I support Trump taking control of DC police — the Constitution is on his side
"This is Liberation Day in D.C., and we're going to take our capital back," Trump said at a White House news conference flanked by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Attorney General Pam Bondi and other senior administration officials. "It's going to be a model. And then we'll look at other cities also. But other cities are studying what we're doing," Trump said. "We're going to have a safe, beautiful capital, and it's going to happen very quickly."
Democratic leaders responded with their usual eloquence. "Violent crime in Washington, D.C. is at a thirty-year low. Donald Trump has no basis to take over the local police department. And zero credibility on the issue of law and order. Get lost," House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., posted on X.
Repeating the same talking point as many other elected Democrats, Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., questioned Trump's move by comparing it to his delay in calling out the National Guard to step the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
Despite Democratic complaints, few should question the need for greater public safety in our nation's inner cities. But under our federal system, crime remains the purview of the states. "The regulation and punishment of intrastate violence… has always been the province of the States," the Supreme Court observed in United States v. Morrison (2000). As the great Chief Justice John Marshall declared a century ago, Congress "has no general right to punish murder committed within any of the States," and it is "clear [that] congress cannot punish felonies generally."
Criminal justice sits at the very core of the states' police power – their general right to regulate the people and activity within their borders – aside from the specific, narrow areas (such as regulating interstate commerce) delegated by the Constitution to the federal government.
All laws in the District of Columbia are federal laws. If the mayor and city officials are allowing rising crime, especially because of lenient laws and policies toward offenders, the president should intervene.
But that is not the case with Washington, D.C. The Constitution specifically creates the District of Columbia as a city beyond the power of any state. As James Madison explained in Federalist No. 43, the "seat of government" must fall only under the power of the nation. Otherwise, he warned, "the public authority might be insulted, and its proceedings interrupted with impunity," and the state where the capital resided "might bring on the national councils an imputation of awe or influence, equally dishonourable to the government and dissatisfactory to the other [states]." The Framers wanted the national government located in a city that would not be under any partisan control.
But in 1973, Congress passed a Home Rule Act (with President Richard Nixon's support) that created a mayor, a city council, and some limited rights to self-government.
This was a constitutional error.
Under the Constitution, there is no true local government in D.C.; the entire city is but a subdivision of the national government. Trump's takeover of the D.C. police and his deployment of troops and federal law enforcement does not intrude on any rights of local government because, unlike the case with deployment of troops in Los Angeles earlier this year, there is no need to pay respect to a state's sovereignty.
The president needs no state's permission to deploy U.S. troops and federal law enforcement to protect federal property, facilities, and personnel.
Even if D.C. home rule did not run contrary to the Framer's design for the nation's only federal city, Trump would still have authority to take Monday's action. The president has an obligation to ensure public safety in D.C. Under Article II of the Constitution, the president has the duty to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
All laws in the District of Columbia are federal laws. If the mayor and city officials are allowing rising crime, especially because of lenient laws and policies toward offenders, the president should intervene. He has the constitutional responsibility to restore common-sense law enforcement methods that will protect those who work and live in Washington.
The 1973 Home Rule Act itself, even if it is constitutional, recognizes the president's authority. It allows him to take over the D.C. police for 30 days in the case of an emergency. The president could declare the high number of murders – the capital city has always had one of the nation's highest murder rates, and currently sits at the fourth highest – an emergency. While murders in 2024 fell, they were coming down from a pandemic high; murders in D.C. are still far higher than the 2012 low. In any event, the Home Rule Act provision only applies to the D.C. police; the Act does not – and could not – limit the president's authority to deploy troops or the FBI to protect the federal city.
President Trump's decision to restore law and order in the District of Columbia is only the first step. He can take the necessary second step by working with Congress to end home rule and restore the control of the elected branches of government over the District.
Just as he has asserted his control over the bureaucracy by firing agency heads, he could test the constitutional waters by removing the mayor and other D.C. officials. They, too, are only assistants to the president who help him fulfill his responsibility to execute federal law; if they fail to perform, he can and should replace them.
A half-century ago, Congress and the president gave in to the misguided idea that residents of D.C. had a democratic right to manage their own affairs. But the Framers did not want D.C. to fall under anyone's partisan control, especially those who would use their control of the District to influence the federal government itself (recall the harassment of Trump officials that went unpunished during his first term).
