Connect with us

District of Columbia

D.C. debates how to cope with crime as reform bill heads to Senate

House Democrats join GOP in voting to overturn measure

Published

on

‘Our LGBT community is something special, not just to Washington, D.C. but to the Metropolitan Police Department,’ said D.C. Police Chief Robert Contee. (Washington Blade file photo by Lou Chibbaro, Jr.)

Just over three weeks after the D.C. Council overturned Mayor Muriel Bowser’s veto of a controversial criminal code reform bill that the Council had passed unanimously last November, the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives on Feb. 9 voted 250 to 173 to overturn the D.C. bill.

In a development that surprised some D.C. political observers, including LGBTQ activists, 31 House Democrats were among those joining Republicans in voting to overturn the sweeping 450-page Revised Criminal Code Act of 2022.

On the same day that it voted to overturn the crime bill, the House voted 260 to 162, with 42 House Democrats voting yes, to pass a second disapproval resolution calling for overturning a bill approved by the D.C. Council to allow non-citizens to vote in local D.C. elections.

Both bills must now go to the U.S. Senate, where Democrats have a slim majority and where just a few Democratic senators voting to overturn either of the two bills, including the crime bill, could result in passage of the disapproval measure. It would then go to President Joe Biden, who would be faced with the choice of vetoing the measures or allowing one or both of the two D.C. bills to be overturned.

The president has said he opposes both of the two disapproval resolutions in the House, but he has not said whether he would veto the disapproval measures.

Most of those who have expressed concern over the criminal code reform bill, including Bowser, D.C. Police Chief Robert Contee, and the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C., have said they support 95 percent of the bill’s provisions.

Supporters, including D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D-At-Large), point out that the voluminous bill was methodically developed over the past 16 years by the nonpartisan D.C. Criminal Code Reform Commission to modernize the city’s criminal code that has not been significantly changed since 1901. 

Mendelson and D.C. Council member Charles Allen (D-Ward 6), who headed the Council committee that drafted the legislation, strongly dispute claims that the bill would result in increased crime in the city or that it would hamper efforts by police to curtail crime.

The mayor has said her opposition centers around several of the bill’s provisions that, among other things, would eliminate most mandatory minimum prison sentences, reduce maximum sentences for crimes such as burglaries, carjackings, and robberies, and allow jury trials for all misdemeanor cases in which a prison sentence is possible.

Mayor Muriel Bowser vetoed a controversial criminal code reform bill, setting off a citywide debate about how to cope with crime. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Critics say allowing a jury trial for most misdemeanor cases would overwhelm the D.C. Superior Court that they say already has too few judges to handle its criminal case load. Under the city’s 1971 Home Rule Act approved by Congress, the U.S. president appoints all D.C. court judges, and the U.S. Senate must confirm the appointments.

Supporters of the criminal code reform measure point out that it is currently drafted so it does not take effect until 2025, which they say will give the court system time to adapt to the new criminal code. But opponents, including the mayor, say that would not prevent the problems that they say the bill as currently written will bring about when it takes effect.

“This bill does not make us safer,” said Bowser in announcing her decision to veto the bill.

“While no one believes that penalties alone will solve crime and violence right now, we must be very intentional about messages that we are sending to our community, including prosecutors and judges,” the mayor said in a statement. “People, we know, are tired of violence and right now our focus must be on victims and preventing more people from becoming victims,” she said.

Bowser added that the bill would weaken what she said was an already lenient sentence for illegal gun possession by reducing the maximum sentence for carrying a pistol without a license and being a convicted felon in possession of a gun.

She has expressed strong opposition to Congress stepping in to overturn the bill, saying that it should be left up to the city to make any changes needed to improve the bill. Bowser last week submitted to the Council legislation calling for changes in the bill, including removing provisions in the current bill that would lower maximum penalties and allow jury trials for most misdemeanor cases.

Among the most outspoken critics of the criminal code revision bill has been the D.C. Police Union, whose chairperson, Gregg Pemberton, said the legislation would result in “violent crime rates exploding more than they already have.”

Most local LGBTQ organizations have not taken an official position on the bill. Capital Stonewall Democrats, the city’s largest local LGBTQ political group, has yet to take a position on the bill itself and most likely will not do so at this time, according to Monika Nemeth, the group’s recently elected president.

