Can Trump call the National Guard into Chicago too?

Summary

---

Consider This from NPR

Episode: Can Trump call the National Guard into Chicago too?
Date: August 26, 2025
Host: Ailsa Chang
Guest: Steve Vladek (Georgetown University law professor)
Episode Length: ~11 minutes of core content

---

Brief Overview

This episode examines President Trump's recent deployments of the National Guard in Washington, D.C., the legal authority underpinning such actions, and whether he could extend those deployments to other cities, like Chicago. Drawing on expert legal commentary and reactions from local residents and officials, the episode explores the tension between federal action and local control, the historical context for military involvement in domestic law enforcement, and the complex legal landscape shaping these contentious moves.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The Situation in Washington, D.C.

• Deployment Details: For over two weeks, 2,000+ National Guard troops have patrolled Washington, D.C., now under arms.
  • "[The] National Guard now carrying weapons on patrol in Washington, D.C. the move marking a major escalation..." — Steve Vladek [00:16]
• Presidential Framing: President Trump has declared a "crime emergency," calling for harsh penalties and heightened federal presence.
  • "On Tuesday, he called for the death penalty for those who commit murder in Washington." — Ailsa Chang [00:24]
• D.C. Residents' View: Local perspectives reveal skepticism about both the necessity and the president's motives:
  • "I think that he wants to destroy the Democratic Party... He knows that he can go into these cities that runs by a Democrat and control it..." — Justina Wilkins Jordan [00:45]
  • "I would say President Trump, sit down and listen. It's not all about you and the Republicans. You can't control the world. I feel... he definitely want[s] to be a dictator." — Justina Wilkins Jordan [01:25]
  • "I think the idea that this is some, like, state of emergency that we're living in, it's not how I feel and I don't think it's how the people that we know here feel." — Ryan Wong [01:57]
• Crime Statistics: Despite political narrative, violent crime is at a 30-year low in D.C. (Justice Department stats, 2024).
• Public Opinion: Nearly 8 in 10 residents oppose the executive order federalizing D.C. law enforcement (Washington Post poll). [02:07]

2. Could Trump Send the National Guard Into Other Cities?

• Trump’s Suggestion: Openly considering sending National Guard troops to cities like Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Baltimore, and Oakland, citing crime. [02:25]
• Local Response: Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson sharply rejects the possibility:
  • "The city of Chicago is not calling for American troops to occupy American cities. It's not democratic. It's unconstitutional. It's illegal and costly." — Brandon Johnson [02:45]

3. The Legal Framework — Steve Vladek Explains

• Unique Authority in D.C.:
  • "With regard to the D.C. National Guard ... The president is always the commander in chief ... He can use them at any time. He doesn't need anyone's permission." — Steve Vladek [04:44]
• Out-of-State National Guard Deployments:
  • Red-state governors have sent their Guard troops to D.C. using a little-known 2006 law — an untested approach. [04:44]
• Limits Outside D.C.:
  • "In other states ... the only way President Trump could directly command the National Guard would be to formally federalize it... And that would expose whatever he would try to, I think, a significant risk of litigation." — Steve Vladek [05:52]
• Federalization Without Local Consent:
  • Citing the Insurrection Act (since 1807), the president can sometimes send troops without a governor’s consent, but usually only in specific emergency circumstances (e.g., protecting federal property, inability of local authorities to enforce laws).
  • "What President Trump did earlier this year in California was based on his assertion that the federal forces were necessary to defend federal property and federal personnel..." — Steve Vladek [06:49]

4. Legal Challenges and Arguments

• Potential Court Arguments: Cities/states may challenge federalization by asserting:
  • The factual basis for a federal intervention doesn’t exist.
  • Even if federalization is lawful, using Guard troops for routine law enforcement may not be, except for securing federal property or officers.
  • When red-state Guard units are sent into other states under the 2006 law, the consent of the receiving governor may be legally required.
  • "You have to have the consent of the receiving state governor, or else you have a massive violation of the equality of state's rights under the Constitution." — Steve Vladek [08:44]

5. Historical Context: Military vs. Law Enforcement

• Historical Reluctance: Founders sought to maintain a "wall" between the military and policing civilians, rooted in abuses under British rule.
  • "One of the charges against King George III... was that he was using the military to effectively supplant civilian rule in the colonies." — Steve Vladek [09:08]
• Rare Applications: The Insurrection Act has been used sparingly; last deployment was in LA during 1992 Rodney King riots.
  • "For President Trump to cross that line... is not just challenging those legal precedents. It really is challenging the very, very strong norm we have in this country that we don't have the military doing law enforcement." — Steve Vladek [09:08]

