Trump wants to take over some U.S. cities. It's unlikely — but he can make life hard for them

CBC

4 days ago

Social Sharing
U.S. President Donald Trump is squaring off against American cities — and in the last few weeks, he's implied that he would use the powers of the presidency to order a federal takeover of New York City and Washington, D.C.
Spurred by his efforts to crack down on immigration and what he characterizes as high crime rates in urban areas, Trump's ongoing feud with several major U.S. cities has reached a boiling point in recent weeks.
"We're thinking about doing it, to be honest with you. We want a capital that's run flawlessly," he said of Washington, D.C., during a cabinet meeting a few weeks ago.
His threats have also extended to New York City, especially in reference to mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani — a self-described socialist and rising star in the Democratic Party who Trump says would be a disaster if elected mayor in the country's biggest metropolis.
"We're going to straighten out New York.... Maybe we're going to have to straighten it out from Washington," the president said earlier this month.
Does he have the power to do that? It really depends on what — and where — Trump is referring to, according to experts who spoke with CBC News. But he could find ways to make life very difficult for city governments and their residents.
WATCH | Trump to expand deportations in Democratic-run cities:
Trump to expand deportations in Democratic-run cities
30 days ago
What are the limits of his power?
The Supreme Court has been "extraordinarily clear" that the federal government can't commandeer parts of state government, said David Schleicher, a lawyer and professor at Yale Law School who is an expert in state and city governments.
"That is, they can't tell state officials or local officials how to run government, and so they can't take them over and make them do stuff," he explained.
That's outlined in the U.S. Constitution's 10th Amendment, which delegates powers to the states that haven't been assigned to the federal government. Within that amendment, the federal government is forbidden from directing state or city officials to work toward its own objectives.
"If what [Trump] means is like, remove the mayor and replace him with Rudy Giuliani or something — that's not something that's within his authority," said Schleicher.
However, when Trump refers to having "tremendous power" at the White House to "run places when we have to" — as he did earlier this month, responding to a question about Mamdani's rise as a leading mayoral candidate — he could be referring to a few different outcomes.
There are several ways the federal government can "pick fights" with cities, according to Philip Wallach, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think-tank in Washington, D.C.
That could include sending immigration officials or federal law enforcement into a city, not unlike what Trump did with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in Los Angeles earlier this summer, or dispatching the National Guard during the protests against the raids.
WATCH | Why everything is an emergency for Trump:
Protests, tariffs, borders: Why Trump says everything is an emergency | About That
1 month ago
Description: U.S. President Donald Trump deployed the National Guard to respond to immigration protests in California with a rarely used law invoked when the government believes a rebellion is underway. Andrew Chang breaks down how Trump's framing of these protests as an emergency — along with everything from trade deficits to fentanyl — exists as part of a larger pattern of governing by executive order with unchecked power.
He could also threaten fiscal consequences through his own authority or with Congress's help — something he has done on several occasions to Chicago.
New York City, in particular, is relying on the federal government for $7.4 billion US in funding during the 2026 fiscal year.
Wallach compared that dynamic to the Trump administration's ongoing conflicts with major U.S. universities, including New York's own Columbia University. While the federal government doesn't control Columbia, it has used cuts to federal funding as leverage over the school.
"I would expect that same kind of playbook to apply to New York City, but on a much bigger scale," said Wallach.
D.C. more vulnerable to federal interference
Trump has similarly mused about taking over Washington, D.C., claiming that the area is riddled with crime; data shows that violent incidents were down significantly in 2024.
But presidential powers are a different story in the nation's capital. The District of Columbia, being a federal district and not a state, is much more vulnerable to meddling by the federal government and Congress.
D.C. is managed under the Home Rule Act, a form of self-government that became law in 1973. But Congress reviews all legislation passed by the local council and has authority over the district's budget — and its residents don't have a voting representative in Congress. The president also appoints the district's judges.
"They have rights in New York City that we do not have in D.C., so we're in a much more precarious position," said Vanessa Batters-Thompson, the executive director of the D.C. Appleseed Center for Law and Justice.
D.C. has had many different government structures over the years, but she says "frankly, past federal management of the city has not worked very well," partly because it was difficult to balance federal power with local input.
And while Trump has argued for a federal takeover of D.C. to crack down on disorder, Batters-Thompson notes that federal law enforcement already has a major presence in the city — from the FBI to the Capitol Police to the Park Police — in addition to D.C.'s local police force.
A complete takeover of the district would probably mean eliminating the Home Rule Act, she said.
But there are other options, like having Congress legislate the area heavily, or enlisting a "control board" — a '90s-era strategy in which the federal government appointed a team of officials to sit above D.C.'s mayor, acting as a backstop to spending and policy decisions.
However, "I would argue that re-imposition of a control board is no longer necessary," said Batters-Thompson, partly because D.C.'s finances are now overseen by a chief financial officer who acts as "a sort of one-person control board."
The political benefits of a Trump-city feud
Trump sees a political opportunity when he positions himself as a counter-influence to solidly Democratic cities, said several of the experts who spoke with CBC News — a recent example being his public tête-à-tête with California governor Gavin Newsom during the Los Angeles immigration raid protests.
"Trump is thinking about other cities where either the politicians in those cities or the population in general present an opposition to his vision as president," said Domingo Morel, an associate professor of political science and public service at New York University.
He likened this to the friction that played out between Republican-governed states and largely Democratic cities in the '80s and '90s: "I think Donald Trump is taking that playbook ... and now saying we're going to do this at the federal level."
Schleicher, the Yale law professor, said Trump and Mamdani have a relationship that is convenient to both of them.
"I imagine Trump's political team views Mamdani as a gift to them, in that they get to oppose the kind of figure they'd like to oppose," said Schleicher, in reference to Mamdani being young, Muslim, and avowedly left-wing.
Meanwhile, Mamdani can use Trump's general unpopularity among New Yorkers to his advantage, "because likening other figures to Trump is to his political benefit," Schleicher added.
"This is the kind of politics to which I imagine there's going to be constant sniping because it benefits both of them."