Trump’s claim that he is “federalizing” the District of Columbia is another in a long line of grievous injuries to the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic norms. Despite its gravity, it is a political stunt. D.C. is, by definition, “federalized.” Trump, by law, controls the D.C. National Guard. Forcing members of the FBI and DEA to “patrol” the National Mall, serving as live-action photo opportunities, is simultaneously humiliating and menacing.
There is a lot of ground to cover on Trump’s “federalization” of D.C., but let’s cut to the chase.
Trump’s federalization of D.C. to “crack down” on historically low crime rates is all the following, and more:
A sign of weakness and fear
A failed distraction from the Epstein scandal
Motivated by racial animus
Factually unnecessary because of record-low crime rates
Proof positive that Trump had the authority to deploy the D.C. National Guard on January 6 without waiting for anyone else to approve or agree
As usual, the press grasped and swatted at the bright shiny object that Trump dangled in front of their eyes, burying the disastrous press conference Trump held on Monday, which should have resulted in the invocation of the 25th Amendment by the Cabinet.
The legacy media ran Joe Biden out of town because the man with a speech disability could not keep up with the vomitous lies by Trump during a debate. But on Monday, Trump twice claimed he was going to meet with Putin “in Russia” later this week. Of course, Trump is meeting with Putin in Alaska, which everyone (except apparently Trump) knows is a US state. See Rex Huppke, Newsweek, Opinion: Nobody knows what Trump is talking about anymore, and no one seems to care.
Huppke describes the news conference as follows:
For starters, on two occasions, Trump told reporters he would be meeting in days with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Russia. The meeting will be held in Alaska, which, unless Trump has given away one of America’s states to Putin, is very much not in Russia.
But whatever the cause, hearing the president ramble incoherently during a nationally televised news conference on Monday, Aug. 11, left no doubt: The man’s brain has turned to oatmeal.
Read Huppke’s op-ed for more details, but, sadly, you know what the details look and sound like. While it gets old saying this, I must: “Imagine if Joe Biden had made the same mistakes.”
I have imagined that scenario and believe that the Editorial Board of the New York Times would have staged a sit-down protest in the Oval Office until Joe Biden was forcibly removed from the White House. But do not expect the Immortals at the NYTimes to hold Trump to any standard of coherence or cogency, much less the exacting standard they applied to Joe Biden.
So, during an unhinged, incoherent press conference, the only convicted felon to serve as president declared an emergency because D.C. was allegedly being overrun with criminals, including, especially, himself. He used the non-existent crime wave to justify sending DC National Guard troops, FBI agents, and DEA agents to walk the streets of Washington, D.C.
An essay in The Atlantic by Quinta Jurecic lays bare the weakness that underlies Trump’s attempt to invade a city that is controlled by Congress and the president. See Quinta Jurecic, The Atlantic, Trump’s D.C. Deployment Is a Show of Weakness.
Per Jerecic,
The inciting incident for this particular round of repression was the attempted carjacking last week of Edward Coristine, better known as Big Balls, a 19-year-old member of Elon Musk’s DOGE inner circle. This sent Trump into a frenzy. “Crime in Washington, D.C., is totally out of control,” he wrote on Truth Social. “I am going to exert my powers, and FEDERALIZE this City.”
Jereric notes three reasons why the federalization of D.C. is a sign of weakness:
First, violent crime in the District, including carjackings, has declined dramatically from its post-pandemic highs to the lowest rate in 30 years.
Second, if Trump is deeply concerned about safety in D.C., why did his Department of Homeland Security slash federal security funding for the city almost in half in recent months?
And third, the president cannot unilaterally “federalize” the city. D.C. is under the direct authority of the federal government, but the Home Rule Act of 1973 provides the city with significant control over its own affairs—something that can be removed only by an act of Congress.
For a deeper dive into the (il)legal basis for Trump’s use of National Guard troops in D.C., see Steve Vladeck’s excellent essay in Substack, One First, “Federalizing” D.C.
