President Trump has declared a federal takeover of Washington, D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department and deployed 800 National Guard troops to the city, citing escalating crime and disorder.
At a Glance
- Trump invoked Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to justify temporarily placing the D.C. police under federal control.
- Approximately 800 National Guard soldiers have been deployed to the capital.
- His administration mobilized around 500 federal law enforcement agents—including FBI and ATF personnel—into local patrol shifts.
- D.C. officials dispute the crisis narrative, noting a notable 26 % year-over-year drop in violent crime in 2025.
- Legal experts anticipate challenges, given the limited scope and duration of presidential authority over D.C. police.
Background and Legal Framework
President Trump invoked Section 740 of the Home Rule Act, enabling emergency intervention in D.C.’s police only under “special conditions of an emergency nature,” and for an initial 48-hour period extendable to 30 days with congressional notice. Longer control requires explicit legislative approval.
Unlike the states, the president uniquely controls the D.C. National Guard at all times, making its deployment federally executed.
What Trump Announced
Trump characterizes his move as a bold “Liberation Day,” promising to “take our capital back” from crime, homelessness, and urban decay. He named the new DEA Administrator, Terry Cole, as interim federal commissioner for the Metropolitan Police Department and warned that traditional governance could be altered, potentially including a reevaluation of D.C.’s home-rule status.
Federal law enforcement has surged—reports cite around 500 agents from agencies like the FBI and ATF deployed on night shifts across the city.
Pushback from D.C. Officials
Mayor Muriel Bowser and Attorney General Brian Schwalb immediately rejected the premise of the emergency. They cited the significant decline in violent crime and credited community policing strategies—not a federal force—for improved safety.
Legal and Political Implications
Observers warn this executive action trespasses on D.C.’s autonomy and signals a potential trend toward increased federal intervention in local matters. Critics cite past controversies—including federal force deployment during the 2020 protests—as context for broader concerns over overreach and militarization of domestic law enforcement.