Trump and Congress should admit that home rule has failed and start making D.C. the great federal city it should be.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
44 minutes ago
Trump-Putin summit: Zelenskyy to travel to DC on Monday to meet with President Trump
Following what was described as a 'lengthy' phone call with President Donald Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced that he will travel to Washington on Monday to meet with President Donald Trump. A White House official said Trump has invited European leaders to join the meeting on Monday afternoon. Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin met in Alaska on Friday and while Putin mentioned an "agreement" in the post-meeting news conference and Trump said "great progress" was made, there was no mention of a ceasefire.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump gave China the AI chips it wanted. Beijing isn't saying thank you
In a surprising reversal of the United States' years-long technology restrictions on China, President Donald Trump last month allowed Nvidia to resume sales of a key AI chip designed specifically for the Chinese market. Yet rather than celebrating, Beijing's response has been noticeably lukewarm, despite having long urged Washington to ease the stringent export controls. In the weeks since the policy U-turn, Beijing has called the chip a security risk, summoned Nvidia for explanations and discouraged its companies from using it. The less-than-welcoming sentiment reflects Beijing's drive to build a self-sufficient semiconductor supply chain – and its confidence in the progress its rapidly advancing chip industry has made. But the cold shoulder may also represent some political posturing. Despite significant advances in its semiconductor sector, China still needs America's chips and technology. Experts said China's national champion Huawei has developed chips with performance comparable to — and in some cases surpassing — the newly approved Nvidia chip. However, China still wants the more advanced AI processors that remain blocked under US export controls. In the years since Trump first imposed tech restrictions on Huawei during his first term, China's chip technology has made significant strides, spurred by the frustration that mounted as Washington piled on export controls, said Xiang Ligang, director-general of a Beijing-based technology industry group and an advisor to the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology. 'We have this capability, it's not as they imagine – that if China is blocked, China won't be able to function, or that China will be finished,' he said. To him, the policy about-face only reflects the importance of having a wholly homegrown chip supply chain. 'For Chinese companies, we may only have one choice if we wish to ensure a relatively secure supply of chips – that means relying on our own domestically produced chips,' Xiang said. That may be China's goal, but in the high-stakes AI race, with all its national security implications, the US remains the leader, at least for now. China is not 'naive' The chip in focus is Nvidia's H20, which was released by the AI chip leader last year to maintain access to the Chinese market following strict export controls put in place under the Biden administration that stopped the export of chips with high processing power. Last month, Trump greenlit the sales of the chip to China after banning it in April as the US trade frictions with China deepened. Trump has justified his decision by calling the chip 'obsolete,' as it lags behind the company's cutting-edge AI processors like Blackwell or H100, from which H20 is derived. He and his officials appeared to have embraced a view long promoted by Nvidia's CEO Jensen Huang – that US can maintain its tech leadership only through ensuring its chips remain the global standard. 'You want to sell the Chinese enough that their developers get addicted to the American technology stack,' Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said last month. But the dramatic reversal has fueled questions about Trump's transactional approach to national security – once considered off-limits to bargaining. China, on the other hand, is alarmed by the alleged security risks of Nvidia's H20s like 'tracking and positioning' and 'remote shutdown' features, capabilities that some US lawmakers have called for but Nvidia denies it has placed in its chips. China's cyberspace watchdog and industry ministry have since summoned the American chip giant over the security concerns and urged firms to avoid H20 chips, a development which was previously reported by Bloomberg. One major Chinese tech company which has developed its AI models has received notice from the authorities urging it to exercise caution in the use of H20s, and advising it not to purchase them, a company insider said on the condition of anonymity. CNN has reached out to the ministry and the cyberspace authorities for comment. An Nvidia spokesperson told CNN that NVIDIA 'does not have 'backdoors' in our chips that would give anyone a remote way to access or control them.' 'Banning the sale of H20 in China would only harm US economic and technology leadership with zero national security benefit,' the spokesperson added. But China believes the US isn't playing fairly, Xiang said. 'What we actually want, you refuse to sell us. For the things you already consider obsolete, you still want to dump them into our market and occupy our market. Do you really think we're that naive?' he said. Still coveted Despite Beijing's concerns and the H20's reduced performance, the chips remain highly sought after by Chinese companies. Equity research firm Bernstein estimated that shipment of the chips to China this year would have reached 1.5 million units, or about 23 billion in revenue, without Trump's export restrictions. Major buyers include Chinese tech giants such as TikTok owner ByteDance, Alibaba and Tencent. While Huawei's top AI chips excel in computing power – one of the key measures in evaluating processors' performance – in comparison with H20, they fall short in terms of memory bandwidth, which determines how much data can move between a chip's memory and computing unit. That bandwidth depends on a technology known as High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) used in AI chips to ensure efficient data transmission in AI model training. China's top HBM maker CXMT, or ChangXin Memory Technologies, is still about three to four years behind industry leaders like South Korea's SK Hynix and Samsung, and American Micron, according to MS Hwang, research director at Counterpoint Research, a research firm. Last year, the Biden administration further tightened export controls on China, including restrictions on HBM sales, forcing Chinese companies to rely on existing stockpiles. Beijing has requested Washington to lift restrictions on HBM as part of the trade deal negotiations, Financial Times reported this week. Key appeal of H20 for Chinese companies also lies in Huawei's limited production capacity and Nvidia's well-established ecosystem, said Qingyuan Lin, senior analyst at Bernstein focusing China's semiconductor industry. 