Donald Trump announced today he is placing the Washington, DC, police department “under direct federal control” and deploying National Guard troops to the nation’s capital. The move comes after Trump ordered a seven-day surge in federal law enforcement within the city last week, citing several high-profile crimes.

This is not just a story about Washington, DC. It is a test balloon, a trial run for how to deploy federal troops and military force into other Democratic-led cities. If this works here, it can work anywhere. And that should worry every American who believes in local control, civilian law enforcement, and constitutional limits on executive power.

Why DC is the perfect testing ground

The nation’s capital occupies a unique legal space. Unlike the 50 states, Washington, DC, has no governor to push back against presidential orders. Congress holds ultimate authority over the city’s laws and budget. Under certain conditions, the president can take over the Metropolitan Police Department without local consent—something that would be impossible in any state without invoking extraordinary laws like the Insurrection Act.

That’s why DC is the ideal place to test a playbook for expanding military presence into cities run by political opponents. It’s a political laboratory for executive overreach. If a president can normalize the sight of troops on the streets of the capital under the guise of “public safety,” it becomes easier to make the case for similar action elsewhere.

Step one: manufacture or magnify a crisis

Earlier this year, House Republicans forced DC to revert to last year’s funding levels, stripping $1.1 billion from the city budget. In March, the Senate passed a bipartisan fix to restore the funds and give the city stability. But in the House, Speaker Mike Johnson has left the bill untouched for months, despite promising in May to move it “as quickly as possible.”

That budget hole has real consequences: potential police staffing reductions, cuts to housing and public health programs, delayed sanitation services. Starve the city of resources, and you make it easier to paint local leadership as ineffective.

Step two: declare local leaders incapable of keeping the city safe

Into this engineered shortfall, Trump stepped in with his “public safety emergency” declaration. In announcing the federal takeover of DC’s police, he described the city as “unsafe” and “disgusting,” despite data showing that violent crime is falling.

The narrative is what matters, not the numbers. If people believe a city is out of control, they are more likely to accept extraordinary measures—like putting the police under direct presidential control.

Step three: seize control and present it as common sense

Once the fear has been stoked, the next step is to make a power grab seem like a reasonable solution. Federalizing the Metropolitan Police Department is being framed as “bold” and “necessary,” language echoed by House Oversight Chair James Comer. He’s promised congressional hearings with DC leaders and is “advancing legislative solutions” to keep this control in place.

In reality, this is the most aggressive use of presidential power over local policing in modern DC history. And it’s happening while the city’s budget is deliberately being choked by Congress.

The bigger plan: exporting the model to other cities

The real danger is not just what happens in DC—it’s what happens after. If this test balloon floats, it provides a political and legal blueprint for sending troops into other Democratic-led cities.

Here’s how it could work:

Declare a public safety emergency in a target city like Chicago, Philadelphia, or Los Angeles. Use high-profile crimes or skewed crime statistics to justify the move. Invoke the Insurrection Act or similar emergency powers to override state authority. Deploy the National Guard or even federal troops for “temporary” law enforcement support.

Once the precedent is set that federal control over a city’s police is a legitimate response to perceived disorder, it becomes easier to use that tactic in politically strategic locations.

The legal barrier—and how it could be bent

The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of federal military forces in domestic law enforcement, except where authorized by Congress or the Constitution. The Insurrection Act is the most notable exception, allowing the president to use military force to suppress rebellion, enforce federal law, or protect civil rights.

Using DC sidesteps this problem entirely. Because of its status, the president can take over the police without triggering Posse Comitatus. That’s why this move is so concerning: it could be the foundation for arguing that military involvement in civilian policing is acceptable under a broader interpretation of existing laws.

Once that door is cracked open in the capital, the next step is pushing it wider, finding legal pretexts to apply the same model to other cities, especially those governed by political rivals.

The racial and political dynamics

DC is majority-Black and overwhelmingly Democratic. It has no voting representation in Congress and no governor to defend its autonomy. That makes it a low-risk, high-impact target for a political stunt, and a perfect place to test a controversial policy without the immediate blowback a president would face from a state government.

But this is about more than one city. It’s about laying the groundwork for using federal force against political opposition’s strongholds, normalizing a level of military involvement in civilian life that America has long considered a red line.

Historical echoes

To a lesser extent we’ve seen this play out before:

In 1874, Congress abolished DC’s elected government and replaced it with appointed commissioners. In 1968, after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., federal troops patrolled DC’s streets. In 2020, federal forces used aggressive tactics against peaceful protesters in Lafayette Square and then Trump held a Bible upside down. Fitting.

Each time, the justification was “restoring order.” Each time, the precedent for centralized control grew stronger.

The boss-level authoritarian playbook

I’ve discussed before on Cloaking Inequity about how authoritarian regimes consolidate power. They use crises, real or manufactured, to undermine local governance, present themselves as the only solution, and then make extraordinary powers permanent.

Think of this as a boss level in a video game: every move up to now has been practice. This is the real test to see how far the executive can go in taking control of civilian life without sparking nationwide resistance. If they succeed in DC, they “level up” and take the fight to other cities.

The cost to residents

For Washingtonians, the consequences are immediate. Their city’s budget has been gutted. Their police department now answers to a president they did not elect. Local accountability mechanisms, city council oversight, community policing boards, are sidelined.

And for other Americans, the cost may come later, when the tactics being tested in DC are deployed in their own cities under the banner of “restoring order.”

How to stop the Orange Wizard of White House’s balloon from flying

The path forward is straightforward:

-Pass the Senate’s funding restoration bill to return budget control and stability to DC.

-End the federal takeover of the Metropolitan Police Department immediately.

-Advance DC statehood to ensure its residents have the same rights and protections as those in every state.

-Reaffirm the limits of the Posse Comitatus Act so that military involvement in civilian policing remains truly exceptional.

If Americans dismiss this as “just a DC problem,” they’ll miss the point entirely. This is not about one city—it’s about setting the stage for a president to use the military in politically targeted ways against domestic opponents. DC is the test balloon. And if it floats here, it will land somewhere else next.

The only question is where—and whether anyone will be ready to stop it.

Julian Vasquez Heilig is a nationally recognized policy scholar, public intellectual, and civil rights advocate. A trusted voice in public policy, he has testified for state legislatures, the U.S. Congress, the United Nations, and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, while also advising presidential and gubernatorial campaigns. His work has been cited by major outlets including The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times, and he has appeared on networks from MSNBC and PBS to NPR and DemocracyNow!. He is a recipient of more than 30 honors, including the 2025 NAACP Keeper of the Flame Award, Vasquez Heilig brings both scholarly rigor and grassroots commitment to the fight for equity and justice.