Vladeck traces the history of D.C.'s various forms of governance, ending with the Home Rule Act, which is the basis for D.C.’s semi-autonomous home rule under the watchful eye of Congress and the president.
Pertinent to today’s announcement is the fact that Trump is, by statute, the direct commander of the D.C. National Guard, obviating any need to “federalize” the Guard.
Per Vladeck,
Second, although D.C. has its own National Guard, the Guard is commanded not by the Mayor . . . but by the President. . . . That means not only that the D.C. National Guard is always under the President’s direct control, . . . the D.C. National Guard can therefore be used for federal missions without being federalized—which would mean they could be used for ordinary law enforcement purposes without violating the Posse Comitatus Act.
The Home Rule Act also authorizes the president to take control of the D.C. police “whenever [he] determines that special conditions of an emergency nature exist which require the use of the Metropolitan Police force for federal purposes.”
But the ability to take control of the D.C. Metropolitan Police is time-limited in the absence of Congressional approval. Again, per Vladeck,
The authority is limited to no more than 30 days . . . And even within those 30 days, the authority is simply to use the MPD “for federal purposes.”
In short, putting aside the absence of an emergency, Trump has the statutory authority to take the steps he announced on Monday.
But whether a true emergency exists is open to debate. Indeed, that question is the subject of a trial in federal court this week before US District Court Judge David Bryer. See ABC News, Trial begins on whether deployment of National Guard to Los Angeles violated federal law.
For a detailed discussion of the Newsom v. Trump trial, see Jay Kuo, The Posse Comitatus Trial. As discussed in Jay Kuo’s article, the Los Angeles deployment of the National Guard does not present the same issues as the D.C. “federalization,” but at root, Trump used a similar gambit: he declared a fake emergency to justify the use of federal troops for law enforcement actions.
As in the Los Angeles deployment, there is a strong element of racism motivating the “crackdown” on crime. During Trump’s incoherent press conference, he threatened to “federalize” other US cities as well, including Baltimore, Chicago, and Oakland. Again, per Jurecic in The Atlantic,
These cities, like D.C., all have Black mayors and significant Black populations—and, for that matter, falling crime rates—but, unlike the capital, they are protected by blue-state governments with significant authority to push back against the president.
Trump omitted five of the “top ten” high-crime-rate cities in his threat, all in red states: Memphis, Little Rock, Cleveland, Birmingham, and Kansas City. Apparently, for Trump, crime only matters when it is committed in cities in Democratic states.
Everything about Trump’s alleged “federalization” of D.C. is a lie designed to distract and mollify his restive base. In the meantime, he continues to anger more Americans with each assault on American cities that are populated by Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and unregistered potential voters in 2026 and 2028.
If the volume and temperature of the emails I received from readers today is any indication, Trump’s invasion of D.C. was another big mistake borne of desperation and fear over his falling favorability ratings. We can’t count on Trump to lead Republicans to defeat in 2026, but we can certainly capitalize on his mistakes.
Judge denies release of grand jury transcripts for Ghislaine Maxwell indictment
U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer issued a scathing opinion denying Trump’s request to release the grand jury transcripts in the indictment of Ghislaine Maxwell. Indeed, the judge called the request a “distraction” that had no support in fact or law. See NPR, Judge denies release of Ghislaine Maxwell grand jury transcripts.
Per NPR, Judge Engelmayer made clear that there was no good-faith reason to request the release of the grand jury transcripts. Per NPR,
“Its entire premise — that the Maxwell grand jury materials would bring to light meaningful new information about Epstein’s and Maxwell’s crimes, or the Government’s investigation into them — is demonstrably false,” Engelmayer wrote.
He said the materials provide no new insight into Epstein or Maxwell clients, nor new information about the venue, new sources of their wealth, or the circumstances of Epstein’s death.
“There is no ‘there’ there,” the judge added.
