Last year, the Washington, D.C. attorney general sued a landlord who allowed buildings to fall into disrepair while illegally billing tenants for utilities. The attorney general’s office secured restitution and court-ordered repairs — tangible relief for families who had been living with mold, broken heating systems and unsafe electrical wiring.
In other cases, the office recovered stolen restaurant tips and stopped financial-technology firms from extracting “junk fees” from seniors on fixed incomes. These are not stories about violent crime; they are everyday examples of ordinary people obtaining redress when more powerful actors break the rules.
Two Dangerous Proposals
I am deeply concerned by two proposals currently before Congress that would dramatically reshape how justice is administered in the District of Columbia. One would eliminate the democratic election of the D.C. attorney general and transfer appointment power to the White House. The other would dismantle the Judicial Nomination Commission and allow the president to appoint judges directly to the local D.C. courts.
What This Would Mean For Residents
Centralized Federal Control: These measures would concentrate authority in the federal executive branch over matters that are inherently local — consumer protection, housing enforcement and access to justice for vulnerable residents.
Weakened Accountability: An elected attorney general answers to D.C. voters. A presidential appointee answers to the priorities of the White House. Converting the office to a political appointment risks fewer investigations, weaker settlements and reduced willingness to confront powerful corporate actors.
Less Representative Courts: The Judicial Nomination Commission vets and assembles a diverse pool of candidates, helping ensure the bench reflects the District’s communities. Removing that safeguard could tilt the judiciary toward corporate interests and away from judges who understand consumer harms like predatory lending, housing discrimination and wage theft.
Why Consumer Protection Is At Stake
The attorney general’s office plays a vital role as the District’s consumer watchdog — enforcing laws on fair credit reporting, debt collection, landlord-tenant standards and fraud. When local leaders are accountable to the community they serve, they are more likely to prioritize investigations that protect low-income families, seniors and workers.
Replacing local accountability with federal appointment power would make it harder for residents to rely on local institutions for timely remedies. That shift benefits the actors who profit from weak enforcement — slumlords, predatory lenders, scam operators and firms that hide fees behind complex contracts.
Preserving Local Voice And Checks And Balances
An attorney general chosen by D.C. voters, combined with a Judicial Nomination Commission that keeps local courts accountable, are essential checks and balances. They ensure enforcement priorities align with community needs and that the judiciary includes perspectives attuned to consumer and civil justice.
Congress should halt efforts to centralize control over the District’s justice system. Weakening these local safeguards endangers everyday consumers and rewards those who rely on a captured system to avoid accountability.
Ira Rheingold is executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved.
