Case Summary
LWVDC and partners filed an amicus brief in support of Washington, D.C.’s opposition to the President’s August 2025 illegal deployment of thousands of National Guard troops to conduct law enforcement in Washington, D.C. in violation of the Home Rule Act and the basic principle that non-federalized National Guard troops are not under the President’s control and that the military does not engage in domestic law enforcement.
On August 11, 2025, President Donald Trump announced that he was going to deploy National Guard troops “to help reestablish law, order, and public safety in Washington, D.C.” The initial deployment was 800 D.C. National Guard troops, but the President expressed a desire to scale up that number, claiming the District was “under siege from violent crime”. Over the next few weeks, at the President’s behest, Ohio, South Carolina, West Virginia, Mississippi, Tennessee, Louisiana, and South Dakota sent more than 1,300 of their own National Guard troops to D.C. without the permission of the D.C. government; only Tennessee responded to the D.C. Mayor’s request for information about the National Guard deployments. As of July 2026, there are more than 4,400 armed National Guard troops in D.C., costing $3M per day.
The National Guard troops were sent to D.C. to carry out law enforcement efforts like presence patrols and “temporarily detaining” people on suspicion of a crime, and have been deputized by the U.S. Marshals Service as ‘Special Police.’ The troops are operating in D.C. under “Title 32” status, meaning they are funded by the federal government but still under the control of their respective governors, as opposed to “Title 10” status when National Guard troops are activated for federal service. However, the troops have been consolidated under the Joint Task Force-D.C., a federally run entity that takes orders from the Secretary of Defense. The National Guard described the status of its troops in D.C.: “unlike active-duty troops on Title 10 status, National Guard members are not restricted by the Posse Comitatus Act, Title 18 U.S.C. § 1385, when operating under the governor’s authority.” However, earlier in the same press release, the National Guard said that a decision came “at the direction of the Secretary of Defense,” at best blurring the line on who the National Guard is reporting to.
The League has firmly opposed the National Guard’s engagement in law enforcement in D.C. from the beginning.
On May 26, 2026, as part of a coalition of D.C.-based civil rights and legal services organization, the League of Women Voters of the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief in the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit highlighting how the deployment damages the people of D.C.’s right to self-government and undermined Black civil rights. The brief traced the inexorable ties between the fight for Black political power and D.C.’s political autonomy, with D.C.’s autonomy increasing during Reconstruction and backsliding during Redemption before reemerging during the Civil Rights Movement as the city became majority-Black by 1957. LWVDC and its partners also pointed out that the lack of a clear chain of command for the deployed National Guard units and Congress’s power to overturn actions of the D.C. government meant that residents have no ability to hold those troops accountable. In fact, the Home Rule Act explicitly gives the D.C. Mayor authority over law enforcement in the District, and D.C. police officers are given D.C. specific training that National Guard forces are not, making the troops less responsive to the needs of the community they are allegedly protecting.
Litigation is ongoing.
The League of Women Voters of Washington D.C. is represented in the matter by the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs and American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of the District of Columbia.
LWV Timeline
Washington, D.C. files lawsuit
Washington, D.C. files a lawsuit challenging the deployment of thousands of National Guard troops without the District’s permission to conduct law enforcement activities.
Washington, D.C. moves for a preliminary injunction
Washington, D.C. files for a preliminary injunction asking the court to prevent the deployment of armed National Guard troops to conduct law enforcement in D.C. without the District’s consent.
District court grants motion for a preliminary injunction
The district court grants the District’s motion for a preliminary injunction, preventing the deployment of armed National Guard troops to conduct law enforcement in D.C. without the district’s permission. The court stays implementation of its order pending the federal government’s appeal.
Federal governments appeals the grant of a preliminary injunction
The federal government appeals the injunction barring them from deploying National Guard troops to the D.C. Circuit.
District court denies federal government’s motion to dismiss
The district court denies the federal government’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit pending a ruling from the D.C. Court of Appeals on the federal government’s appeal.
LWVDC files an amicus brief supporting the preliminary injunction
The League of Women Voters of the District of Columbia along with D.C.-based civil rights and legal services organizations files an amicus brief asking the Court of Appeals to affirm the district court’s preliminary injunction against the federal government.