On September 5, 2025, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that sent shockwaves through Washington and beyond: the United States Department of Defense would be renamed the “Department of War.” The move, which revives a title last used in the 1940s, has ignited fierce debate across the country and put a spotlight on the administration’s approach to both national security and domestic policy.
The executive order, as reported by CNN and other outlets, states that the change is intended to “project strength and resolve” at a time of heightened global insecurity. The War Department, first established in 1789 under President George Washington, was dissolved and replaced by the Department of Defense in 1947, reflecting a postwar shift toward deterrence and security rather than outright conflict. President Trump, however, argued at the White House signing ceremony that the old name is a better fit for America’s current posture. “I think it’s a much more appropriate name in light of where the world is right now. It sends a message of victory,” he said.
The order also directed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to assume the new title of Secretary of War and to work with Congress to make the change permanent. In his remarks, Hegseth defended the move as more than just a symbolic gesture. “This name change is not just about renaming, it’s about restoring. Words matter. We’re going to go on offence, not just on defence. We’re going to raise up warriors, not just defenders,” he declared. By late Friday, the Pentagon’s website had been updated to display “U.S. Department of War” under the new domain war.gov, a rapid digital transformation that underscored the administration’s urgency.
But the name change was only the beginning. Just one day later, President Trump took to social media with a provocative message aimed squarely at Chicago, a city he has repeatedly criticized. In a meme posted Saturday, Trump warned that Chicago “will find out why it’s called the Department of WAR,” as officials in the city braced for a major immigration enforcement crackdown. The post, which included an artificially generated image of the president wearing a hat and sunglasses against the Chicago skyline, read, “I love the smell of deportations in the morning … Chicago about to find out why it’s called the Department of WAR.” The meme also featured the phrase “Chipocalypse Now,” a not-so-subtle nod to the administration’s aggressive stance.
According to CNN, the planned immigration enforcement operation in Chicago was expected to begin as early as September 5, 2025. Personnel from Immigration and Border Protection and Customs and Border Protection had already begun arriving in the city, with the White House reserving the right to call in the National Guard if the situation escalated. The operation was modeled after a similar crackdown in Los Angeles earlier that summer—a deployment that a judge recently ruled broke federal law prohibiting military involvement in domestic law enforcement. The Trump administration has appealed that decision, but the legal and political ramifications remain unresolved.
The reaction from Illinois officials was swift and scathing. Democratic Governor JB Pritzker condemned Trump’s post as “not normal,” writing on X, “The President of the United States is threatening to go to war with an American city. This is not a joke. This is not normal. Donald Trump isn’t a strongman, he’s a scared man. Illinois won’t be intimidated by a wannabe dictator.” Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson echoed those concerns, stating, “The President’s threats are beneath the honor of our nation, but the reality is that he wants to occupy our city and break our Constitution. We must defend our democracy from this authoritarianism by protecting each other and protecting Chicago from Donald Trump.” Representative Mike Quigley, who represents part of Chicago, described the president’s rhetoric as “edging more and more toward authoritarianism,” telling CNN, “This is a scary time. For those who haven’t paid attention, it’s time to watch what this president is doing.”
Meanwhile, supporters of the administration—including Republicans close to the president—welcomed the rebranding as a show of American strength. They argued that returning to the “Department of War” moniker would remind adversaries that the United States is prepared to act decisively. Secretary Hegseth’s remarks at the signing ceremony, emphasizing offense over defense and the raising of “warriors, not just defenders,” struck a chord with those who see the world as increasingly dangerous and unpredictable.
But critics, including opposition Democrats and many analysts, warn that the rebranding could have far-reaching consequences. Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey dismissed the move as “a childish idea,” adding that Americans are more interested in preventing wars than “touting them.” Others pointed out the enormous costs associated with the change—potentially running into billions of dollars for redesigning emblems, documents, email addresses, and uniforms across the vast military bureaucracy. There’s also the not-so-small matter of congressional approval. Under U.S. law, the creation and renaming of executive departments is the purview of Congress, not the president alone. Trump, for his part, has expressed confidence that lawmakers will support the initiative, but political observers predict heated debates in the months ahead as Democrats and some moderate Republicans question both the necessity and the symbolism of the move.
Beyond the politics, there are practical and legal concerns. The planned Chicago immigration operation, coming so soon after the Los Angeles deployment was ruled illegal, has reignited debates over the appropriate use of military and federal resources in domestic law enforcement. The Trump administration maintains that the Chicago crackdown is distinct from broader plans to use federal law enforcement and National Guard troops to address crime in the city. Yet, the White House has not ruled out deploying the National Guard if the situation demands it, a prospect that worries many local officials and civil liberties advocates.
The rebranding of the Pentagon and the aggressive rhetoric surrounding Chicago have also raised questions about America’s image abroad. The original War Department oversaw U.S. military efforts during both World Wars, a legacy that carries both pride and caution. Reviving the name at a time of fragile global peace could signal a more confrontational foreign policy, some analysts warn, and may complicate relationships with allies and adversaries alike.
As the debate rages, the practical implications are already being felt. The Pentagon’s digital presence now reflects the new name, and federal personnel are on the ground in Chicago. Congressional hearings are expected, with lawmakers from both parties preparing to scrutinize the administration’s actions, the costs involved, and the broader message being sent to the world.
For now, the nation is left to grapple with what’s in a name—and what it means when the president invokes “war” not just as a metaphor, but as official policy. The coming weeks will reveal whether Congress, the courts, and the American public are ready to accept this historic change, or whether the backlash will force a reconsideration of both the name and the approach it represents.
