D.C. Code § 23-115
This is the official text of D.C. Code § 23-115, part of District of Columbia’s Code — part of the compiled statutory law of District of Columbia, published by the state as "Code." Browse the sections below, each linked to its official government source.
Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.
§ 23-115. Limits on defenses that justify, excuse, or mitigate a defendant's conduct on the basis of a victim's gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation.
Official statutory text
(a) In any prosecution, criminal proceeding, or criminal trial, when applicable to the offense charged, for the purposes of proving:
(1) Heat of passion caused by adequate provocation, a defendant's provocation was not objectively adequate if it was based on discovery of, knowledge about, or the potential disclosure of the victim's actual or perceived gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation;
(2) Insanity, the defendant did not lack substantial capacity if the mental disease or defect at issue was based on discovery of, knowledge about, or the potential disclosure of the victim's actual or perceived gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation; or
(3) Self-defense, defense of others, or defense of property, the defendant was not justified in using force if the basis for their belief in imminent danger was based on discovery of, knowledge about, or the potential disclosure of the victim's actual or perceived gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section, the defense may present evidence of prior trauma to the defendant for the purposes of excusing or justifying the defendant's conduct or mitigating the severity of the offense.
(1) Heat of passion caused by adequate provocation, a defendant's provocation was not objectively adequate if it was based on discovery of, knowledge about, or the potential disclosure of the victim's actual or perceived gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation;
(2) Insanity, the defendant did not lack substantial capacity if the mental disease or defect at issue was based on discovery of, knowledge about, or the potential disclosure of the victim's actual or perceived gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation; or
(3) Self-defense, defense of others, or defense of property, the defendant was not justified in using force if the basis for their belief in imminent danger was based on discovery of, knowledge about, or the potential disclosure of the victim's actual or perceived gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section, the defense may present evidence of prior trauma to the defendant for the purposes of excusing or justifying the defendant's conduct or mitigating the severity of the offense.
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Need a lawyer in District of Columbia?
Find a District of Columbia lawyer
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the
Open US Law dataset
(Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine
(Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.