Just over a week after President Trump’s 30-day crime emergency in Washington, D.C. officially expired, the city finds itself grappling with the aftermath—and the looming possibility of renewed federal control. While the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) is back under local leadership, more than 2,000 National Guard troops remain deployed throughout the capital, a stark reminder that federal intervention is far from over.
The end of the emergency, which occurred on September 19, 2025, returned authority over the MPD to Mayor Muriel Bowser and her administration. Yet, President Trump wasted no time in signaling that this autonomy could be short-lived. Earlier that week, he took to Truth Social to lambast Bowser’s decision to scale back MPD’s cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), threatening, “If I allowed this to happen, CRIME would come roaring back. To the people and businesses of Washington, D.C., DON’T WORRY, I AM WITH YOU, AND WON’T ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN. I’ll call a National Emergency, and Federalize, if necessary!!!”
Trump’s warning is more than political bluster—it’s a demonstration of just how easily the federal government can retake control of D.C. policing under the Home Rule Charter. The specter of another federal emergency declaration hangs over the city, and the continued presence of federal law enforcement officers, including ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), ensures that tensions remain high.
Mayor Bowser, for her part, has welcomed federal agents’ help—up to a point. She has asked that they follow the city’s lead and work collaboratively, but she’s drawn a clear line when it comes to immigration enforcement. “Immigration enforcement is not what the MPD does. And with the end of the emergency, it won’t be what MPD does in the future,” Bowser said last week, according to The 51st. Despite her stance, ICE remains active in the city, and the extent of ongoing cooperation between MPD and ICE is unclear. During the emergency, MPD set up traffic checkpoints where ICE checked IDs, and an order from Police Chief Pamela Smith allowing limited cooperation still stands, though its future is uncertain.
The federal presence has drawn sharp criticism from local officials. At a House Oversight Committee hearing on September 18, D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson spoke forcefully about ICE’s tactics, stating, “To the extent the recent federal activities here have had any positive impact at all, that impact is blunted by the fact that residents equate it with whatever ICE has decided they need to do in our neighborhoods. If ICE must continue its operations in the District, they need to change their tactics, stop hiding behind masks, discontinue racial profiling, cease detaining lawful immigrants, and afford detainees due process.”
And it’s not just ICE that’s raising eyebrows. Residents across neighborhoods east of the Anacostia River have complained of a white and orange helicopter circling overhead for hours—sometimes late into the night, disturbing sleep and rattling windows. The chopper, as it turns out, belongs to CBP and is part of the ongoing federal surge. Zahid Rathore, an Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner, took it upon himself to investigate. Using public flight trackers, he discovered the helicopter wasn’t using ADS-B, a tracking system that would make its flights publicly visible. “This is CBP doing surveillance on our people,” Rathore told The 51st. “How much helicopter surveillance do we need?”
The Department of Homeland Security confirmed to The 51st that the helicopter was indeed theirs, explaining that it provides “a unique one-of-a-kind mission set that provides enhanced officer safety while also providing critical situational awareness for law enforcement operations.” The agency insisted it was not being used to monitor protests. Still, the lack of ADS-B tracking has sparked both privacy and safety concerns, especially after a military helicopter not using ADS-B collided with a passenger jet earlier this year, killing 67 people. Legislation sponsored by Senator Ted Cruz is now pending in the Senate, aiming to require helicopters flying in and around D.C. to use ADS-B for greater transparency and safety.
Beyond the visible show of force, the federal surge has placed a significant financial strain on the District. In mid-August, D.C. government dump trucks were deployed to block streets for a visiting European delegation—a small example of the city’s hidden costs in supporting federal operations. The Emergency Planning and Security Fund (EPSF), designed to reimburse D.C. for such expenses, has consistently fallen short. In 2022, Congress allocated $25 million to the EPSF, while D.C. incurred $46.2 million in costs. The following year, the gap narrowed but persisted: $30 million allocated versus $35.9 million spent. In 2024, the shortfall ballooned to $26.5 million. Over the past five years, D.C. has spent nearly $84 million of its own funds to cover federal security needs.
“We’re not complaining about the additional work because we think we do it best, but there is a cost,” Bowser recently said. “In recent years the payment hasn’t matched what it costs.” While Congress increased the EPSF to about $90 million in 2025—largely due to the presidential inauguration—D.C. officials estimate they’ll still face a $9 million shortfall by July, even before accounting for Trump’s federal surge.
City leaders are pushing for a permanent increase in EPSF appropriations, from the usual $30 million up to at least $90 million annually. A draft spending bill in the House would raise the fund to $70 million, while a Democratic alternative proposes $100 million. Mendelson, again before the House Oversight Committee, argued, “I stress: these payments to MPD are not a grant, they are reimbursement. Full reimbursement is an easy way for Congress to help improve public safety in the District.”
Meanwhile, the model of federal intervention piloted in D.C. is spreading. On September 15, 2025, Trump signed an order with Tennessee Governor Bill Lee to establish a new federal crime task force in Memphis. The task force, which includes the National Guard, FBI, immigration authorities, and U.S. Marshals, is modeled after the D.C. surge. Trump declared, “It’s very important because of the crime that’s going on in many cities, not only in Memphis, and we’re going to take care of all of ’em. Step by step, just like we did in D.C.”
Yet, the Memphis Police Department had just reported declines in every major crime category compared to previous years. Mayor Paul Young made his opposition clear: “I did not ask for the National Guard, and I don’t think it’s the way to drive down crime.”
There are broader implications. As News Nation contributor Lindsey Granger noted, deploying federal agents for street patrols in D.C. has delayed other FBI investigations, including those into financial fraud and public corruption. Many agents now spend two or three nights a week on patrol, slowing down critical work like witness interviews and search warrants. Some have even quit in frustration. Granger warned, “The military should not be policing civilians. So why are we normalizing it? Why are we so quick to welcome soldiers into U.S. cities as a fix for crime?”
The debate over federal intervention in local policing is far from settled. D.C. remains at the center of this national experiment—caught between the promise of greater security and the perils of eroding local control, strained resources, and the normalization of military-style policing on American streets.
