The Trump administration has ordered National Guard personnel patrolling Washington DC to be armed, escalating its crackdown on crime in the nation’s capital.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced on Friday that the troops, who were deployed earlier this month under the president’s orders, will now carry their service-issued weapons “consistent with their mission and training.”
The decision marks a sharp shift from just last week, when both the Pentagon and U.S. Army had said the nearly 2,000 troops deployed to the city would not be armed. Officials emphasized then that the mission was intended as a visible deterrent, not an active law enforcement role.
President Donald Trump took the unusual step of ordering National Guard troops into the capital in early August, also seizing control of the city’s Metropolitan Police Department. He argued that Washington was suffering from “out of control” crime and required federal intervention. “DC was a hellhole,” Trump said on Friday in the Oval Office, adding that his deployment had restored “total safety” to the city. He also suggested the strategy could be expanded to Chicago, another Democratic-led city.
Despite the administration’s praise, the move has sparked widespread backlash. Washington’s Democratic mayor, Muriel Bowser, has so far not commented on the decision to arm troops. But local officials have repeatedly said crime in the city has been decreasing. Bowser pointed earlier this year to statistics showing violent crime at its lowest point in three decades.
Polling also reflects sharp opposition. A Washington Post–Schar School survey released this week found nearly 80% of DC residents oppose the deployment of both National Guard soldiers and federal law enforcement officers. Many respondents also rejected the administration’s takeover of the Metropolitan Police Department, a move critics argue undermines local self-governance.
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson was quick to push back against Trump’s suggestion that his city might also see troops on its streets. In a statement, Johnson said the White House had not shared any information with him about a potential deployment and blasted the idea as “uncoordinated, uncalled for, and unsound.” He warned that an “unlawful deployment” could inflame tensions between residents and law enforcement and jeopardize progress in reducing crime.
Despite criticism, the Trump administration has pressed ahead. Attorney General Pam Bondi said on X that the DC operation has already led to more than 700 arrests, including 40 on Thursday alone, and the seizure of 91 illegal firearms. Trump also announced plans to ask Congress for $2 billion to “beautify the city,” following an earlier Republican-led budget cut that slashed Washington’s spending by $1.1 billion.
For now, National Guard personnel have not directly participated in law enforcement actions. Instead, they have been stationed near landmarks such as Union Station and the National Mall. Whether arming them signals a shift in their mission remains unclear.
Trump hinted that the operation could extend beyond its current 30-day authorization. He said he is considering declaring a national emergency once the deadline expires, which would allow him to keep troops in the capital indefinitely. “If I have a national emergency, I can keep the troops here as long as I want,” he told reporters.
The deployment has also received backing from several Republican-led states, including South Carolina and West Virginia, which contributed additional Guard units to the effort. Yet the fundamental debate continues: whether federal intervention has improved public safety or worsened tensions in a city where most residents see the presence of armed troops as an unnecessary show of force.
As the situation develops, the arming of the National Guard in Washington DC underscores both the growing scale of the administration’s crime crackdown and the political fault lines it has opened across the country.
Leo Cruz brings sharp insights into the world of politics, offering balanced reporting and analysis on the latest policies, elections, and global political events. With years of experience covering campaigns and interviewing world leaders, Leo ensures readers are always informed and engaged.
