In common with the legislatures of the States, Congress cannot constitutionally pass ex post facto laws in criminal cases, nor suspend the writ of habeas corpus, nor pass a bill of attainder, nor abridge the freedom of speech and of the press, nor invade the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, nor enact laws respecting an establishment of religion.  These are general limitations.  Congress cannot do these things any where.  The exact import, therefore, of the clause “in all cases whatsoever,” is, on all subjects within the appropriate sphere of legislation.  Some legislatures are restrained by constitutions from the exercise of powers strictly within the proper sphere of legislation.  Congressional power over the District has no such restraint.  It traverses the whole field of legitimate legislation.  All the power which any legislature has within its own jurisdiction, Congress holds over the District of Columbia.

It has been asserted that the clause in question respects merely police regulations, and that its sole design was to enable Congress to protect itself against popular tumults.  But if the framers of the Constitution aimed to provide for a single case only, why did they provide for “all cases whatsoever?” Besides, this clause was opposed in many of the state conventions, because the grant of power was not restricted to police regulations alone.  In the Virginia Convention, George Mason, the father of the Virginia Constitution, said, “This clause gives an unlimited authority in every possible case within the District.  He would willingly give them exclusive power as far as respected the police and good government of the place, but he would give them no more.”  Mr. Grayson said, that control over the police was all-sufficient, and that the “Continental Congress never had an idea of exclusive legislation in all cases.”  Patrick Henry said.  “Is it consistent with any principle of prudence or good policy, to grant unlimited, unbounded authority?” Mr. Madison said in reply:  “I did conceive that the clause under consideration was one of those parts which would speak its own praise.  When any power is given, its delegation necessarily involves authority to make laws to execute it. * * * * The powers which are found necessary to be given, are therefore delegated generally, and particular and minute specification is left to the legislature. * * * It is not within the limits of human capacity to delineate on paper all those particular cases and circumstances, in which legislation by the general legislature would be necessary.”  Governor Randolph said:  “Holland has no ten miles square, but she has the Hague where the deputies of the States assemble.  But the influence which it has given the province of Holland, to have the seat of government within its territory, subject in some respects to its control, has been injurious to the other provinces.  The wisdom of the Convention is therefore manifest in granting to Congress exclusive jurisdiction over the place of their session.” [Deb.  Va.  Con., p. 320.] In the forty-third number of the “Federalist,” Mr. Madison says:  “The indispensable necessity of complete authority at the seat of government, carries its own evidence with it.”