D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb alleges that the deputization of the Guard is “in violation of the foundational prohibition on military involvement in local law.”
The Attorney General for the District of Columbia has filed a lawsuit aimed at ending President Donald Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to the city.
According to ABC News, an estimated 2,300 Guardsmen from seven states are currently stationed in the District. The deployment began on August 11, with the Trump administration claiming that a military presence is necessary to combat crime and “beautify” the city.
While it is unusual for a president to activate the Guard without the explicit permission of a state’s governor—or, in this case, the District’s mayor—Trump is entitled by law to deploy the National Guard to D.C. for a limited period of time, provided that certain conditions have been met.
However, in his lawsuit, D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb claims that the scope and duration of the employment is unlawful, allegedly infringing upon the District’s autonomy under the Home Rule Act.
In court filings, Schwalb’s office notes that the National Guard contingents in D.C. were placed under the command of the U.S. Department of Defense before being deputized by the U.S. Marshals Service. Deputization, in this case, allows troops to perform limited law enforcement functions.
Schwalb alleges that the deputization of the Guard is “in violation of the foundational prohibition on military involvement in local law.”
Under federal law, any presidentially-authorized deployment of the National Guard within the District of Columbia can last up to 30 days, with longer deployments requiring explicit approval by Congress.
Furthermore, though some of the National Guard troops involved in the surge are from D.C., others have been requisitioned from other states, primarily those with right-leaning governments.
By asserting command over state-level militias, Schwalb says, the Trump administration should have formally brought most activated, non-local units into federal service. The president’s failure to do so is, per Schwalb’s complaint, violative of the both the U.S. Constitution and federal law.
Schwalb has also said that the military presence within the District, aside from being unprecedented in recent times, threatens to erode trust between residents and law enforcement while hurting the local economy, with Restaurant Association Metropolitan Washington recently announcing an extension to “Restaurant Week” to compensate for lower-than-expected customer traffic.
The lawsuit has already garnered support from Schwalb’s political allies, with California Attorney General Rob Bonta issuing a statement lambasting the president’s politicization of the Guard.
“President Trump is illegally seeking to use the military to police our people. It’s unnecessary, undemocratic, and most importantly, unlawful,” Bonta said in a press release. “As a judge in California recently affirmed, the President’s power is not boundless, and the military may not act as the President’s personal police force. When troops arrived in Los Angeles in early June, we knew this was likely the beginning — not the end — of the military occupation of American cities. This dangerous moment requires all of us to stand up, speak out, and hold the President and his Administration accountable to laws and democratic values he swore to uphold. California is proud to stand with D.C. in this fight.”
Sources
DC attorney general sues to end federal National Guard deployment
D.C. sues Trump administration over ‘illegal deployment’ of National Guard in Washington
Join the conversation!