Nemeth said threats by Congress to overturn this and other D.C. bills are of great concern to the organization, and it reconfirms Capital Stonewall Democrats’ strong support for D.C. statehood.

Adam Savit, president of Log Cabin Republicans of D.C., the local chapter of the national LGBTQ Republican organization Log Cabin Republicans, said the local chapter also has not taken an official position on the D.C. criminal code bill. But he said in an email to the Blade that “we generally sympathize with the sentiments of the D.C. GOP,” which has come out against the legislation on grounds that it will result in a higher rate of crime in the city.

“Decreased penalties mean a decreased deterrent, and it will absolutely lead to increased criminality and further undermine the ability of the police to keep order,” Savit said in expressing his own opinion. “The way to protect LGBTQ citizens is to set credible penalties for violent crime and enforce the law,” he said.

The DC Center for the LGBT Community, which oversees its longstanding LGBTQ Anti-Violence Project, did not respond to a request by the Blade for comment on the crime bill.

The D.C. Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance, however, has taken a position in strong support of the measure.

“We applaud the D.C. Council for enacting the Revised Criminal Code Act, an important modernization of our criminal laws that is the product of over 15 years of careful deliberation,” said GLAA President Tyrone Hanley in a statement to the Blade. Hanley said the statement was approved by the GLAA board.

“We have long known that mandatory minimums do not make communities safer, but exacerbate mass incarceration,” the GLAA statement says. “The larger symbolic reductions in maximum sentences for certain crimes bring them in-line with actual practice [by judges], plus research demonstrates that the length of sentence is not an effective deterrent to most crime,” the GLAA statement continues.

“We should not give in to right-wing narratives that some wish to use to exert power over D.C. and return to ineffective and harmful approaches,” the statement concludes.

Longtime D.C. gay activist and former GLAA President Rick Rosendall has taken a similar position, saying in an email to the Blade that opposition to the bill is based on “alarmist talking points.” Rosendall pointed to the assertion by D.C. Council member Kenyan McDuffie (I-At-Large) that some provisions in the bill actually raise penalties and create new categories of crimes that make it easier for prosecutors to prove.

Another longtime LGBTQ rights advocate and Democratic Party activist Peter Rosenstein has taken a differing view. He says he fully agrees with Bowser’s decision to veto the crime bill and said the Council should not have passed the separate bill to allow non-U.S. citizen D.C. residents the right to vote in local D.C. elections.

“Lowering the maximum possible penalties for burglaries, carjackings (now at their highest) and robberies, while residents are seeing a crime wave, is irresponsible and won’t make the city safer,” Rosenstein said in a Washington Blade commentary. “If Congress takes action on these bills, the Council must accept the full blame,” he said. “While Congress shouldn’t interfere with the D.C. government (I have long advocated for budget and legislative autonomy for the District) we don’t have it yet.”

D.C. Congressional Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) has strongly criticized the House for passing the disapproval resolutions calling for overturning the crime bill and the noncitizen voting rights bill. She said she is alarmed that Republican members of the House and Senate are once again attempting to intervene and usurp the will of the democratically elected D.C. local government. 

Norton noted that since Congress passed the D.C. Home Rule Act of 1971, creating the city’s elected mayor and Council – with Congress retaining the ability to make the final decision on all laws passed by the D.C. government – Congress has only used its power to overturn a D.C. law on three occasions over the past 40 years.

One of the three laws overturned by Congress was the Sexual Assault Reform Act of 1981, which called for repealing the city’s antiquated sodomy law that made it a crime for consenting same-sex adults and consenting heterosexual adult to engage in oral or anal sodomy. It took another 12 years for the Council to pass legislation repealing the D.C. sodomy law in 1993. At that time gay then-U.S. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) played a lead role in persuading Congress not to overturn the sodomy repeal law once again.

But with states throughout the country now passing or considering anti-LGBTQ bills, including bills targeting transgender people and drag performances, the emboldened action by the U.S. House on Feb. 7 to overturn two bills passed by the D.C. Council raises the possibility that GOP lawmakers in Congress might attempt to impose anti-LGBTQ policies on the District.