'Even when you want to completely replace the H20 demand with the local guys, they're not able to deliver the amount of chips that's needed,' he said. The supply bottlenecks stem from constraints in scaling up production of both the manufacturing of computing units of the AI chips and the integration of various components in them, a technology known as advanced packaging in the industry, Lin said. Bernstein estimated that Huawei's shipments of its advanced AI chips in 2025 would amount to around 700,000 units, still far short of the demand in the country. CNN has reached out to Huawei for comment. Meanwhile, Nvidia's powerful ecosystem, which integrates its chips with its software platform, has created what experts call a 'moat,' making it difficult and costly for AI developers who train models on its software to switch to alternatives. 'The H20 comes with a complete ecosystem covering both hardware and software support, ensuring better compatibility and ease of integration,' said Brady Wang, associate director at Counterpoint. 'This ecosystem maturity is still a challenge for many Chinese-developed chips, making the H20 more attractive despite its cost disadvantage.' 'Very close' Still, experts said China's rapid progress in semiconductor technology should not be underestimated. Years of tightening export controls have injected both urgency and opportunity into Beijing's push for self-sufficiency, Lin said. While chipmaking technology appeared to stall after Huawei's 2023 flagship smartphone showcased advanced chips that American officials had deemed extremely difficult to produce, domestic chipmaking equipment companies have been steadily gaining ground, he said. 'The local guys actually had very little chance to gain share from the global players because of the technology gap, but export controls created a market that didn't exist before and accelerated the domestic substitution,' he said. Bernstein projects that the percentage of homemade AI chips in China will surge from 17% in 2023 to 55% by 2027, while American suppliers like Nvidia and AMD will shrink to 45% from 83%. In April, Huang of Nvidia met with Trump in Washington, urging the administration to loosen export controls on chips and saying that the diffusion of American AI technology around the world needs to be accelerated. 'There's no question that Huawei is one of the most formidable technology companies in the world…they made enormous progress in the last several years,' he said. 'China is right behind us. We're very, very close.' CNN's Hassan Tayir and Fred He contributed reporting. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump criticizes ‘fake news,' Democrat, Zelensky in series of posts
President Trump late Sunday in a pair of posts on Truth Social ripped the media and a prominent Democrat for criticisms of his summit on Friday with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump met with Putin in Alaska, and will meet Monday with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky as he seeks to find a way to end the more than three-year war between those two countries. Media criticism of the summit has focused on the lack of clear accomplishments from the meeting, and Trump's decision to literally roll out a red carpet for the Russian leader. 'The Fake News has been saying for 3 days that I suffered a 'major defeat' by allowing President Vladimir Putin of Russia to have a major Summit in the United States,' Trump wrote. 'Actually, he would have loved doing the meeting anywhere else but the U.S., and the Fake News knows this. It was a major point of contention! If we had the Summit elsewhere, the Democrat run and controlled media would have said what a terrible thing THAT was. These people are sick!' Trump then criticized Democrats and the media for wanting crime in D.C., an apparent reference to his decision to federalize the local police force and call in the National Guard to the nation's capital. Trump then turned to criticism of Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who earlier on Sunday had described Trump's decision to federalize D.C. police as a 'stunt.' 'The very unattractive (both inside and out!) Senator from Connecticut, Chris Murphy, said 'Putin got everything that he wanted.' Actually, 'nobody got anything,' too soon, but getting close. 'Murphy is a lightweight who thinks it made the Russian President look good in coming to America. Actually, it was very hard for President Putin to do so. This war can be ended, NOW, but stupid people like Chris Murphy, John Bolton, and others, make it much harder to do so,' Trump wrote, referencing his former national security adviser. Murphy on Sunday said Trump called in the National Guard to Washington, D.C., and federalized the police because he 'didn't like the fact that the walls were closing in on him, that his own base was questioning why he wouldn't release the Epstein files, why he was protecting very powerful people.' Murphy made those remarks in an interview with NBC News's Kristen Welker on 'Meet the Press.' Murphy had also criticized the summit, saying Trump was effectively elevating Putin on the global stage. Trump in a third post also criticized Zelensky, again suggesting that ending the war with Russia was all on his shoulders. 'President Zelenskyy of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight,' Trump wrote. He blamed former President Obama for Russia having taken over Crime in 2014, and appeared to blame the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 on Ukraine's discussions about entering NATO. Russia unilaterally invaded Ukraine in 2022, after previously taking over Crimea, recognized as part of Ukraine, in 2014.
