D.C.
GETS DAY IN COURT FOR FULL VOTING RIGHTS
By Bill Miller, Washington Post Staff Writer, Tuesday , April 20,
1999 ; Page B01
For decades, scores of public officials -- and some of the District's
most ardent champions of home rule -- have struggled in hopes of winning
for D.C. residents a vote in Congress.
After failing to achieve their goal through the political process, they
turned to the courts yesterday for what they hope will be a landmark
voting rights decision.
"I don't think you or I will ever participate in a case where the stakes
are higher than this one," John M. Ferren, the District's corporation
counsel, told a special three-judge panel. "When you stand back and
think about it, we are talking about the most precious and fundamental
right anyone can have."
Ferren was among a battery of lawyers who recapped more than 200 years
of history during nearly four hours of spirited arguments. Two separate
groups of D.C. activists filed suits against the United States last
year over the right to cast ballots in national elections, and both
cases were heard yesterday.
The framers of the Constitution, Ferren said, would be "astonished"
to learn that "500,000 people today in our nation's capital are not
voting."
D.C. residents are the only U.S. citizens on the American mainland without
a vote on Capitol Hill. That, according to Ferren and other advocates,
violates their constitutional right to participate in democracy. "It's
a very simple argument," he told the judges. "It's a national right
to citizenship."
Justice Department lawyers, who handled the case on behalf of the Clinton
administration, pointed to language in the Constitution that calls for
the election of representatives by people from the "states." Because
the District is not a state, said lawyer John R. Tyler, the "unavoidable
conclusion" is that people in the District do not have the right to
choose representatives and senators. Tyler's argument harked back to
1801, when Virginia and Maryland gave up land for the creation of a
federal seat of government.
Before 1801, people living in the area that became the District were
able to vote in national elections in Maryland and Virginia. One section
of the District was returned to Virginia in 1847, but people in the
rest of the District have been shut out of a say in Congress. Congress
passed a constitutional amendment in 1960, which was ratified a year
later, that gave citizens in the District the right to vote in presidential
elections. The District has an elected delegate to Congress, Eleanor
Holmes Norton, who may vote in committee but not on the House floor.
Ferren argued yesterday that the framers never intended to leave District
voters without elected representation.
The two lawsuits seek to right what they contend are historical wrongs.
One lawsuit, Adams et al. v. Clinton et al., wants the court to make
it possible for D.C. residents to choose statehood or unite with another
state, in the process providing for voting rights. The other lawsuit,
Alexander et al. v. Daley et al., wants the court to order Congress
to find a way to let D.C. residents elect full senators and representatives.
The Adams complaint is being pushed by a coalition of activists led
by Takoma Park lawyer George S. LaRoche. The District government joined
57 other residents in filing the Alexander lawsuit. The plaintiffs include
a cross section of Washington business, community and political leaders,
such as former mayor Walter Washington, civil rights leader Dorothy
Height and businessman John Hechinger, who was the first D.C. Council
chairman. Ferren is aided in that case by Charles A. Miller and other
lawyers from the firm of Covington & Burling and by Jamin Raskin, an
American University law professor.
Height and Hechinger were in the audience yesterday, along with Norton,
former mayor Marion Barry, banker and activist Lloyd Smith, statehood
advocate Sam Smith, George Washington University President Stephen Joel
Trachtenberg, financial control board Vice Chairman Constance B. Newman,
D.C. Council Chairman Linda Cropp and numerous other council members.
Mayor Anthony A. Williams showed up before the hearing to lend support
but left before arguments began. The session took place in the biggest
room of the federal courthouse, which seats more than 300 people. Still,
dozens had to be turned away.
The matter was heard by a special panel comprising Judges Louis F. Oberdorfer
and Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, both of U.S. District Court, and Merrick
B. Garland, of the the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The
decision by the three judges can be taken directly to the U.S. Supreme
Court, shortening the time it would take to come up with a final determination.
The judges gave no time frame yesterday for their ruling.
The judges peppered the Justice Department lawyers with questions, particularly
about why District residents are not permitted to vote when those who
live on military bases and on the grounds of other federal enclaves
can do so. The Justice Department argued that the District has a special
status.
Lawyers representing D.C. residents were questioned most extensively
about what steps could be taken in the event they prevail. Ferren said
he believed the answer could come later, with the District either getting
its own senators and representative or joining in elections now held
in Maryland.
The arguments capped Ferren's two-year career as the District's top
lawyer. Yesterday was his last day on that job. He plans to return to
the D.C. Court of Appeals, where he was a judge for nearly 20 years.
He called the voting rights case "by far the most important" he handled
as the corporation counsel.