Norton has pointed out that although Congress has so far overturned only three D.C. laws, it has also imposed restrictions on the city through its power to control the city’s budget and spending. Without needing approval by the Senate, the GOP-controlled House has in the past — and can at this time — add hostile provisions to the city’s annual budget bill.

In recent years, the House has used the budget process to ban D.C. funding for abortions for women in financial need and to block the city from allowing the sale of marijuana as part of D.C.’s legislation – which Congress allowed the city to pass – decriminalizing the possession of marijuana.

Most LGBTQ activists contacted by the Blade said they haven’t had a chance to read the entire 450-page Revised Criminal Code Act, but from what they have learned about the bill from media reports leads them to believe it most likely would not impact LGBTQ people any more or less than the overall D.C. population.

Some activists, however, point out that transgender women of color have been targeted for crimes in the D.C. area, including murder, in greater numbers than others in the community. And the release by D.C. police in January of the city’s data on reported hate crimes in 2022 show that similar to the past 10 years or more, LGBTQ people were targeted for hate crimes in greater numbers than other categories of victims of hate crimes such as race, ethnicity, or religion.

“I’m not certain what contributes to the uptick in some types of calls that we’ve seen or some of the crimes that we’ve seen,” said D.C. Police Chief Robert Contee in response to a question from the Blade about what, if anything, police can do to address hate crimes targeting LGBTQ people.

“But our commitment is to investigate those cases thoroughly and hold people accountable when we identify people who are responsible for those types of crimes,” Contee said. “Our LGBT community is something special, not just to Washington, D.C. but to the Metropolitan Police Department,” he said. “They have a strong relationship with our Special Liaison Branch,” he noted, which oversees the department’s LGBT Liaison Unit.

“So, we’re going to continue to do the things we need to do to make sure that those calls are coming in and people are trusting us to report these crimes to us,” Contee told the Blade. “And again, we do everything we can to investigate those crimes.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

LGBTQ advocates optimistic about D.C.’s expected new mayor

Janeese Lewis George cites strong record of support as Council member

Published

on

Janeese Lewis George is expected to easily win election as mayor in the city’s Nov. 3 general election. (Washington Blade photo by Landon Shackelford)

Several prominent D.C. LGBTQ community advocates said they are optimistic that Democratic mayoral nominee Janeese Lewis George, who is expected to easily win election as mayor in the city’s Nov. 3 general election, will continue her strong record of support on LGBTQ issues from her current role as a Ward 4 D.C. Council member.

But most of the seven LGBTQ advocates who responded to an informal Washington Blade survey of community leaders and activists said they would be observing Lewis George’s transition plans for her expected mayoral administration to determine if she will follow through with her campaign promises to put in place policies and funding to strongly support the LGBTQ community.

Lewis George emerged as the decisive winner in the city’s June 16 Democratic primary with 54 percent of the vote in a six-candidate race, with her lead opponent, former D.C. Council member Kenyan McDuffie (D-At-Large) receiving around 37 percent and four lesser-known candidates receiving 4 percent or less.

In a city with an overwhelmingly Democratic electorate, virtually all political observers believe Lewis George will win the November general election to become the city’s next mayor.

In the primary, she received the endorsement of the Capital Stonewall Democrats, the city’s largest local LGBTQ political organization, and received the highest possible candidate rating of +10 from GLAA DC, formerly known as the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance of Washington.

With Lewis George, McDuffie, and the four lesser-known candidates in the Democratic primary, including one who identified as bisexual, expressing strong support on LGBTQ issues, LGBTQ advocates acknowledged that most queer voters chose a candidate to support based on non-LGBTQ issues.

And Lewis George’s LGBTQ supporters have said they believe Lewis George received the largest share of the LGBTQ vote based on her outspoken support for social justice related issues, including policies to address the need for affordable housing, which she said impacts LGBTQ people in need, especially queer people of color and transgender residents. 

“I think she understands a theory of community and economic development that is both inclusive of LGBTQ people but not exclusive about us,” said Benjamin Brooks, president of GLAA D.C. Brooks also currently serves as interim director of policy for one of the divisions of Whitman-Walker Health, D.C.’s LGBTQ supportive medical clinic and health services organization.

