But of course! Something else has come between the District and its voting rights.

Today the Post is reporting that President George W. Bush and various senators have expressed concerns over the constitutionality of legislation that would grant the District a voting seat in the House of Representatives. According to the White House the legislation, which passed two House committees this week and may face a vote before the House as early as next week, would be unconstitutional by virtue of its granting District residents a right reserved for residents of states. An opinion by the Congressional Research Service voiced the same concern in January, though various legal experts — including conservative heavyweights like Viet Dinh and Kenneth Starr — have vouched for the legislation.

We’re obviously disappointed by the White House’s statement, but not totally surprised. President Bush has never been much of a fan of District voting rights, so this is perfectly within character for him (his sudden enthusiasm for the Constitution is less so).

The bill may not even reach the White House, though, as it still faces the U.S. Senate, where the 60 votes necessary to overcome the threat of a filibuster will be tough to come by. Both Utah senators have expressed opinions about the legislation that are similar to the administration’s, even though the measure would grant their state an additional seat in Congress.

At the very least, we’d like to see a debate occur. Ultimately, the status of the District is something the courts will have to decide, and if they deem the legislation unconstitutional it’ll mean we’re back to square one. But we should at least be able to try our case, shouldn’t we? Congress is supposed to debate and pass laws; the courts are supposed to determine their constitutionality. We hope they have a chance to do that.