Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dc statehood would require it become part of md or a constitutional amendment neither of which democrats are bothering to try

If the Supreme Court rules that the First Amendment gives a right to representation then there already is a constitutional amendment. DC residents would have to either be given statehood or voting rights in MD.

I’m looking forward to this and I’ll be watching this case closely. I wonder how that will impact DC city resources and state resources for the state of MD.

Anonymous wrote:Dc statehood would require it become part of md or a constitutional amendment neither of which democrats are bothering to try

If the Supreme Court rules that the First Amendment gives a right to representation then there already is a constitutional amendment. DC residents would have to either be given statehood or voting rights in MD.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting information PP, so perhaps it would be better if DC was absorbed into MD? I doubt MD would want to give approval for DC to become a state without a fight. DC is in an economic boom. This sounds like a case that would make it to the Supreme Court.

Why would Maryland fight making DC a state?

Clearly, you didn’t read the previous information about MD ceding the land to DC for the nations capital. It was never intended for DC to become a state. If DC wants to be a state then it must get the express permission of the state of MD. You clearly didn’t comprehend that DC in the past was represented in Congress by a MD resident. This makes it all the more difficult to prove that DC should earn statehood.

In order to grant the residents of the District of Columbia voting representation and control over their local affairs, some members of Congress, such as Rep. Dan Lungren, have proposed returning most parts of the city to Maryland. These proposals go back at least as far as 1839, when some members of Congress proposed retrocession of the portion of the District west of Rock Creek to Maryland. In recent years since at least 2001, several failed attempts, mostly supported by Republicans, have been made to return most of the District to Maryland and give them full voting rights: H.R. 810 & H.R. 381, both sponsored by Rep. Ralph Regula (R-OH); and H.R. 1858, H.R. 1015, H.R. 3732 and H.R. 2681, all sponsored by Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX). The proposals received little support from congressional Democrats.

If both the Congress and the Maryland state legislature agreed, jurisdiction over the District of Columbia could be returned to Maryland, excluding a small tract of land immediately surrounding the United States Capitol, the White House and the Supreme Court building which would become known as the "National Capital Service Area". The idea to retrocede all but the federal lands to Maryland dates back to at least 1848.

https://www.dcvote.org/sites/default/files/documents/articles/mdrretrocession.pdf

ProQuest has a few pretty good articles about DC retrocession as it relates to MD. Do people see this likely to happen?

Anonymous wrote:Interesting information PP, so perhaps it would be better if DC was absorbed into MD? I doubt MD would want to give approval for DC to become a state without a fight. DC is in an economic boom. This sounds like a case that would make it to the Supreme Court.

Why would Maryland fight making DC a state?

Interesting information PP, so perhaps it would be better if DC was absorbed into MD? I doubt MD would want to give approval for DC to become a state without a fight. DC is in an economic boom. This sounds like a case that would make it to the Supreme Court.

It seems DC cannot have statehood without the permission of MD. Read below to find out why.


Originally DC was formed from Maryland and Virginia land, but the Viriginia land was ceded back to Virginia in 1846. Thus, all of DC's current land was originally Maryland's land. And as noted above, there's already been a case (1793-1794) where a DC resident represented Maryland in the U.S. Congress.

Uriah Forrest (who lived in DC) represented Maryland in the U.S. House of Representatives. Up until 1801, people who lived in DC voted just like any other U.S. citizen (voting in either Virginia or Maryland, depending on where the DC land came from). However, the "Organic Act" passed by Congress in 1801 stripped DC residents of their rights to vote in Federal elections. In 1801 this didn't affect many people, but this 1801 law now affects hundreds of thousands of people. Given this strong historical precedent, it would make sense for DC residents to vote in Federal elections as Marylandians. Although a bill was passed in 1961 to give residents the right to vote in presidential elections we still lack proper congressional representation. DC Vote has more information on this)

Which leads us back to the thesis sentence: Although Maryland ceded the land of DC for purposes of creating a Federal capital district, there's evidence that Maryland never ceded that land for the purpose of creating another state. That's important, because states have to specifically okay the creation of another state from their land. Indeed, there's historical evidence that Maryland did not intend for another state to be created, since a DC resident has represented Maryland!

Credit to: David A. Wheeler
https://dwheeler.com/essays/dc-in-maryland.html

The highly politicized Republican Supreme Court three out all the Republican gerrymandering cases and kept the Democratic ones.

Anonymous wrote:Dc statehood would require it become part of md or a con itutional amendment neither of which democrats are bothering to try

Neither are needed. The constitution says there shall be a federal district. It does not specify the size. Congress could accept a state of New Columbia while maintaining a federal district consisting only of the monumental core.

Dc statehood would require it become part of md or a con itutional amendment neither of which democrats are bothering to try

Dare we dream of DC Statehood?
https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/439060-thanks-to-maryland-gerrymandering-case-dc-residents-have-hope-for-voting

The U.S. Supreme Court’s acceptance of a gerrymandering case arising from the U.S. District Court in Maryland has piqued the interest of the District of Columbia.

The case, argued on March 26, 2019, seeks to resolve concerns that states are using redistricting plans to choose congressional representation for targeted populations. The issue to be addressed by the Supreme Court, however, is whether Maryland’s 2011 redistricting plan intended to diminish Republican representation in the United States Congress.

The crux of the matter is the District Court’s finding that Maryland’s 2011 redistricting plan violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The District Court held that the redistricting plan placed an unconstitutional burden on both the plaintiffs’ representational and associational rights based upon party affiliation and voting history.


The Supreme Court has now opened the door to address political manipulation (gerrymandering) in the context of the First Amendment. This is excellent news for the 700,000 residents of Washington, D.C., because we are equally entitled to these First Amendment protections.