During Pride Month, Norton Introduces Bill to Protect LGBTQ+, Reproductive Rights in D.C.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – During Pride Month, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) reintroduced her District of Columbia Non-Discrimination Home Rule Act to end the unique applicability of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) to the District of Columbia. RFRA, which provides more protection for religious exercise than the First Amendment requires, applies to the federal government, the D.C. government and the territorial governments, but not to state governments. Norton's bill would ensure the District is treated the same as states, while defending LGBTQ+ and reproductive rights in D.C.

"RFRA was designed to be a shield to protect religious freedom, but the Supreme Court's 2014 Hobby Lobby decision demonstrates it’s now being used as a sword to discriminate against the LGBTQ community and women," Norton said. "Additionally, members of Congress have used RFRA as a justification for trying – but failing – to overturn D.C. antidiscrimination laws. My bill is an important step in ensuring home rule for the District."

Norton's introductory statement follows.

Statement of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton

on the Introduction of the District of Columbia Non-Discrimination Home Rule Act of 2025

June 9, 2025

Today, I introduce the District of Columbia Non-Discrimination Home Rule Act of 2025, which would end the applicability of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) to the District of Columbia government.  This bill would treat the D.C. government in the same manner as state governments under RFRA, and allow D.C. to protect LGBTQ+ and reproductive rights.

RFRA, which provides more protection for religious exercise than the First Amendment requires, applies to the federal government and the D.C. government, but not to state governments. 

While RFRA was designed to be a shield to protect religious freedom, it is being used, as evidenced by the Supreme Court’s 2014 Hobby Lobby decision, as a sword to discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community and women.  Republicans in Congress have cited RFRA as a justification for trying to overturn D.C. non-discrimination laws.  For example, since 2015, Republicans have repeatedly tried to nullify or block D.C.’s Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2014, which prohibits employers from discriminating against employees and their families based on reproductive health decisions, claiming, in part, that it violates RFRA. 

This bill would help ensure that D.C. is able to enact and carry out non-discrimination laws.  I strongly urge my colleagues to support this bill.

###