It Looks Like the End of the Road for Rideshare Alternative Empower in D.C.

The Superior Court for the District of Columbia reinstated its contempt orders against rideshare alternative Empower and its CEO Joshua Sear on Friday, resuming daily multi-thousand-dollar fines against the company and Sear. With no clear path to continue operations, it seems likely that Empower will be forced to cease operations, depriving thousands of independent drivers and money-conscious riders in and around D.C. of a convenient, inexpensive transportation option.

The battle between the rideshare company and district officials has been years in the making and has centered around the legality of Empower’s operations in the city. Empower originally argued that it is not a private vehicle-for-hire company—and is thus not subject to certain district regulations and fees—because it did not employ drivers.

In October 2025, Empower ended any and all contractual relationships with riders and drivers in the district. The company argued this action removed it from the Department of For-Hire Vehicles’ (DFHV) jurisdiction, as the district code defines private vehicle-for-hire companies as those “that uses digital dispatch to connect passengers to a network of private vehicle-for-hire operators,” and operators as those who “provide private vehicle-for-hire service in contract with a private vehicle-for-hire company” (emphasis added). 

The Superior Court didn’t buy Empower’s argument, but stayed its contempt orders while Empower petitioned the D.C. Court of Appeals. Then, in November, and again in February, the D.C. Council updated the definition of private vehicle-for-hire operator to clarify that no contract is required between an operator and a private vehicle-for-hire company for either to qualify as such.

The new definition not only holds moving forward, but retroactively applies, beginning March 1, 2024. Since March 2024 precedes the DFHV’s cease and desist against Empower—the basis for the Superior Court’s contempt orders—Empower assumed the DFHV would withdraw this cease and desist and issue a new one, which would prolong legal proceedings.

This assumption was false.

In December, the District requested that the Superior Court lift the stay on its contempt orders, arguing that the Council’s “amendment resolves the question of statutory interpretation” regarding Empower’s status as a private vehicle-for-hire company. At a January 9 hearing, the Superior Court obliged. A month later, the Court of Appeals denied Empower’s motion for a stay pending appeal on the grounds that the company “failed to demonstrate that they are likely to succeed on the merits.”

On Friday, the District requested the Superior Court to reimpose fines against Empower and Sear, who was not present due to an illness. Chris Southcott, attorney for the District, called Sear’s illness “convenient timing” and requested a bench warrant for his arrest. Superior Court Judge Shana Frost Matini denied this request as inappropriate. 

Martini did find it appropriate, however, to reinstate the multi-thousand-dollar fines against Empower and Sear, who will tentatively appear before the Superior Court on March 23. With no obvious avenue of recourse remaining, it looks like the end for the embattled rideshare alternative, cherished by drivers and riders alike.