6. Can Trump Leave Troops in D.C. Indefinitely?

• Statutory Reality: As laws stand, little exists to curb a president from maintaining an emergency or extended troop presence in D.C.; Congress granted significant power over the nation’s capital.
  • "For better or for worse, and I would argue for worse, Congress has given the President an awful lot of power over the District of Columbia." — Steve Vladek [10:35]
• Key Takeaway: D.C. is constitutionally and legally an outlier; what’s permitted there does not automatically apply to other cities.
  • "Just because we're getting conditioned ... doesn't mean we should feel the same if you see that in, you know, Times Square or Grant Park." — Steve Vladek [11:07]

---

Memorable Quotes & Notable Moments

• "I think that he wants to destroy the Democratic Party. He knows that he can go into these cities that runs by a Democrat and control it..."
  — Justina Wilkins Jordan (D.C. resident), [00:45]
• "The city of Chicago is not calling for American troops to occupy American cities. It's not democratic. It's unconstitutional. It's illegal and costly."
  — Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, [02:45]
• "In D.C. the National Guard has much broader power ... In other states ... the only way President Trump could directly command the National Guard would be to formally federalize it."
  — Steve Vladek, [05:35]
• "Congress has given the President an awful lot of power over the District of Columbia ... reflecting a series of historical and structural quirks about the nation's capital."
  — Steve Vladek, [10:35]
• "We don't have the military doing law enforcement."
  — Steve Vladek, [09:08]

---

Key Timestamps

• 00:00–02:25 — Resident and mayoral perspectives on federal intervention and public feeling in D.C. and Chicago
• 04:44–06:15 — Steve Vladek explains legal authority behind National Guard deployment in D.C. vs. other states
• 06:49–08:58 — Discussion of legal hurdles and challenges for deploying Guard in states without consent, Insurrection Act context
• 09:08–11:07 — Historical context, why the US keeps a separation between military and police, the implications of current actions
• 10:35–11:07 — The difference between D.C. and other cities; limits of presidential power outside the capital

---

Conclusion

This episode provides a nuanced, legally grounded look at the Trump administration’s National Guard deployments, highlighting resistance from cities and examining the significant constitutional and historical barriers to federal military involvement in local law enforcement. Steve Vladek’s insights stress that what’s permissible in D.C. is not easily transferable elsewhere, and broad presidential authority remains checked by law, norms, and, potentially, legal challenges. The episode closes by underlining the importance of staying alert to the distinction between D.C. and other U.S. cities regarding federal intervention.

---

Transcript

[Ailsa Chang]

For over two weeks, members of the National Guard have been walking the Streets of Washington, D.C. alongside federal law enforcement and local police. And as of a few days ago, the more than 2,000 National Guard troops in D.C. were authorized to carry weapons.

[Steve Vladek]

Breaking overnight, members of the National Guard now carrying weapons on patrol in Washington, D.C. the move marking a major escalation in President.

[Ailsa Chang]

It's all part of the federal crime. On what President Trump calls a, quote, crime emergency in the nation's capital. He's only escalated that rhetoric over the last two weeks. On Tuesday, he called for the death penalty for those who commit murder in Washington. Many residents in D.C. where there hasn't been an execution in over half a century, aren't buying it.

[Justina Wilkins Jordan]

I think that he wants to destroy the Democratic Party. He knows that he can go into these cities that runs by a Democrat and control it and say, hey, we don't need Democrats. They are not doing effective, effective job.

[Ailsa Chang]

Justina Wilkins Jordan lives in D.C. s Deanwood neighborhood where she says she does hear of shootings, violent fights and drug transactions and she would like to see more law enforcement on the streets. But she has not seen any federal officers in her neighborhood and doesn't trust the president's motives here. She spoke to NPR's Frank Langford.

[Unnamed Resident]

If President Trump were sitting in this chair right now, what would you tell him?

[Justina Wilkins Jordan]

I would say President Trump, sit down and listen. It's not all about you and the Republicans. You can't control the world. I feel that right now, the reason why he's doing it because he definitely want to be a dictator.

[Ailsa Chang]

Now, crime obviously does occur in Washington, D.C. but recent Justice Department statistics show that violent crime in the city hit a three decade low in 2024. Ryan Wong, who lives in the city's U Street neighborhood, says this summer doesn't feel any more violent or dangerous than any other summer.

