Washington D.C.’s attorney general, Brian Schwalb, has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, claiming that the deployment of National Guard troops in the nation’s capital is an illegal and unconstitutional use of military power. Schwalb argues that the military presence violates the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of armed forces in domestic law enforcement, and threatens the democratic principles of self-governance and civil liberties.
The lawsuit comes amid a growing controversy over the Trump administration’s use of federal law enforcement in D.C. After President Donald Trump federalized the city’s Metropolitan Police Department on August 11 under the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth authorized the deployment of armed troops to D.C., raising concerns about the legality and impact of the military’s involvement in local policing.
According to Schwalb, 2,300 National Guard troops are currently on the streets of Washington, D.C. in military gear, carrying weapons, and driving armored vehicles, which he describes as a clear violation of the law and a threat to public trust. He has accused the Trump administration of violating the Posse Comitatus Act and operating National Guard units under direct military command without legal authorization.
Schwalb’s legal action follows a recent court ruling that found the administration’s use of federal troops in Los Angeles during immigration-related protests was illegal, which has drawn support from Democratic officials like California Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass. The lawsuit is also part of a broader struggle between federal and local authorities over the power of the executive branch to control law enforcement in D.C., with Schwalb arguing that the city’s home rule has been effectively undermined by the federal takeover.
Despite claims that the 30-day federalization of D.C.’s police department is set to expire, Vice President JD Vance recently suggested that the mission may continue, which would require Congressional approval for an extension. Schwalb has warned that without a clear end date, the National Guard’s continued presence threatens not only the city’s freedoms but also its economic vitality, as the military involvement is said to be depressing critical industries like restaurants, hotels, and tourism.
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson has defended the administration’s actions, stating that Trump is well within his legal rights to deploy National Guard troops to protect federal assets and assist law enforcement with specific tasks. She has dismissed the lawsuit as another move by opponents to undermine the President’s crime-fighting efforts in D.C.
The legal battle has sparked a national debate over the role of the military in domestic affairs and the balance between security and civil liberties. As the case unfolds, it is likely to have significant implications for how future administrations interact with local law enforcement and the use of the National Guard in domestic situations.