A federal judge has issued a temporary halt to President Donald Trump’s plan to deploy National Guard troops to Washington, D.C., marking a significant pause in the administration’s broader push to send military forces into U.S. cities over the objections of local officials. U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb, appointed by former President Joe Biden, ruled that the Trump administration cannot deploy Guard troops to enforce domestic law in the nation’s capital without approval from the city’s mayor. However, she delayed the enforcement of her decision until December 11, giving the administration time to appeal.
The legal battle is one of several unfolding nationwide as Trump challenges long-standing limitations on a president’s authority to use military personnel for domestic law enforcement. The dispute in Washington centers on Trump’s August 11 announcement directing National Guard troops into the city, which prompted a lawsuit from District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb on September 4. Schwalb argued that the president unlawfully seized control of local policing and violated laws restricting military involvement in civilian law enforcement.
While Washington, D.C., is not part of any state and the president holds special authority over its law enforcement matters, city leaders say Trump exceeded his powers and set a dangerous precedent. They argue that allowing federal troops to enforce civilian law without local consent undermines democratic governance.
The Trump administration has defended its actions, calling the lawsuit politically motivated. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said the president acted lawfully and credited the troop deployments with reducing crime. Administration attorneys insisted Trump has full authority to deploy troops in the capital without local approval.
Beyond Washington, Trump has ordered deployments to Los Angeles, Chicago, and Portland, Oregon, citing rising crime and unrest tied to immigration enforcement. Democratic leaders have pushed back, filing lawsuits to stop what they describe as politically motivated military interventions. Trial courts have sided with local officials in each case where the deployments were challenged, though one appellate ruling has allowed troops to remain in Los Angeles.


U.S. Vaccine Policy Shifts Under RFK Jr. Create Uncertainty for Pharma and Investors
U.S. Imposes Visa Restrictions on Haiti Transitional Council Over Gang Allegations
Trump Family Files $10 Billion Lawsuit Over IRS Tax Disclosure
US Judge Rejects $2.36B Penalty Bid Against Google in Privacy Data Case
Meta Faces Lawsuit Over Alleged Approval of AI Chatbots Allowing Sexual Interactions With Minors
U.S. Eases Venezuela Oil Sanctions to Boost American Investment After Maduro Ouster
Panama Supreme Court Voids CK Hutchison Port Concessions, Raising Geopolitical and Trade Concerns
Democrats Question Intelligence Chief’s Role in FBI Georgia Election Raid
Zelenskiy Awaits U.S. Details as Ukraine Prepares for Possible Peace Talks Next Week
Panama Supreme Court Voids Hong Kong Firm’s Panama Canal Port Contracts Over Constitutional Violations
Israel Intensifies Gaza Airstrikes Amid Ceasefire Tensions
Pentagon and Anthropic Clash Over AI Safeguards in National Security Use
Court Allows Expert Testimony Linking Johnson & Johnson Talc Products to Ovarian Cancer
SEC Drops Gemini Enforcement Case After Full Repayment to Earn Investors
Keir Starmer Urges Prince Andrew to Testify in U.S. Epstein Investigation
Trump Nominates Brett Matsumoto as Next Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner
U.S. Approves Over $6.5 Billion in Military Sales to Israel Across Three Defense Contracts 



