kind of local control that the District doesn’t have because of its unique status, that have chosen to protect access to abortion care,” Meyers says.
It’s an imperfect solution. Maryland has no restrictions on gestational length, but it does have a parental notification law. Further, the location wouldn’t be as accessible for thousands of residents—many of whom don’t own cars—who live in the healthcare-desert of Northeast DC, where Planned Parenthood’s clinic is located. Restrictions on abortion in DC may impact the ability to provide other types of healthcare too, like pap smears and breast cancer screenings.
The DC chapter of the ACLU also promises it is ready to challenge any abortion restrictions on DC “We are going to fight with all the tools that we have at our disposal to protect abortion rights at a local and a federal level,” says ACLU DC policy counsel Melissa Wasser.
Trump’s transition team has so far conveyed such efforts won’t be necessary; Trump spokesperson Karoline Leavitt told Politico in August that Trump has “long been consistent in supporting the rights of states, and the District of Columbia, to make decisions on abortion.” Moreover, Republicans have vowed they won’t touch the filibuster, theoretically preempting them from passing stand-alone laws about the happenings in DC with a simple Senate majority.
But that’s not to say they won’t try. Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced in the last congressional session a bill to revoke DC’s Home Rule outright. Beyond individual bills, future budget riders are always a possibility. More concerning yet, it’s not unthinkable that a Trump-appointed US Attorney for DC gets creative in restricting abortion by enforcing laws already on the books, like the Comstock Act, which prohibits the mailing of any medical materials used for abortions: the medications mifepristone and misoprostol, plus instruments such as cervical dilating rods could be affected by the law’s enforcement. (These materials are also used to manage miscarriages.)
Influential conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation and the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony group, may also use the vulnerability of the District’s self governance to challenge DC’s current practice of allowing abortions at any stage of pregnancy. Abortions beyond the early second trimester are exceedingly rare, and are generally performed to prevent suffering or injury, but nevertheless became a flashpoint in the recent election year. In 2013, a GOP bill to ban D.C. abortion after 20 weeks accrued more than 200 co-sponsors.
The issue is far more salient now. And Trump has a campaign promise to fulfill: “We will take over the horribly run capital of our nation,” he said at a 2024 campaign rally. “We’re going to take it away from the mayor. And again, that doesn’t make me popular there, but I have to say it.”
