OPINION: Why Donald Trump is wrong to take over the DC police

AMERICA’S CAPITAL city was designed as a showcase for its democracy: sweeping boulevards, white-marble palaces of administration, monuments aplenty. This week, however, Washington, DC has become a manifestation of something less inspiring: the grandstanding instincts of the current president.

This time, Donald Trump’s preoccupation is violent crime. Mr Trump has been banging this drum for decades. “Roving bands of wild criminals roam our neighbourhoods dispensing their own brand of twisted hatred,” warned Mr Trump nearly 40 years ago. The occasion then was the rape and assault of a white woman in New York’s Central Park, for which five black and Hispanic men were later wrongfully convicted. On August 11th Mr Trump all but quoted himself: “Our capital city has been overtaken by violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals, roving mobs of wild youth, drugged-out maniacs and homeless people,” he said from the White House briefing room. Then he deployed the National Guard to Washington; took control of its police force; and promised to “get rid of the slums” and clear out its homeless population.

This is not the president’s first use of the armed forces for civilian law enforcement in a city that reviles him and that he reviles right back. Earlier this summer Mr Trump sent National Guard troops to protect federal property during protests over immigration raids in Los Angeles. In 2020 he ordered them to disperse Black Lives Matter demonstrators in Washington. In neither instance did local Democratic leaders ask for his intervention. Now Mr Trump hints that the Washington deployment could be a blueprint for other troublesome (ie, Democratic-run) places. That will be easier said than done, however. The capital has an unusual legal status as a territory of the federal government granted qualified home rule. Elsewhere the president would face more legal impediments.

The practical impact of the president’s order may be modest. He has authorised the DC National Guard—which is tiny—to act as cops. About 200 troops will support law enforcement. By law his control of the city police can last for only 30 days; after that Congress would need to extend it. It is a far cry from a federal takeover of Washington.

Seeking to justify his order, Mr Trump cited several awful attacks against government workers. In early August carjackers beat up and bloodied a former DOGE staffer. In June stray gunfire killed a congressional intern. Last year an official at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission was shot to death in a carjacking. In 2023 a Senate aide was stabbed and a congressman was robbed at gunpoint. “It’s becoming a situation of complete and total lawlessness,” said Mr Trump, likening the capital to Baghdad and Bogotá.

The president is right that violent crime in Washington surged in 2023 and that it numbers among the most dangerous cities in America. He neglected to say that crime there has since tumbled. This year’s murder rate is falling towards the pre-pandemic trend. The number of carjackings, which doubled between 2022 and 2023, is declining too, though they are still more frequent than they were before the pandemic. Overall the capital is considerably safer than it was in the 1990s, when it had the highest murder rate in the country, and it is a bit less dangerous than it was a decade ago.

Mr Trump’s action will irk the 700,000-odd citizens of Washington, whose elected government is being sidelined. And it is hypocritical. Mr Trump and his fellow Republicans in Congress have been impeding the city government, preventing it from spending the taxes it has raised and forcing cuts to services like policing. Republicans have thus exacerbated Washington’s crime problem.

Mr Trump’s focus on the city over more violent ones is not just because he can see it from his bedroom window. It is because the federal government retains more authority over the capital than over states or even other federal territories. The president commands the DC National Guard—in states, governors have that job—and he can take temporary control over the police department.

Washington’s unique status means these same tactics cannot easily be replicated outside the capital. To “federalise” the National Guard for arrest purposes elsewhere—to empower troops to act as cops—Mr Trump would have to invoke the Insurrection Act. Only then can the armed forces legally be put to use to quell a domestic uprising. The act was last used in 1992. Invoking it again would be immensely controversial. Mr Trump’s approach in Washington, then, is clever when viewed through a lawyer’s lens. Which is not to say that his order is justified or good policy. 

Stay on top of American politics with The US in brief, our daily newsletter with fast analysis of the most important political news, and Checks and Balance, a weekly note from our Lexington columnist that examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.