On Monday, September 15, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an order authorizing the deployment of National Guard troops to Memphis, Tennessee, and the creation of a sweeping federal task force to address what he described as persistent crime in the city. The announcement, made from the Oval Office with Tennessee Governor Bill Lee and Republican Senators Marsha Blackburn and Bill Hagerty at his side, has set off a political storm in Tennessee and reignited fierce debates over crime, race, and federal authority in American cities.
Trump’s order, which he said would “deploy the full powers of federal law enforcement agencies and enforcement generally to restore public safety and get dangerous career criminals off of our streets,” brings together the National Guard, FBI, ATF, DEA, ICE, Homeland Security Investigations, and U.S. Marshals in a coordinated campaign. According to Attorney General Pam Bondi, operations in Memphis could begin as soon as the week of September 22, 2025.
Governor Lee, who formally requested the federal support, stood by the president during the announcement, telling reporters, “I’m tired of crime holding the great city of Memphis back.” But Lee’s public stance has been anything but consistent. As recently as August 26, 2025, he told a group of journalists he had no plans to send military troops to Memphis, citing a report showing a 15% decline in crime and stating, “We’ve had no conversations with the president or his team about National Guard in Memphis. We have targeted our efforts and our communications with those federal agencies. I even spoke this morning with an FBI official about our efforts in Memphis and Shelby County and how they’re working. So that’s where we are today.”
Yet, by September 12, Lee admitted he had been in “constant communication with the Trump Administration to develop a multi-phased, strategic plan to combat crime in Memphis.” In an interview on September 16, Lee hedged on specifics, saying he did not have a date for when the Tennessee National Guard would arrive in Memphis but assured it would be “sooner than later.” He emphasized the importance of transparency, stating, “Part of our plan is just to make sure people know when we know... We obviously want the community to understand when this is going to happen, what it’s going to look like, how many soldiers there are going to be, how many police officers there are going to be, how many troopers there will be. The more we tell Memphians, the better off it’s going to be.”
The federal intervention comes at a time when, paradoxically, crime in Memphis is actually falling. Police Chief C.J. Davis reported that homicides and violent crime have seen historic reductions in 2025, including a six-year low in the city’s murder rate. Crime statistics from the Memphis Police Department indicate a more than 22% decrease in crime in 2025 compared to 2024, marking a 25-year low. Axios reported that, nationally, crime—including murders—is lower than at any time since the Obama administration.
This context has fueled criticism from local Democratic leaders and activists, who see the deployment as unnecessary and politically motivated. State Representative Jesse Chism, chair of the Tennessee Black Caucus of State Legislators, warned, “Anytime we talk about bringing in an occupying strike force made up of folk who don’t know Memphis and don’t have a relationship with the people and the communities, I’m very concerned. Sending troops into Memphis now could rip the scab off of a wound that is just beginning to heal and only increases the possibility of unintended consequences.” Chism argued for more financial resources for community policing and violence prevention over a military-style approach.
Senate Minority Leader Raumesh Akbari, a Memphis Democrat, invoked the city’s painful history with federal troop deployments, noting that the last time a president sent the Guard to Memphis was in 1968 after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. “As a lifelong Memphian, I want to be clear: We do not need the National Guard occupying our city,” Akbari said. “Other times the Guard was deployed to Southern cities, it was to enforce civil rights laws when segregationists refused to comply. That history matters—because what we are seeing now is not about justice, it’s about politics.” She further argued, “an abuse of power, using troops to score political points off of crime statistics, even though overall crime in Memphis is down to a 25-year low.”
Memphis Mayor Paul Young echoed these concerns, expressing skepticism that the National Guard’s presence would reduce crime. “We don’t have a say in the National Guard, but our goal is to ensure that we have influence in how they engage in this community,” Young said. He made clear that the city did not request the federal support but would try to shape the Guard’s engagement for the community’s benefit.
State Representative Antonio Parkinson tried to strike a note of cautious optimism, saying, “While I disagree with the deployment of the National Guard to Memphis, I also understand this: We are Memphis and we have a history of taking lemons and turning it into the best lemonade you’ve ever tasted. While we didn’t ask for this, there is an opportunity in this to turn it around and create many wins out of this situation.”
But for many, the move is seen as a dangerous overreach. State Representative Justin J. Pearson, a Memphis Democrat, was blunt in his criticism, saying, “This is an abuse of power by the Trump administration. It is moving us from a democracy to an authoritarian regime led by a wannabe dictator. We cannot normalize the behavior of the nationalization of — the federalization of the National Guard against our own citizens, against our own communities.” Pearson argued that if leaders truly wanted to address crime, they would focus on eradicating poverty and passing gun safety laws, not “taking away our power, targeting and attacking Black-led majority cities and destroying our democracy for their own political gain.”
Pearson also raised concerns about the timing of the deployment, suggesting it could have a chilling effect on voter turnout during upcoming elections if troops are present at polling places. “This gets much more scary for some folks when it’s an election season and the National Guard is going to be posted up in front of our polls. That’s going to happen at the midterms. It’s likely to happen during the presidential election. This is not what is supposed to be happening in our country, and we all need to be unified in realizing that this is nothing more than a power play for more authoritarianism from this administration.”
The debate over the National Guard’s deployment in Memphis is not happening in a vacuum. The city has a long and fraught history with military presence, from the 1968 civil rights era to the 1978 firefighters’ strike that saw troops and curfews imposed after widespread fires. The scars of those moments—both physical and emotional—still linger for many Memphians.
Ultimately, the deployment will test the balance between federal power and local authority, as well as the ability of Memphis to chart its own course on public safety. Whether the National Guard’s involvement will help, hinder, or heighten tensions remains to be seen—but for now, it has already set the stage for a clash between Washington’s agenda and Memphis’ own vision for its future.
