This week, Indiana said it would soon send 300 National Guardsmen to D.C. for a four-month stint under President Trump’s direction, but it’s now not clear whether they will make it that long.
On Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge Jia Cobb ruled that Trump’s deployment of some 2,300 members of the D.C. National Guard and Guardsmen from almost a dozen Republican states to fight crime in the city was unlawful. The judge found that it illegally infringes upon the city’s ability to direct law enforcement and undermines Congress’s authority over the nation’s capital, though her order is on pause for three weeks to allow time for appeal.
In the 61-page ruling, Cobb wrote that the Trump administration had “exceeded the bounds of [its] authority … in deploying the [D.C. National Guard] for non-military, crime-deterrence missions in the absence of a request from the city’s civil authorities.” She also ruled that the president lacked the authority to call up out-of-state Guardsmen to patrol in D.C.
The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb in early September in which he called the Guard’s deployment – which came as part of Trump’s August declaration of a crime emergency in the city – an “involuntary military occupation” that additionally violated federal prohibitions on the use of the military for domestic law enforcement.
On Thursday, Schwalb hailed the ruling.
“Normalizing the use of military troops for domestic law enforcement sets a dangerous precedent, where the president can disregard states’ independence and deploy troops wherever and whenever he wants – with no check on his military power,” he said in a statement. “This unprecedented federal overreach is not normal, or legal. It is long past time to let the National Guard go home – to their everyday lives, their regular jobs, their families, and their children.”
The Guardsmen aren’t expected to start packing their bags just yet, though. Cobb put her ruling on hold for 21 days to give the Trump administration a chance to appeal. It's not clear yet if the administration plans to do do.
But in a post on X, Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller lambasted the ruling. “Judicial despotism is one of the gravest hazards we face to the functioning and endurance of our Republic. No district judge can steal for himself the powers of the Commander-in-Chief,” he wrote.
When Trump first deployed the National Guard, he said the troops would help tamp down on violent crime in D.C. But their presence has largely been symbolic, with armed soldiers seen standing or patrolling in relatively safe tourist areas or picking up trash in federal parks. There have been several controversial incidents, though, including when Guardsmen chased down teenagers who were causing a ruckus in Navy Yard late last month.
The legal fight over the Guard’s presence in D.C. drew attention from across the country, with Democratic states (like California and Oregon, which have also fought the deployment of the National Guard in their own backyards) weighing in on D.C.’s side and Republican states siding with Trump. In one court filing, 23 Republican states compared Trump’s decision to use the National Guard to fight crime to President James Madison’s use of troops to protect Washington from British troops who eventually sacked it.
It has become evident that Trump planned on keeping the National Guard in the city through next year – even into the summer. Earlier this week, Alaska had also said it would send 100 of its own Guardsmen to patrol D.C.
With your help, we pursue stories that hold leaders to account, demystify opaque city and civic processes, and celebrate the idiosyncrasies that make us proud to call D.C. home. Put simply, our mission is to make it easier — and more fun — to live in the District. Our members help keep local news free and independent for all:
