In August, President Trump stated that crime in Washington, D.C., is “out of control.” He expressed concerns regarding public safety, stating it jeopardizes public servants, residents, tourists, and even disrupts the functioning of the federal government. To address these issues, he described a city plagued by “blood, carnage, filth, and worse” and issued an Executive Order that declared a state of emergency. This order also authorized the Metropolitan Police Department’s takeover and called in the National Guard to help restore order.
Just under two months later, President Trump announced, “We now have a very safe city.” A spokesperson from the White House maintained that crime has dramatically decreased, claiming that compared to the same period in 2024, overall crime has dropped by 17 percent, murders by 50 percent, assaults with deadly weapons by 16 percent, and robberies by 22 percent.
Among the eight states that sent troops to D.C., five have already set dates for withdrawal: Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, West Virginia, and Ohio. The others are also expected to leave shortly, while an extended order for over 900 D.C. National Guard members runs through December.
But was it really a success?
“We need months of data to draw any conclusions,” commented crime analyst Jeff Asher. “If crime was already decreasing before the intervention and continued to drop afterward, what does that imply?”
Let’s consider some data that the White House hasn’t highlighted. Last year, Washington’s violent crime rates had hit a 30-year low. This downward trend continued, with violent crime decreasing by 26 percent and homicides by 13 percent in the first half of 2024 compared to the previous year.
In the weeks leading up to the executive order, violent crimes involving firearms saw a decline as well. Initially, there were about seven violent crimes reported daily. By mid-August, that average dropped to 5 or 6, but by the end of September, it had risen back to 7.
The National Guard could make arrests, yet Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated they wouldn’t engage in law enforcement. Pentagon spokesman Kingsley Wilson confirmed this by saying, “We’re not going to arrest people.”
During the first 13 days of operations, approximately 550 arrests occurred, with 527 made by Metropolitan Police officers. Among those detained, 225 were illegal immigrants and three were suspected gang members.
A significant portion of the arrests—about a quarter—were categorized as “other,” according to District 8 Councilman Trayon White (D), who noted that many of those detained were undocumented and faced minor charges.
Interestingly, many National Guard activities seemed disconnected from crime prevention. Their responsibilities included providing support to the MPD while patrolling various areas, sometimes carrying weapons but also engaging in community work like cleaning public spaces and running soup kitchens. For instance, they disposed of over 1,000 bags of trash and cleared significant amounts of debris.
Mayor Muriel Bowser (D), who was not consulted before Trump’s executive order, criticized the deployment, asserting it was not the best use of resources.
Virginia Berger, a senior defense policy analyst, pointed out the high costs associated with this operation. Internal budget documents indicate that the initiative could cost approximately $1.8 million daily for National Guard personnel, covering wages, accommodations, and other expenses.
While annual funding for the National Guard has decreased, their missions typically involve assisting during disasters or quelling riots, as Maj. Gen. Greg Porter noted. Trump’s deployment challenges the National Guard’s ability to stay “trained, equipped, and ready to meet our nation’s demands.”
One commentator estimated that the daily cost of this “invasion” of Washington was equivalent to a quarter of the nightly cost of running public housing for homeless individuals, suggesting that investing in public housing can reduce crime and improve health and education outcomes.
So, the reasons for not deploying the National Guard to combat crime include cost, efficient resource allocation, and the democratic principle of keeping military involvement out of domestic issues, a tradition upheld since 1894.
Another consideration is this: Even if President Trump is correct that D.C. is now safer, what happens when the troops leave? How can we prevent the city from reverting to “crime, bloodshed, carnage, squalor, and worse” once the National Guard departs?