“I think that she represents a change in administration that will see more dollars to public programs that are more pro social,” Brooks said. “We’re going to be looking at who she appoints to the different agencies that we’re interested in and making sure that LGBTQ people are centered in that conversation,” he said.

Brooks added, “We know LGBTQ people were featured heavily in her campaign as organizers and as her staff members. So, I think we should expect to see us included, and she has put out a platform that lifts up all Washingtonians.”

Longtime D.C. gay Democratic activist John Klenert said he, too, will be watching to see if and how Lewis George follows up her campaign promises on LGBTQ issues.

“My number one concern will be with the budgets being what they are in the city, will she continue to fiscally support the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs?” he told the Blade. “Number two, will she continue to support the HIV type places like Whitman-Walker,” he said.

Acknowledging that Lewis George has expressed support for these types of programs during the election campaign, Klenert added, “Words are cheap. Let’s see on paper her proposals.” 

D.C. gay Democratic activist Peter Rosenstein is among the few LGBTQ activists who publicly raised concern over Lewis George’s status as a Democratic Socialist and member of the controversial Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) national organization. 

“I congratulate Ms. George on winning the primary and hope she will do a great job as our next mayor,” Rosenstein told the Blade in a statement. “But the issues I promulgated in the primary still go unanswered,” he said, noting that he is unaware of Lewis George saying whether she disagrees with the DSA’s platform opposing the existence of the state of Israel, not talking to any pro-Israel Zionist organizations, and, among other things, defunding U.S. police departments.

Rosenstein also noted that Lewis Geroge, as far as he knows, has not publicly rebuked one of her supporters who endorsed her for mayor, Ward 8 community activist Jauhar Abraham, who has publicly referred to gay people as “sissies” and “fags” who should not be allowed to teach in the city’s public schools.

“Will she really stand up for the LGBTQ community, or does she agree with those like Jauhar Abraham,” Rosenstein said in his statement. “These are issues she owes the voters answers to.”

Ward 8 gay longtime Democratic and community activist Phillip Pannell, who just won election in the Democratic primary as the city’s Democratic National Committeeman, is among the LGBTQ activists who supports Lewis George’s candidacy for mayor. He told the Blade that Lewis George, while not saying so directly, has made it clear she does not support what he describes as Jauhar Abraham’s anti-gay slurs.

When asked if the Abraham issue as raised by Rosenstein was a concern for him, Pannell said, “No, because I know that Jauhar Abraham’s homophobic statements are in no way in alignment with Janeese Lewis George’s support for our community.”

He added, “You can’t always judge a candidate or basically indict a candidate because of the support of some individuals. There is no way Janeese supports the type of stuff Jauhar spews.”

Like some of the other LGBTQ advocates who spoke to the Blade about Lewis George’s potential impact on the LGBTQ community, Pannell said he is optimistic about her actions as mayor.

“I expect that she will at least maintain the type of support that we are getting under Mayor Bowser if not more so,” he said. “And a good indication of her level of support would be the votes that she has cast in support of our community while she has been a member of the Council,” Pannell said.

Also, like other LGBTQ supporters of Lewis George, Pannell said he is not troubled over her role as a Democratic Socialist. “There are many people who are associated with the Democratic Party who would be very much aligned with Democratic Socialist organizations,” he said. “So that doesn’t bother me at all.”    

Ashley Gibbs, who serves as board co-chair of the D.C. LGBTQ+ Community Center, is among the activists who said they are uncertain about Lewis George’s expected impact on the community. 

“Certainly, I expect her to win in November given the demographics of D.C.,” she said. “I have to admit I live in Maryland now, so I am less clued into D.C. politics than I used to be,” she added. “So, I think it’s a big unknown. I think we’re just going to have to wait and see what happens and how well Janeese can make things given the federal government.”

David Perruzza, owner of the D.C. LGBTQ bars Pitchers and A League of Her Own, located in the Adams Morgan neighborhood, like other LGBTQ bar owners, said he preferred not to comment on the ins and outs of the race for mayor

But similar to other nightlife related small businesses in the city,  including bars and restaurants, Perruzza said he was deeply troubled over what he believed to be Lewis George’s support for ending the so-called tip wage system for bars and restaurants. He said most LGBTQ bar owners believe doing that could force them to go out of business due to excessive labor costs.

