## Facts

- John R. Thompson Co., Inc. operated cafeterias in Washington, D.C.
- In 1950, Mary Church Terrell and other Black patrons sought service at one of the company’s restaurants and were refused solely because of race.
- The District brought a criminal information charging the company with violating two Reconstruction-era D.C. statutes enacted in 1872 and 1873 that prohibited racial discrimination in public accommodations, including restaurants.
- The Municipal Court quashed the information, ruling the statutes had been repealed by implication through later congressional reorganization of the D.C. government.
- The Municipal Court of Appeals concluded the 1873 statute remained in force but treated the 1872 statute as repealed as to restaurants.
- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held both statutes unenforceable and ordered dismissal.
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari to determine whether the statutes were validly enacted and still enforceable.

## Issues

1. Whether Congress, under Article I, § 8, cl. 17, could delegate legislative authority for the District of Columbia to the D.C. Legislative Assembly created in 1871.
2. Whether prohibiting racial discrimination by restaurants was within the Assembly’s authority over “rightful subjects of legislation.”
3. Whether the 1872 and 1873 anti-discrimination statutes survived later congressional changes to the District’s governmental structure and remained enforceable.
4. Whether, as a matter of local statutory interpretation, the 1873 statute repealed the 1872 statute as applied to restaurants.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed in part and remanded.
- Congress could delegate legislative power for the District to the 1871 D.C. Legislative Assembly; “exclusive Legislation” did not make Congress’s power nondelegable.
- The Assembly’s authority over “rightful subjects of legislation” was coextensive with a state’s police power and included regulating discrimination in restaurants.
- The 1872 and 1873 anti-discrimination statutes were not repealed by later reorganizations of the D.C. government and remained enforceable.
- The Court declined to decide whether the 1873 statute repealed the 1872 statute as to restaurants and left that question for further proceedings on remand.

## Legal Principles

- Under Article I, § 8, cl. 17, Congress’s legislative authority over the District includes powers comparable to those a state may exercise over local affairs.
- The constitutional grant of “exclusive” legislative authority over the District bars concurrent state authority but does not prevent Congress from delegating local legislative power.
- A delegation authorizing legislation on “rightful subjects of legislation” confers power as broad as state police power, including regulation of public accommodations and prohibitions on racial discrimination.
- Local statutes remain effective after governmental reorganization unless Congress clearly repeals them; repeal by implication is disfavored absent clear inconsistency or indication of repeal.

## Conclusion

The Court held that D.C.’s Reconstruction-era public-accommodations prohibitions on racial discrimination were validly enacted under delegated authority and remained enforceable despite later changes in the District’s government, while reserving for remand whether one of the two local statutes displaced the other as applied to restaurants.


District of Columbia v. John R. Thompson Co., 346 U.S. 100 (1953)