H.R.3850 - District of Columbia Non-Discrimination Home Rule Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.3850, the District of Columbia Non-Discrimination Home Rule Act of 2025, aims to amend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) of 1993. The amendment seeks to eliminate RFRA's applicability to the District of Columbia. This bill was introduced in the House of Representatives by Ms. Norton on June 9, 2025, and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
The primary goal is to grant the District of Columbia greater autonomy in its non-discrimination policies. This would be achieved by preventing individuals or organizations from using RFRA as a defense against D.C.'s non-discrimination laws.
The bill directly targets Section 5 of RFRA, specifically removing the District of Columbia from the list of areas where RFRA applies.
Expected Effects
If enacted, H.R. 3850 would limit the ability of individuals and organizations in the District of Columbia to claim religious exemptions from local non-discrimination laws under RFRA. This could lead to stronger enforcement of D.C.'s non-discrimination policies.
It would also potentially impact religious organizations and individuals who might face conflicts between their religious beliefs and D.C. laws. The practical effect is to prioritize local non-discrimination laws over religious freedom claims within the District.
Potential Benefits
- Strengthens local control and home rule for the District of Columbia.
- Potentially enhances the enforcement of non-discrimination laws within D.C.
- May reduce legal challenges based on religious freedom grounds against D.C. laws.
- Could lead to greater clarity and consistency in the application of non-discrimination policies.
- Supports the principle of equal treatment under the law within the District.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- May infringe upon the religious freedom of individuals and organizations in D.C.
- Could lead to legal challenges arguing that the Act violates the First Amendment.
- Potentially creates a conflict between federal and local laws regarding religious freedom.
- Might alienate religious communities who feel their rights are being curtailed.
- Could set a precedent for limiting the application of RFRA in other jurisdictions.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutional alignment is complex. While Congress has broad authority over the District of Columbia, the First Amendment protects religious freedom. The bill's impact on religious freedom must be carefully considered.
Arguments against alignment would cite the First Amendment's guarantee of religious freedom, potentially infringed upon by limiting RFRA's applicability. Arguments for alignment would emphasize Congress's power over D.C. and the need to balance religious freedom with non-discrimination principles.
The Constitution grants Congress legislative power over the District of Columbia, but this power is not unlimited and must be exercised in accordance with the Bill of Rights.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).