[Ryan Wong]

I think the idea that this is some, like, state of emergency that we're living in, it's not how I feel and I don't think it's how the people that we know here feel.

[Ailsa Chang]

Nearly 8 in 10 people in Washington oppose Trump's executive order to federalize law enforcement in the city, according to a recent poll by the Washington Post. And yet President Trump has openly suggested that he will send the National Guard into other cities, citing high crime.

[Unnamed Resident]

You look at Chicago, how bad it is. You look at Los Angeles, how bad it is. We have other cities that are very bad. New York has a problem. And then you have, of course, Baltimore and Oakland.

[Ailsa Chang]

On NPR's Morning Edition, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson rejected Trump's threats to deploy the National Guard to his city.

[Brandon Johnson]

Community safety is my number one issue. The city of Chicago is not calling for American troops to occupy American cities. It's not democratic. It's unconstitutional. It's illegal and costly.

[Ailsa Chang]

Consider this the Trump administration says it may deploy the National Guard to other Cities Beyond Washington, D.C. can the president legally do that? From NPR I'm Ailsa Changing.

[NPR Announcer]

Support for.

[Jay Kalik]

This podcast and the following message come from Made in Cookware President and co founder Jay Kalik shares the key ingredients that go into Made in products.

We try to design products that are going to last you an incredibly long time. And to know that we're making this in places that take the raw material seriously, take the manufacturing processes seriously, that's ultimately what's going to allow us to sleep better at night selling this product to you.

Learn more about Made in Cookware at M a d e I-n cookware.com this.

[NPR Announcer]

Message comes from NPR's sponsor, Shopify. No idea where to sell? Shopify puts you in control of every sales channel. It is the commerce platform revolutionizing millions of businesses worldwide. Whether you're a garage entrepreneur or IPO ready, Shopify is the only tool you need to start, run and grow your business without the struggle. Once you've reached your audience, Shopify has the Internet's best converting checkout to help you turn them from browsers to buyers. Go to shopify.comshopify to take your business to the next level. Today.

[Ailsa Chang]

It'S Consider this from npr. One common question that keeps coming up as the National Guard patrols the nation's capital is how, on what legal basis can the Trump administration do this? Well, Steve Vladek, a Georgetown University law professor, answers that question for us.

[Steve Vladek]

I mean, so there really are two different authorities he's relying upon with regard to the D.C. national Guard folks who are here in D.C. all year. The president is always the commander in chief of the D.C. national Guard. He can use them at any time. He doesn't need anyone's permission. But he's also relied upon out of state National Guard troops that have been sent by a bunch of red state governors under a really obscure and not well tested authority that was enacted by Congress in 2006, it's really that authority that's a much bigger deal. If President Trump really does try to take the show on the road.

[Ailsa Chang]

And Trump has said that his decision to deploy any National Guard troops is to fight crime, even though D.C. police data shows a double digit drop in violent crime rates the last few years. What is the National Guard allowed to do when it comes to local crime?

[Steve Vladek]

This is where things get really, really sticky because of the uniqueness of D.C. in D.C. the National Guard has much broader power than it has almost anywhere else in the country. Because in D.C. it is always federal, it's always active under the command and control of President.

[Ailsa Chang]

Right.

[Steve Vladek]

In other states, in California, in Illinois, in New York, the only way President Trump could directly command the National Guard would be to formally federalize it. And that depends upon President Trump finding various things to be true on the ground that also don't appear to be true on the ground. And that would expose whatever he would try to, I think, a significant risk of litigation.

[Ailsa Chang]

Okay, what happens to the president's authority to federalize the National Guard in parts of the country outside of D.C. when there is local pushback, like here in Los Angeles, where I am all the pushback from the mayor here and the governor did not stop Trump from federalizing the California National Guard and sending active duty Marines into LA earlier this year. And now Trump is saying more cities like Baltimore, like Chicago are next. But mayors of both of those cities and the governors there are saying no. So what allows the president to disregard the wishes of those officials?

[Steve Vladek]

Federal law since at least 1807 has allowed the president in some circumstances to send troops in to states whether or not the governor consents. And, you know, we saw that put to good use a lot during the civil rights movement, for example, when President Eisenhower sent troops into Little Rock, Arkansas, to, you know, desegregate Central High School. The tricky part here is that what President Trump did earlier this year in California was based on his assertion that the federal forces were necessary to defend federal property and federal personnel to witness ICE officers who are going on raids in Los Angeles. He needs that kind of a target. He needs that kind of a sort of predicate. Or some broader argument that local civilian authorities have been unable to enforce the laws on the books before the law would allow him to federalize, say, the Illinois National Guard and send it into Chicago.