Under the tip wage system, which has been in place in D.C. and other cities and states for many years, businesses that employ servers who receive tips can pay them a significantly lower minimum wage called the tip wage compared to the regular minimum wage, which is now $18.40 per hour in D.C. At the initiative of local labor groups, D.C. voters in 2022 approved for the second time Initiative 82, which called for raising the minimum wage for tipped workers to the full minimum wage over a phase-in period of 10 years or more.

Organizations representing local restaurants and bars said most tipped workers make close to if not more than the full minimum wage in tips, and that under the current D.C. law, businesses are required to pay tipped workers the difference if they don’t make the equivalent of the full minimum wage in tips.

They argued that the initial raising of the tip wage from just over $5 per hour to several dollars more an hour created a financial hardship that was forcing many of them to go out of business. The mayor and D.C. Council responded by repealing Initiative 82 and later putting in place in 2025 a compromise law supported by the business owners that brought the tip minimum wage to $10.30 per hour as of July 1, 2026.

The new law calls for the tip minimum wage to increase to 60 percent of the full minimum wage by 2028 and increase incrementally by 5 percent until it reaches 75 percent of the full minimum wage in 2034.

D.C. Council records show that Lewis George voted against the compromise bill when the Council approved it in July of 2025 as an amendment to the city’s Fiscal Year 2026 budget.        

Local nightlife advocate and small business owner Salah Czapary, who served as Mayor Bowser’s director of the D.C. Office of Nightlife and Culture from 2022 to 2024, said Lewis George told a group of nightlife business operators and owners during a meeting in May that she opposes yet another ballot measure proposed by the labor advocacy group One Fair Wage that calls for raising the city’s minimum wage for all workers to $25 per hour and for eliminating the subminimum wage for tipped workers.    

“I was in the room when she explained to a room full of nightlife small business, arts, and cultural operators that she has spoken with experts in the field,” Czapary told the Blade. He said Lewis George told the gathering that she did not support the latest wage initiative that was attempting to get on the ballot, which was a concern to business owners at the time. 

“And I think that’s actually quite impressive for a lawmaker to do when everyone assumes you would support a certain initiative,” he said in referring to Lewis George.  “To have one view and then assess the reality that might have changed. And then say that while I agree with the idea of raising the wages —  I think most people do — we also don’t live in a vacuum. We have to deal with the realities of the economy,” Czapary said.

“I think D.C., as we know, has been a safe haven for LGBTQ individuals from across the country and  has been very progressive on its treatment of LGBTQ people,” he said. “I think we will not expect that to change under our new mayor,” he added. “She was endorsed by many LGBTQ individuals and organizations, and she will continue to build on that progress we’ve made as a city, and we will continue to be that safe haven for people.” 

Edmund Morris, president of the D.C. Equality Chamber of Commerce, which he said represents more than 100 LGBTQ+ and allied businesses serving the D.C. Metro area, released a short statement in response to the Blade’s request for comment on the impact his group expects Lewis George to have on the LGBTQ community.

 “Janeese Lewis George has emphasized inclusive policies and support for local small businesses, priorities that align with our mission,” the statement says. “We look forward to productively engaging a future administration on how best to support aspiring and active entrepreneurs to flourish in the city that they serve,” it says.

Nick Tsusaki, founder and owner of the D.C. LGBTQ bar Spark Social, said he preferred not to comment on the impact Lewis George will have on policy related to LGBTQ issues. But he said he was impressed by Lewis George’s visits to several LGBTQ bars during the primary campaign.

“I’m really excited for her” he said, “I think she made a point in her last week of campaigning to do like an LGBTQ bar crawl. She came to Spark, to Trade and Bunker,” he said referring to two other D.C. LGBTQ bars. “And really showing dedication to the community in a way that went above and beyond what I had expected –really meeting the community where we’re at.”

He added, “And so, for her to drop in on a Friday night and just talk to – get on the microphone and talk about why she’s excited to fight for our community was really cool to see in an authentic way.”

In response to requests by the Blade and Capital Stonewall Democrats seeking statements from each of the mayoral candidates during the primary campaign, Lewis George submitted these comments, which are excerpted from a longer statement.

