| It’s been a little more than a week since President Donald Trump took over D.C. police and sent federal law enforcement and National Guard members to patrol the city. He’s framed this as a crackdown on crime, but to those who study constitutional law, the militarization of the nation’s capital has similarities to countries with fewer freedoms. “We can’t be frogs in boiling water who don’t notice armored vehicles outside of Union Station [in D.C.] and a takeover attempt of elections while dictators hang out on our soil,” said Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice, which focuses on democracy issues. “This has been a significant week in signaling the next steps for Trump.” On Monday, Trump left the door open to expanding this to other cities — ones notably run by Black mayors: “You look at Chicago, how bad it is. You look at Los Angeles, how bad it is,” he said. “We have other cities that are very bad. We’re not going to let it happen, we’re not going to lose our cities.” Here’s what’s going on. Could this expand to other cities? It would be hard. The federal government has significant say over Washington because it’s not a state. But even with that authority, what Trump is doing may be legally dubious, security experts Joseph Nunn and Spencer Reynolds wrote on Just Security. Trump had to declare a public safety emergency to take over D.C. police for 30 days despite declining violent crime in D.C. (even if the exact amount is up for debate). “The ebb and flow of local crime is not an ‘emergency’ that could justify a federal takeover of the D.C. police,” Nunn and Reynolds write. D.C. has sued, and a judge is weighing in. If Trump wanted to expand this to other cities, they explain, he could violate the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, which upholds states’ rights and their ability to run their police departments. There’s also a federal law — the Posse Comitatus Act — that restricts when the president can use the military for domestic law enforcement. “It says no use of the military in civilian spheres unless absolutely urgent,” said Kimberly Wehle, a professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law who specializes in explaining laws. “Protests do not count.” Since federal agents have taken over policing in D.C., more than 450 people have been arrested without releasing typical information about who and why, The Washington Post’s Olivia George and Emma Uber report. Nunn and Reynolds warn that Trump could try to marshal other state National Guard units to take over cities’ police departments — so it’s not technically him deploying the military. It’s a playbook he’s using in D.C. Republican governors in six states so far have sent 1,200 troops to D.C. for Trump. This is different from deploying troops Los Angeles In June, Trump sent thousands of troops to Los Angeles, but their assignment appeared to be protecting federal facilities, not policing. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) sued the Trump administration, arguing that Trump manufactured a crisis to send in troops and overrode the governor’s authority to manage the National Guard. So far, courts have allowed the troops to stay, though most have left. Multiple legal and national security experts said at the time that they worried Trump would try to militarize other cities. A memo that the Trump administration issued to send the National Guard to Los Angeles is vague enough that several legal experts said Trump could use it to justify sending troops to any protest, in any city — no matter how small or peaceful the demonstration. “If he thinks he has succeeded in L.A., I don’t see why he wouldn’t try it elsewhere,” Josh Chafetz, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown University, told me in June. “I think it’s one of the scariest things that a president can do,” Ariela Rosenberg, a national security expert with Protect Democracy, told me that month. “Do they use this extremely blank check they gave themselves to deploy the National Guard in the smallest of circumstances?” Trump’s desire to use force isn’t new In 2020, Trump deployed the military to disperse racial justice protesters in D.C., with helicopters hovering over protesters’ heads, which the Army said was an improper use. This summer, Trump has sent thousands of troops into two major U.S. cities. And now he’s said he is considering expanding this to other cities, despite clear constitutional and legal hurdles. “Laws are only meaningful to the extent they’re enforced,” Wehle wrote in her “Simple Politics” newsletter. “It’s getting to the point that, regardless of what the law says, Trump will find a way to do as he pleases. And the GOP-controlled Congress, as well as the Supreme Court, will go along. These are unprecedented times.” | 