[Ailsa Chang]

What specific legal arguments could city and state leaders make to challenge the Trump administration in court?

[Steve Vladek]

So, you know, again, I think there are two different authorities he could use in these arguments will depend upon which one it is. So if President Trump tries to federalize, let's say again, the Illinois National Guard, just as one example, one of the arguments will be that the factual predicates for federalization are not present, that, you know, he didn't have the authority because there was Just no need for it. Another argument, and one we've seen in the California case already, is that even if President Trump has the authority to federalize the Illinois National Guard, he doesn't have the authority to send them into the streets to do ordinary law enforcement, that they can only do limited missions like protecting federal property or federal officers. If it's the other authority, if it is the, you know, weird 2006 statute that allows state governors to send their national Guards at their own volition into other states.

[Ailsa Chang]

Yeah.

[Steve Vladek]

To support a, quote, federal mission, unquote, then I think the arguments are going to be that you have to have the consent of the receiving state governor, or else you have a massive violation of the equality of states rights under the Constitution.

[Ailsa Chang]

Well, just historically speaking for context here, explain why the US has always tried to draw some clear lines between the military and domestic law enforcement.

[Steve Vladek]

Yeah, I mean, if we go all the way back to the founding of this country, you know, one of the charges against King George III that was leveled in the Declaration of Independence was that he was using, you know, the military to effectively supplant civilian rule in the colonies. This is why, for example, the Constitution prohibits the quartering of troops in our homes in the Third Amendment. Congress really, since 1792, has said, we recognize there are going to be some circumstances, some emergencies, in which the president's really going to need to be able to use troops on the home front, maybe to repel invaders or to suppress an insurrection. But, you know, those authorities have historically been used sparingly. We haven't even seen those authorities used since 1992, when President Bush used this statute called the Insurrection act to send troops into Los Angeles during the Rodney King riots. For President Trump to cross that line in a context in which there is such significant contestation of the factual basis, and in which it really does seem to be about partisan politics and not public safety, is not just challenging those legal precedents. It really is challenging the very, very strong norm we have in this country that we don't have the military doing law enforcement.

[Ailsa Chang]

Well, short of the courts, is there anything stopping the President of the United States from declaring an ongoing emergency and leaving troops on the streets of D.C. indefinitely?

[Steve Vladek]

So, not on the statutes as they are currently written. Now, you know, someone has to pay for all of this, so presumably there's gonna be a budgetary constraint at some point along the way. But, you know, for better or for worse, and I would argue for worse, Congress has given the President an awful lot of power over the District of Columbia. You know, reflecting a series of historical and structural quirks about the nation's capital. I think the most important point for folks to take away from that is that doesn't mean that the same things will be legal if and when President Trump tries them in other cities. You know, just because we're getting conditioned to and desensitized to visuals of National Guard troops in Union Station and on the National Mall doesn't mean we should feel the same if you see that in, you know, Times Square or Grant Park.

[Ailsa Chang]

Steve Vladek of Georgetown University Law center, thank you very much.

[Steve Vladek]

Thank you.

[Ailsa Chang]

This episode was produced by Brianna Scott. It was edited by Patrick Jaran Watanan. Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun. It's CONSIDER THIS from npr. I'm Ailsa Chang.

[UP First Host]

Americans are living longer than ever before. On the Sunday Story from UP first, we look at a growing number of people using these extra years to find new meaning.

[Ailsa Chang]

You get to the point where you start asking, what did you do in your life that was significant?

[UP First Host]

A look at the transformative power of human passion and finding your purpose in the third act of life. Listen now on the upverse podcast from npr.

[Ailsa Chang]

On the next through line from npr.

[Justina Wilkins Jordan]

She becomes, for lack of a better.

[Ailsa Chang]

Word, a Tupperware queen.

[Unnamed Resident]

It just never seemed to occur to.

[Steve Vladek]

Her that her growth in any endeavor could be stunted because she happened to.

[Ailsa Chang]

Be a woman, the Tupperware tycoon Brownie Wise. Listen to Throughline in the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts.

[NPR Announcer]

Us want to hear this podcast without sponsor breaks? Amazon prime members can listen to Consider this Sponsor free through Amazon Music. Or you can also support NPR's vital journalism and get Consider this +@ +npr.org. that's +npr.org.