Once again, federal district court judges are serving as a first line of defense to Trump’s lawlessness. Although appellate courts and the Supreme Court have handed Trump some wins by reversing the rulings of the District Court judges, the fact that federal courts continued to hold the line against Trump’s lawlessness is encouraging. When we take back Congress and the presidency, the federal district courts will be allies in the rehabilitation of democracy.
Of course he did. Trump extends deadline for tariffs on goods imported from China
Reminder: Trump has no authority to impose tariffs on goods imported from other countries. The US is currently operating under a “truce” in which goods imported from China are taxed at a rate of 55%. Those tariffs were scheduled to increase to 145% on Tuesday, August 12, 2025. Both the current rate and the proposed rate are illegal and unconstitutional.
See, generally, The Hill, Trump extends China tariff truce for 90 days.
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals should issue an opinion shortly on an appeal from the US Court of International Trade’s ruling that held Trump’s tariffs violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.
The Federal Circuit should rule that Trump’s tariffs are illegal and that the billions collected from American businesses must be returned. Trump will, of course, appeal to the US Supreme Court. I have no confidence that the US Supreme Court will correctly apply the Constitution to the facts before it, but if it does, the US will be required to repay hundreds of billions of dollars illegally taken from US companies.
Trump replaces fired Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner with a political hack.
Trump fired the chief labor statistician, Erika McEntarfer, after the August report showed weak employment numbers over the last three months. Trump has nominated EJ Antoni as the chief labor statistician for the Bureau of Labor Statistics. See NYTimes, Trump Names EJ Antoni New BLS Commissioner.
Antoni is leaving his job at the arch-conservative Heritage Foundation, where he specialized in generating economic propaganda that had only a passing acquaintance with economic reality. In other words, he is a perfect candidate to create fake reports about the imaginary performance of the US economy.
It is rare for members of a profession to criticize one another bluntly. But Antoni is apparently so partisan that he has drawn withering criticism from respected members of the economic community. See Huffington Post, Trump Taps BLS Skeptic To Replace Leader He Fired Over Grim Jobs Report.
Per HuffPo,
Jason Furman, a top economic adviser in Barack Obama’s White House who is now an economics professor at Harvard University, was highly critical of Antoni’s nomination.
“I don’t think I have ever publicly criticized any Presidential nominee before. But E.J. Antoni is completely unqualified to be BLS Commissioner,” he wrote on social media. “He is an extreme partisan and does not have any relevant expertise. He would be a break from decades of nonpartisan technocrats.”
Concluding Thoughts
Trump’s announcement regarding the federalization of Washington, D.C., touched a nerve with the readers of this newsletter. Throughout the day on Monday, I received dozens of emails that were unusually angry and disgusted—and that’s saying a lot! There was a similar reaction when Trump federalized California National Guard troops to protect federal buildings in Los Angeles. Americans really do not like the sight of military personnel patrolling American cities.
Let’s hope that Americans turn out in even greater numbers to support the residents of D.C. They have been abused for two centuries by being denied equal representation in Congress. The District of Columbia should be a state with its own governor, legislature, and representatives in the House and Senate, rather than being subject to veto by Congress and military control by the president.
Like all bullies, Trump chooses victims he believes are weak. On Monday, he incorrectly concluded that the people of D.C. will quietly accept streets filled with National Guard members and FBI agents. Trump is wrong. Instead, he will see streets filled with thousands of patriotic Americans rising to defend the rule of law and the Constitution—joined by hundreds of thousands of Americans marching in solidarity.
Talk to you tomorrow!
Daily Dose of Perspective
The moon is still filling the night sky with reflected sunlight, so I took images of other bright objects—clusters of stars. These “globular” clusters are by far the most common night sky objects. But because they tend to look the same and have no color, most astrophotographers focus on the other deep sky objects, like nebulae and galaxies, that are more dramatic.
The clusters are densely packed and gravitationally bound.
Below, the Hercules Cluster (M13), 22,000 light-years from Earth:
M92, which is 26,000 light years from Earth:
Finally, M71, which is 13,000 light years from Earth:
From Today’s Edition Newsletter via this RSS feed
You must log in or # to comment.