“As mayor, I will protect our LGBTQ+ neighbors against federal attacks on their identity, including their health care. … On the Council I have been a strong  supporter of pro-LGBTQ+ bills, including making D.C. a sanctuary for people seeking gender-affirming health care as well as addressing discrimination and harassment in nightlife  and hospitality…And as mayor, I am prepared to move up and win those fights – a fight for D.C. statehood, a fight for our true economy, and a real opportunity to uplift our Black queer and trans youth.”

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. Council approves increased funding for Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs

Increase attached to 2027 budget bill

Published

on

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser at the 2024 Pride month flag raising ceremony at the Wilson Building. (Washington Blade photo by Emma Hanna)

The D.C. Council on July 14 gave final approval for the city’s fiscal year 2027 budget that includes an amendment calling for increasing the number and size of funding grants that the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs provides for local organizations providing services for the LGBTQ community.

The amendment, called the “LGBTQ Community Grant Amendment Act of 2026,” was introduced earlier this year by D.C. Council member Zachary Parker (D-Ward 5), the Council’s only gay member.

The D.C. LGBTQ Budget Coalition called the Parker amendment “a historic measure that establishes the District’s most sustainable model for a vehicle for investing in LGBTQ communities.”

The Council approved the version of the FY 2027 budget bill with the attached Parker amendment in its first of two required votes on June 9. Shortly after voting unanimously to give final approval of an earlier version of the two-part budget measure on July 7 that includes the Parker amendment, the Council sent the bill to Mayor Muriel Bowser for her signature.  

Bowser has expressed strong opposition to several provisions in the $22 billion budget measure passed by the Council that are unrelated to the Parker amendment regarding the Office of LGBTQ Affairs. The mayor has yet to say whether she will sign, veto, or choose not to sign the bill.

The latter option would allow the bill to become law if Congress does not choose to overturn it during its required 30-day legislative review period for all D.C. bills. Political observers believe the Council will vote to override a veto if Bowser chooses to veto the bill.

When contacted by the Washington Blade on July 22 to determine where the mayor stands on the budget bill, mayoral spokesperson Daniel Gleick said only, there was “no update on the budget just yet.”

Among other things, the Parker amendment calls for the Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs to issue a $980,000 grant in FY 2027 to a private, nonprofit organization in partnership with the office “for the purpose of supporting programs that promote the welfare of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning community.”

It would allocate $680,000 of that funding total from existing funds from the city’s community affairs grants program and calls for $200,000 in newly appropriated funds.  

It says the organization selected would also initiate its own fundraising effort to expand the amount of funds beyond the amount the office would provide, enabling it to provide larger grants to a greater number of local LGBTQ organizations.

“The legislation arrives at a critical moment, as LGBTQ-serving organizations face unprecedented uncertainty,” the D.C. Budget Coalition said in its comment on the Parker amendment. “Growing demand for services is colliding with shrinking resources, federal attacks on LGBTQ programs, and ongoing threats to local funding streams,” the coalition’s statement says.

In what some observers have called a highly controversial action; the budget bill approved by the Council reverses and restores millions of dollars in budget cuts proposed by Bowser in the budget she submitted to the Council earlier this year.

Among other things, the Council’s budget preserves the current level of funding for housing vouchers, childcare, paid family leave, and other programs slated to be cut in the mayor’s proposed budget, according to a report by the Washington Post.

Bowser points out that the Council approved budget bill calls for using $150 million from the city’s reserve fund, which she and others have said could put the city in jeopardy in future years. The mayor has said the cuts were needed to prevent a major funding shortfall brought about by the action by Republicans in Congress to cut the city’s budget by over a billion dollars.     

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Is the Metro safe for riders?

WMATA says crime dropped 37 percent on system in 2025

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

I was inside Benning Road train station in April waiting for my train with two friends on the way to school. It usually took me 25-30 minutes to get from Benning Road Station to school at Congress Heights. As I waited for the train, I kept noticing that every train that got to five minutes away would disappear from the Metro screen before it got to my stop. 

