Will Kbach (11:26)
Here's what the right is the right mostly supports the federal takeover, suggesting disorder in the Capitol has been rampant for years. Some say that Trump is well within his power to exercise this authority. Others note the toll that crime in D.C. has taken on the community. In the Spectator, Ben Domenech argued Trump is right to take over dc. Ever since the violent summer of George Floyd, Washington has struggled to achieve the same return to normalcy that has been the case in other major cities. A major driver is the lack of sufficient police staffing, with the Metro Police Department running almost 1,000 officers short of needed levels. Carjackings and vehicle theft are three times the national average, and the homicide rate is six times that of New York City, dominic wrote. The poor response times and lack of inability to disperse gang activity is taken for granted by residents, with restaurant closures and other venues seeing less foot traffic because of the crime concerns. The overall result of Trump's move, in media terms, will be to make national figures finally pay attention to how bad things are in dc, if only to deny they justify his actions. But they'll also be set to use any criminal activity that does happen going forward to argue that the administration's methods are ineffective, dominic said. But this is a sideshow. The real question is how DC's citizens feel about what comes next and whether it makes DC feel safe again. As a local who hasn't been willing to risk taking my children into the city late in the day, I can hope that changes soon. In national review, Charles C.W. cook said DC's home rule is a luxury, not a right. Per the plain terms of the US Constitution, Congress has plenary power over the seat of government in the United States, which is not a city or a state, or even a reservation, but a special district like no other in the land, cook wrote. If the national legislature wishes to, it can delegate some of its power to a council or a mayor or an emissary in a pointy hat, but it is not obliged to do so. In dc, home rule is a luxury, a privilege, an indulgence. I would prefer that Washington, D.C. be transmuted into a genuine federal district, with the vast majority of the city's area handed back to Maryland, Virginia, or any other state that is willing to take it. Until such a time as that is achieved, however, it is entirely reasonable for the United States Congress and to the extent he has been empowered by the law, the United States President, to exercise control over land, that is the undisputed preserve of the United States. If, as seems plainly to be the case, the region's experiment in political devolution has been a failure, it is not only right but necessary that the rightful ministry be restored. In the Atlantic, Charles Van Lehman wrote Trump is right that DC has a serious crime problem. Is crime in dc, as Trump put it last week, totally out of control? Critics were quick to dismiss his claims as fear mongering. Lehman said the reality is much more complicated than either the president or the mayor depicted. Bowser is right that violence has declined, but the nation's capital really does have a long standing and profound violence problem that will not improve without deliberate intervention. Although violent crime rates overall are near 30 year lows, Washington's murder rate was generally rising before the pandemic. The murder rate at the end of 2024 was lower than in 2023, but still about 70% higher than that of a decade prior. This violence takes a dreadful toll on the communities it affects. In 2023, the most recent year for which complete data are available, 3.4 out of every 1,000 black boys and men ages 15 to 24 in Washington died by homicide. That's nearly 3.5 times higher than the national rate, lehman wrote. A federal takeover of DC's crime apparatus could in theory address this problem, though it's far from guaranteed. There's a real risk the feds could posture for 30 days, the window in which Trump will likely maintain control of the MPD and then declare victory as violence continues its downward trajectory. That would of course, do little to fix the real problems. Now here's what the left is saying. The left is strongly opposed to Trump's actions, saying he is more interested in control than addressing crime. Some suggest Trump is making it more difficult for DC to improve public safety. Others say DC has a real crime problem but question Trump's approach. In the Atlantic, Jonathan Chait argued Trump doesn't really care about crime. Trump claims that he is acting to quell a spike in violent crime, and although he might very well feel sincere concern about crime, this does not explain his actions any more than concern, concern about fentanyl smuggling, which he no doubt also genuinely opposes, motivates his trade restrictions against Canada. Chait said the most obvious reason for skepticism about Trump's desire to fight crime is that he is the most pro criminal president in American history. He has treated laws as suggestions throughout his career, beginning with his defiance of Justice Department orders that he and his father stop discriminating against black prospective tenants. Serious policy experts, some of them conservative, have proposed solutions to bring down crime levels in Washington. The most straightforward remedy is to fill vacancies in the city's courts to speed up the processing of criminal cases. At Trump's press conference, the Fox News host turned U.S. attorney Jeanine Pirro denounced the District of Columbia's laws restricting sentencing for juvenile offenders. Chait wrote, Trump's plan bears little resemblance to any of these remedies. His big idea is to flood the streets with troops. In the Hill, svante Myrick said Trump unleashes troops on cities already making progress on crime. I was a mayor for 10 years. All mayors deal with crime, and we have learned a lot about what works to make cities safer for everyone. That's why so many cities, including Washington, D.C. are safer today than they were 10, 20 or 30 years ago, Myrick wrote. I believe Trump taking control of DC's police department and calling out the National Guard based on false claims about crime is both an attempt to distract voters from bad news about the extraordinary harm he is unleashing on the American people and and an effort to further test the limits of his own power. Trump made it clear in Los Angeles that he will deploy National Guard troops over the objections of state and local officials. He has explicitly threatened to expand his tactics in D.C. to other cities, where he has far less constitutional legitimacy to intervene, Meyrick said. The president would like to distract us from bad economic news on jobs and the price of groceries, and certainly the president would rather we not pay much attention to the astonishing levels of shady dealing that have made Trump and his family billions of dollars rich. Trump abusing his power to shift the narrative is an aspect of his authoritarian rule. It's not going to make residents of D.C. or any other city safer. Finally, the Washington Post editorial board wrote about how Trump's D.C. crime experiment ends. President Donald Trump likes a foil, and few serve his political needs quite like DC's government. By federalizing the local police force this week, he allowed himself to pose as a man of action and then dare his opponents to claim that crime in the Capitol is not a problem. Yet his law and order message so far has translated into little more than security theater, and it cannot go on forever, the board said. The president says he wants to maintain indefinite control, but the Home Rule act gives him only 30 days. After that, he's required to get an extension from Congress. Trump is not known for his interest in policy minutia, whether the question is over taxes or street crime. Whatever his motivation for picking this fight now, Republicans on Capitol Hill would do the city a service by developing a credible plan for how federal intervention might help D.C. accomplish accomplish what police could not on their own, the board wrote. Politically, Trump's opening gambit has paid off, and he should be on defensible legal ground at least for three more weeks, even if this question has never been litigated. But if he cannot show results and instead pivots to another stunt, this will become a political albatross. All right, that's it for what the left is saying. Let's send it over to Isaac for his take.
