D.C. just hauled the White House into court over what it calls an illegal “military occupation.”
The ask: stop National Guard street patrols, box the mission to true federal protection, and put guardrails back on the law.
Here’s the play, clean and tactical.
What D.C. filed
A federal complaint seeking a TRO and preliminary injunction to freeze the Guard’s law-enforcement role in the District.
The legal spine
Home Rule limits, no-military-policing statutes, and the Title 10/Title 32 gray zone that lets camo creep into local LE.
The trigger
A “crime emergency” declaration that federalized pieces of D.C. policing and greenlit a Guard surge on city streets.
On-the-ground picture
Out-of-state troops, rifles, armored vehicles, “presence” patrols, and federal deputations that look and feel like local policing.
Why D.C. says it’s illegal
The President can protect federal property; he can’t turn the Guard into city cops without the law and the Mayor on board.
What the feds argue
Unique D.C. status, federal assets at risk, authority to direct services for federal purposes—and they say the surge is “working.”
What’s different from 2020
This suit leans on specific statutory tripwires, not just broad constitutional vibes—aimed at street-level tasks, not ceremonial posts.
What a near-term win looks like
Judge orders: no patrols, no arrests, no street stops; narrow any remaining Guard mission to protecting named federal sites.
What to watch next
Judge assignment, TRO timing, headcount disclosures, any intercity coordination, and whether states recall their Guard units.
Prediction
Partial injunction curbing law-enforcement tasks is the base case. Fewer camo uniforms on the Mall in the short run; a longer trench fight over D.C. control powers to follow.
