Mary O'Leary explores the increasing militarisation of America under Donald Trump's presidency.
As of August 11th, 2025, President Trump declared the United States capital, Washington D.C.,
to be in a state of crime emergency, sending over 2,200 soldiers to be stationed across the city. In
the first month the White House reported a total of 1,669 arrests, many of them due to
immigration related crimes. Following this stream of arrests Trump declared the crime
emergency to have finally ended, however these troops continue to be stationed within the
American capitol with no report of leaving.
Washington D.C. is not the only American city to have had troops deployed, with cities like Los
Angeles and Memphis also receiving troops. In response to the threat of deployment by Trump,
other cities such as Chicago held large protests in early September, with the Governor of Illinois,
JB Pritzker and the Chicago Mayor, Brandon Johnson also pushing back against the president.
In retaliation, Governor Pritzker wrote on X, “This is not normal. Donald Trump isn’t a
strongman, he’s a scared man. Illinois won’t be intimidated by a wannabe dictator.”
As recently as September 27th , Trump has announced the deployment of troops to Portland,
Oregon. This deployment comes after mass protests against ICE in which the President claims
their facilities have been “under siege by antifascists and other terrorists”. Unlike the troops sent
to Washington and Memphis, these soldiers are being sent specifically to take control of the
widespread protests in the city. This reasoning mirrors the basis for which troops were sent to
Los Angeles; to quell the pushback against ICE and Trump’s administration.
Though defended by the Trump administration as a strategy to decrease crime within these cities,
the deployment of troops has also occurred with the specific intention to quell those who protest
against the president and ICE. Though deployment has garnered criticism from fellow politicians
there has been no significant action from either the Legislative branch or the Supreme Court
questioning the legality of the president’s actions.
Under American law, Congress has the main authority to deploy the nation's military, not the
President. There are notable ways to get around this however, such as the Insurrection Act which
allows the president to deploy troops to quell insurrections and rebellions.
President Trump, however, has not invoked the Insurrection Act, instead citing the 1903 law 10
U.S.C. § 12406 which allows for the president to call upon the National Guard if, “a rebellion or
danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States,” or if, “the
President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”
In the past both the Insurrection Act and Section 12406 have acted in tandem with one another,
with Section 12406 rarely being used without enacting the Insurrection Act as well. It is unclear
why Trump has decided to solely enact Section 12406 or if he is opposed to using the
Insurrection Act in the future.
That being said, even if both laws were to be enacted, the president’s reasoning for deployment
does not meet the requirements articulated by the American Department of Justice for using
federal forces to quell unrest. For this reason, the deployment of troops across the United States
is truly unprecedented, especially when they are being used to quell protests and crime instead of
insurrection.
There has been legal pushback however, specifically within the nation's capital. As recently as
this past Thursday, September 25 th , a lawsuit was filed against the organization Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE) for the illegal arrests of Latino immigrants in Washington DC. The
lawsuit was filed by four D.C. residents and the Maryland-based immigration rights’
organization CASA.
Spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security, Tricia McLaughlin responded to the
lawsuit stating, “What makes someone a target for immigration enforcement is if they are
illegally in the U.S. — NOT their skin color, race, or ethnicity. DHS law enforcement uses
‘reasonable suspicion’ to make arrests. There are no ‘indiscriminate stops’ being made.”
This response however is at odds with the recent Supreme Court Noem v. Perdomo, which
allows for ICE to make arrests based on factors such as race, ethnicity, language use, location,
and type of employment. The soldiers deployed to protect ICE facilities and the Trump
administration themselves, have given ICE increasingly more jurisdiction over the people they
arrest, with acts like Noem v. Perdomo protecting them from legal retaliation.
The legality of both Trump’s deployment of troops and the wide range of arrests made by ICE
are still to be settled within the American courts. How far both organizations wish to go against
immigration and how much power they will eventually be allotted is still up for debate. What is
unquestionable however, is that the power of the Trump administration and ICE is still growing
at rapid speeds without any sign of stopping in the near future.