On August 22, 2025, the streets of Washington, D.C. entered a new phase of federal intervention as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered nearly 2,000 National Guard troops patrolling the city to begin carrying firearms. The move, part of President Donald Trump’s ongoing crackdown on crime in the nation’s capital, marks a significant escalation in both the scope and symbolism of the administration’s efforts to assert control over the city’s public safety apparatus.
The Pentagon’s announcement, as reported by multiple outlets including the Associated Press and BBC, offered few details about the exact nature of the change or the specific threats that prompted it. Hegseth, referring to the order as “common sense” on social media, provided little in the way of justification beyond the administration’s stated goal of restoring order and “beautifying” the city. The new directive reverses a policy stated just a week prior, when the Pentagon and Army insisted that the troops would remain unarmed during their deployment.
Since early August, National Guard units—bolstered by reinforcements from six Republican-led states, including South Carolina and West Virginia—have been stationed across Washington. Their presence is highly visible near landmarks such as the National Mall and Union Station, but until now, their role has largely been limited to crowd control, assisting tourists, and supporting local police. Scenes of guardsmen feeding squirrels, helping commuters, and chatting with residents have been common, with no overt indications of threats that would require weapons, according to NBC News and AP.
President Trump, never one to shy away from the spotlight, visited law enforcement and National Guard troops in Washington on August 21, personally thanking them for their service. In a meeting at the White House the following day, he declared, “DC was a hellhole. But now it’s safe.” He praised the “total safety” he claimed the mission had achieved and suggested the approach could soon be exported to other cities, specifically naming Chicago and New York as potential next targets. “After we do this, we’ll go to another location, and we’ll make it safe also,” Trump said, according to BBC.
The president also announced his intention to seek $2 billion in congressional funding for what he described as “intervention and beautification plans” for the city. This request comes on the heels of a $1.1 billion budget cut to Washington’s municipal funding earlier in 2025, a move imposed by the Republican-controlled Congress. Trump, who has previously promised to make the city’s grass as lush as his golf courses, told supporters, “It’s going to be safe, and it’s going to be beautified.”
Despite the administration’s rosy portrayal, the deployment has been met with sharp criticism from local officials and the city’s overwhelmingly Democratic residents. D.C. Councilmember Charles Allen didn’t mince words, stating that Trump’s actions are “not of a president, but of someone on the march to an authoritarian takeover.” Councilmember Christina Henderson echoed the sentiment, accusing the administration of “inviting confrontation where there doesn’t need to be any.”
Mayor Muriel Bowser and Attorney General Brian Schwalb have so far declined to comment on the arming order, but the mayor has previously pointed to police data showing a 26% decrease in violent crime compared with the previous year. In fact, a poll conducted by the Washington Post and Schar School earlier in the week found that nearly 80% of Washington residents oppose the deployment of federal officers and the National Guard, as well as the federal takeover of the city’s police department.
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, responding to Trump’s suggestion that his city could be next, expressed “grave concerns” about any potential National Guard deployment. He described the president’s approach as “uncoordinated, uncalled for, and unsound,” warning that such a move could “inflame tensions between residents and law enforcement” and undermine recent progress in reducing crime.
The Pentagon has stated that the National Guard troops “will soon be on mission with their service-issued weapons, consistent with their mission and training.” According to NBC News, the U.S. Marshals Service, an agency of the Justice Department, will approve the authorization. Officials clarified that only those Guard members supporting law enforcement functions are likely to carry weapons, while troops assigned to beautification tasks will likely remain unarmed. The specific types of firearms to be issued have yet to be determined.
While the Trump administration touts the deployment as a success, Attorney General Pam Bondi reported that the operation has resulted in more than 700 arrests—including 40 on Thursday night alone—and the seizure of 91 illegal firearms. Of those arrested, 36 were identified as undocumented immigrants, according to a White House official. Protests against the intervention have continued to flare, though the largest gatherings have numbered only a few hundred people.
Some experts, such as Alex Wagner, a former chief of staff to the Army secretary, have raised concerns about the decision to arm the National Guard. Wagner described the move as a “recipe for disaster,” arguing that most Guard members lack the specialized training required for urban law enforcement crackdowns and could be placed in “no-win situations.” He cautioned that any confrontations could be politically exploited by the White House.
The city’s police department and other local agencies have found themselves in a difficult position. As a federal district, Washington’s government has limited autonomy, with Congress retaining broad authority over local affairs. While local leaders have tried to balance constituent concerns with the risk of antagonizing the administration, their options for formal resistance remain limited.
Adding to the tension, D.C. schools are set to begin the new academic year on August 25. The district has reassured parents that law enforcement actions on school grounds will require a valid warrant or court order, and that officers in schools are not collaborating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The debate over federal intervention in Washington, D.C. is not new, but the current episode has brought longstanding questions about the balance of power between local and federal authorities into sharp relief. For now, the sight of armed National Guard troops in the capital serves as a potent—and for many, unsettling—reminder of the stakes involved. Whether the administration’s gamble will pay off in lasting safety and “beautification,” or lead to deeper divisions and unrest, remains to be seen.