I found out from one of my friends that a Metro work vehicle had crashed into a train at Metro Center and that all trains were now delayed. While my friends were able to call their family to pick them up, I had no such luxury. The train was my only option. It took me more than an hour to get to school. I missed my first period because of it and had to make up my work later in the day. I was marked absent because when a student misses one class, they’re marked absent for the day and an email is sent to their parents. I felt irritated knowing that I had to deal with all of these problems that weren’t even my fault due to an incident that happened on a different side of town. 

The incident at Metro Center isn’t the only incident that I have experienced on the subway. I have experienced kids fighting and almost pushing me on the tracks, massive delays because a woman was passed out on the train and Metro police pulling out their assault rifles and arresting someone in the station, which caused people to panic and start running.  

I later learned the crash that led to me being late to school caused 11 injuries to people who were on the train, according to media reports. And the Metro has experienced other dangerous incidents this year. A man was beaten so badly on Cinco de Mayo that he needed staples in his head and another man was beaten to death by a stranger at the Addison Road station

However, I’ve never experienced any incident that has led to me getting hurt, nor actually seen anyone get hurt.  

So, is the Metro safe? 

Metro experienced the lowest crime rate in its history in 2025, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority said. The crime rate decreased by 37 percent in 2025 compared to 2024. 

Last year, the Metro Transit Police Department increased enforcement efforts department-wide by more than 25 percent, Metro said. WMATA said it is in the process of installing upgraded video systems on our 6000 and 7000-series rail cars, which make up most of the cars in the system. This new camera system allows for live video access to rail cars from Metro’s Integrated Command and Communications Center.

Asked if he felt unsafe using the Metro, Dr. Aruna Rajam, a teacher at Bard High School Early College DC and George Washington University, recalled being on the train with a man who was smoking weed and yelling.  

“It didn’t turn physically violent, but it was alarming and made me feel like the situation could go sideways quickly,” said Rajam, who takes the train to both of his jobs, traveling day and night. 

Incidents like these are what make Rajam feel unsafe occasionally when he is riding the subway at night: “Late at night — like my 8:45 ride from Foggy Bottom to Springfield — it’s a different atmosphere.” 

Jayden Payne, a rising sophomore at Bard, worries even more. 

“There was a man who seemed intoxicated, moving around his phone, pretending it was a gun-all up in ladies’ faces,” he said in an interview. 

When asked if he would recommend the subway to others, he gave a firm “no” due to all of the incidents that he has heard about that have happened on the Metro. 

Erin Bray, who graduated from Bard in June, recalled an incident when a man brought a gun on the train when she was on it. Asked if she felt safe on the subway, Bray said: “No, because there’s not enough security and people keep bringing [weapons] on there.” 

Metro said it launched a Safety Risk Reduction Plan to improve riders’ safety and employs several other safety tactics, including Safe Passage patrols to help students in D.C. get to and from school safely. 

While all of the people interviewed said that they saw or experienced an uncomfortable incident, Metro said it is increasing its security and safety protocols. 

WMATA data coincides with what one of my interviewees said about his experience on Metro. 

“I feel safer now than I felt riding the Metro today than I did 10 years ago,” Dr. Samuel Slattery, a social science teacher at Bard High School Early College, said.  

He spoke of his experience with the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority subway in Philadelphia in comparison: “… That’s what an unsafe train system feels like,” Slattery said. 

The week before he was interviewed in May, Slattery said he was on SEPTA and there was a woman “eating beans off the floor of the train,” a homeless man “passed out in the middle of the train,” and a mentally ill woman yelling in his and other passengers’ faces that, “‘Jesus was watching her’ and the rest of us were in contact with demons.” This incident agitated Slattery so much that he said, “Screw this” to his friend and decided to pay extra for an Uber.

Metro riders who want to report an incident or safety concern can call Metro Transit Police (MTPD) at 202-961-2121 or text MYMTPD (696783). Metro also posts a daily Crime Blotter on its website where the public can see the calls MTPD responded to on a given day.  The Crime Blotter can be found here: https://www.wmata.com/about/transit-police/crime-stats.cfm 

Christian Jennings, a 2026 graduate of Bard High School Early College DC, is a rising freshman at North Carolina State University, where he plans to major in nuclear engineering. He worked with journalist-instructors at Youthcast Media Group on this article. 

Continue Reading

Popular