‘DC Crime Emergency’? Experts Question Trump’s Order to Federalize Police Force in Washington
By Legal and Political Correspondent
Published August 15, 2025
Washington, D.C. – On August 11, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order declaring a “crime emergency” in Washington, D.C., federalizing the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and deploying 800 National Guard troops to the city. Invoking Section 740 of the 1973 District of Columbia Home Rule Act, Trump placed the MPD under the control of Attorney General Pam Bondi, citing rampant violent crime as a threat to public safety and federal operations. However, legal experts, local officials, and crime data analysts are questioning the necessity and legality of the move, pointing to a 30-year low in violent crime and raising concerns about its impact on D.C.’s autonomy.
The Executive Order and Its Rationale
Trump’s order, announced at a White House press conference, claims that D.C.’s “out-of-control” crime rates—particularly homicides, robberies, and vehicle thefts—endanger residents, tourists, and federal workers. The administration cited a 2024 homicide rate of 27 per 100,000 residents and vehicle thefts at 842.4 per 100,000, framing D.C. as one of the “most dangerous cities globally.” Trump also pointed to a recent assault on Edward Coristine, a former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staffer, during an alleged carjacking attempt as a catalyst for action.
The order delegates authority to Bondi to oversee the MPD, with Drug Enforcement Administration head Terry Cole appointed as interim federal commissioner. Approximately 100-200 National Guard troops will assist with administrative, logistical, and “physical presence” roles at any given time, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth indicating readiness to deploy additional units if needed. Trump also suggested potential military involvement, stating, “We will bring in the military if it’s needed,” though he expressed confidence it would not be necessary.
Experts Challenge the “Crime Emergency” Narrative
Critics, including D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb and Mayor Muriel Bowser, argue that the executive order misrepresents the city’s crime landscape. Official MPD statistics show a 26% drop in violent crime in 2025 compared to 2024, with homicides down 12%, robberies down 28%, and assaults with a dangerous weapon down 20%. The U.S. Department of Justice reported in January 2025 that D.C.’s violent crime rate reached a 30-year low in 2024, with a 35% reduction from 2023, including a 32% drop in homicides and a 53% decrease in armed carjackings.
“There is no crime emergency in the District of Columbia,” Schwalb declared in an August 11 X post, calling Trump’s actions “unprecedented, unnecessary, and unlawful.” He emphasized that the city’s progress in reducing crime undermines the justification for federal intervention. Bowser echoed this, noting that D.C.’s economy is thriving, with businesses opening and families growing, and described comparisons to “war-torn” cities as “hyperbolic and false.” Both officials are exploring legal options to challenge the order, with Schwalb’s office stating it will “do what is necessary to protect the rights and safety of District residents.”
Legal scholars question the order’s foundation under the Home Rule Act, which allows the president to federalize the MPD for up to 30 days if “special conditions of an emergency nature” exist, requiring congressional notification within 48 hours. Georgetown Law professor Tahir Duckett told The Hill that the data does not support an emergency, suggesting the move is more about political theater than public safety. The administration’s reliance on outdated 2023 crime statistics, which saw a post-pandemic spike, further fuels skepticism, as does a police union’s unverified claim of manipulated crime data, cited by White House communications director Steven Cheung.
Implications for D.C. Home Rule
The federalization of the MPD is the first use of Section 740, marking a significant erosion of D.C.’s autonomy under the Home Rule Act. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton called it an “historic assault on D.C. home rule,” arguing it diverts resources for purposes not supported by residents. The act requires Mayor Bowser to comply, but she expressed unease, noting minimal prior coordination with the White House. Bowser’s call for D.C. statehood gained traction, highlighting the district’s lack of voting representation in Congress and vulnerability to federal overreach.
The deployment of the D.C. National Guard, which reports directly to the president unlike state guards, raises additional concerns. While the Justice Department’s 1989 opinion allows the D.C. Guard to perform law enforcement duties without violating the Posse Comitatus Act, critics warn that its presence could escalate tensions. A parallel lawsuit in California, Newsom v. Trump (U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. 25-cv-04870), challenges a similar National Guard deployment in Los Angeles, testing the limits of presidential authority over domestic policing.
Community and Political Reactions
D.C. residents and leaders are divided. Some, like the sister of a crime victim quoted by NBC4 Washington, support increased law enforcement presence, citing high-profile incidents. Others, including George Morgan, a 65-year-old unhoused resident near the Lincoln Memorial, expressed disappointment to NPR, arguing that resources should prioritize housing and healthcare over militarization. The Democratic Mayors Association labeled the move a “political charade,” while Senator Dick Durbin called it an attempt to distract from other controversies, such as the Epstein files.
Trump’s rhetoric, including calls to “hit hard” against protesters and remove homeless encampments, has heightened fears of aggressive enforcement. His August 11 remarks encouraging police to respond forcefully to spitting or provocation drew criticism for endorsing excessive force, particularly given his past pardons of January 6 rioters who attacked officers.
Looking Ahead
The federalization is set to expire after 30 days unless Congress passes a joint resolution to extend it, an unlikely prospect given the Republican-controlled House and Senate’s support, with House Speaker Mike Johnson praising the decision. Representative Jamie Raskin plans to introduce a resolution to reverse the emergency declaration, but its success is uncertain.
The move could set a precedent for federal interventions in other cities, with Trump warning Los Angeles, New York, and Chicago to “self-clean up” or face similar measures. Legal experts predict challenges in federal court, potentially clarifying the scope of the Home Rule Act and Posse Comitatus. Meanwhile, D.C.’s economy and community trust face risks, with Duckett warning that heavy-handed policing could undermine the MPD’s community-based strategies, which have driven recent crime reductions.
As the National Guard hits D.C. streets and Bondi assumes MPD control, the city braces for a tense period. The clash between federal authority and local governance underscores D.C.’s unique vulnerability, fueling calls for statehood and raising questions about the balance of power in the nation’s capital.
Sources: Whitehouse.gov, CNBC, NBC4 Washington, Defense One, Washingtonian, ABC News, Axios, Politico, USA Today, ASIS Online, The Hill, Newsweek, PBS, X Posts by @DCAttorneyGen, @KToropin, @DCNewsLive, @krassenstein