DC council member defends Home Rule amid Trump's threat to intervene
The Brief
D.C. Councilmember Brooke Pinto is defending D.C.'s Home Rule, emphasizing local leadership and improvements in crime and homelessness.
Pinto cites a 35% drop in violent crime and progress in reducing homeless encampments.
Mayor Muriel Bowser continues to push for D.C. to become the 51st state in response to federal takeover talks.
WASHINGTON - In the wake of President Donald Trump's recent comments suggesting the federal government take control of Washington, D.C., Councilmember Brooke Pinto expressed concerns over the legitimate threat to the city's self-governance.
Pinto, who represents Ward 2, emphasized that Washington, D.C. has had Home Rule for more than 50 years, allowing residents to elect their local leaders and make decisions about their city's future.
The backstory
Last week, aboard Air Force One, the president criticized D.C.'s governance, referencing issues such as homeless encampments and the city's handling of crime. "There are too many tents on the lawn," Trump said, calling for federal intervention.
The remarks have sparked concerns among D.C. residents and leaders, with Pinto expressing dismay at the possibility of losing control over local affairs.
What they're saying
Pinto, in an exclusive interview on FOX 5's "On The Hill," acknowledged the anxiety surrounding the President's comments but urged that D.C. must continue focusing on the issues within its control.
"What I and my colleagues are staying focused on now is doing everything we can to run our city the best way we can," Pinto said. "We ended the year following the passage of my legislation with the lowest violent crime numbers we've had in 30 years."
On the issue of homelessness, Pinto pointed to the city's efforts to reduce encampments.
Over the past two years, D.C. has reduced the number of people living in tents by nearly half, implementing strategies like the CARE Pilot, which connects individuals to services and housing.
"We should not have people living outside in unsafe, undignified conditions," she said. "We're working to ensure that people are moved indoors into safe, dignified housing."
The council member also highlighted progress in crime reduction, referencing a 35% drop in violent crime.
Despite these improvements, the White House has continued to express concerns, with some federal leaders suggesting that more action is needed. Pinto assured that efforts to enhance public safety, including initiatives to support the police and reduce violent crime, are ongoing.
"We've had success, but there is still work to do," Pinto said. She mentioned upcoming legislation to improve police retention and further crime reduction strategies, emphasizing a comprehensive approach that includes prevention, support for officers, and efforts to help formerly incarcerated individuals reenter society.
When asked about the ongoing partnership between local and federal governments, Pinto said that while the federal government plays a critical role in areas such as crime prosecution and police reimbursement, D.C. must maintain its authority to make decisions that impact its residents. "The federal government can and should help with things like filling vacancies, supporting law enforcement, and providing resources," she explained.
Pinto's comments reflect her ongoing commitment to D.C.'s self-governance and the belief that local leaders are best equipped to address the city's challenges.
"I'm laser-focused on public safety, education, housing, and improving our business environment," she said. "We'll continue to work with the federal government, but our priorities remain local."
The Source
FOX 5's "On The Hill" hosted by Tom Fitzgerald

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
500 Marines ‘prepared to deploy' to LA: Northern Command
Approximately 500 U.S. Marines are 'prepared to deploy' to Los Angeles amid rising tensions between protesters and law enforcement over President Trump's immigration policies, according to a statement from U.S. Northern Command. The Marines are 'in a prepared to deploy status should they be necessary to augment and support the [Defense Department's] protection of federal property and personnel efforts,' reads the statement released Sunday. The notice came a day after Trump announced he had authorized the deployment of approximately 2,000 California Army National Guard troops, 300 of whom were deployed Sunday at three locations in the Los Angeles area: Los Angeles, Paramount and Compton. The federalization of the California National Guard represents a rare and legally murky step that bypassed the consent of California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), who said Sunday evening that he plans to bring a lawsuit against the Trump administration for bypassing him. The last time the federal government mobilized National Guard members without the consent of a governor was in 1965, when former President Lyndon Johnson sent Guard members to Selma, Ala., to protect civil rights protesters there. The National Guard is relatively limited in its scope, since members are deployed specifically to protect federal buildings, which includes the downtown Los Angeles detention center where much of the unrest centered. The military is generally barred from carrying out domestic law enforcement duties. Declaring the Insurrection Act is seen as a potential path around those restrictions. Trump did not rule out invoking the Insurrection Act during a gaggle with reporters before boarding Air Force One on Sunday, but he suggested the current protests against immigration raids had not yet risen to insurrection. Shortly after the gaggle, Trump issued a statement on Truth Social claiming that 'violent, insurrectionist mobs are swarming and attacking our Federal Agents to try and stop our deportation operations.' He said he directed relevant Cabinet officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, 'to take all such action necessary to liberate Los Angeles from the Migrant Invasion, and put an end to these Migrant riots.' Hegseth said Sunday morning that Marines were ready to be deployed to Los Angeles if needed. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
How Trump Could Use The Insurrection Act To Deploy Troops In LA
As protests continue to flare in Los Angeles over the Trump administration carrying out immigration raids and deploying National Guard troops to the area, President Donald Trump has floated the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act over objections from California's governor and the mayor of LA. Invoking the Insurrection Act, which generally gives the president the authority to quell rebellion or unrest by deploying the military, would be an escalation of the administration's actions so far in California. On Saturday, Trump deployed at least 300 National Guard troops to downtown Los Angeles after thousands of protesters took to the streets. They largely concentrated themselves in the city's garment district, where federal agents had started conducting raids for undocumented workers on Friday. According to the Department of Homeland Security, rioters assaulted multiple ICE officers, 'slashed tires, defaced buildings and taxpayer funded property,' the agency said in a statement on Saturday. (The agency also singled out several Democratic lawmakers, accusing them of 'villainizing and demonizing' ICE agents.) Local news station KTLA reported Monday that at least five LAPD officers have been injured, requiring medical care. Six other officers experienced minor injuries that did require hospitalization. Many protesters were not violent nor particularly destructive, but some individuals lobbed rocks and fireworks at police, or set driverless cars on fire. Los Angeles police made roughly 150 arrests on Sunday, according to The New York Times. Law enforcement used flash-bangs and rubber bullets against protesters. During a live broadcast on Sunday, police hit a journalist in the leg with a rubber bullet. Trump signed a proclamation late Saturday that mobilized the Guard to respond to protests against the raids, claiming the demonstrations interfered with the 'faithful execution of federal immigration laws.' As tensions escalated on Sunday, the Pentagon said it was prepared to send in at least 500 active U.S. Marines to Los Angeles. Trump's proclamation is not an invocation of the Insurrection Act but instead relies on Title 10, or 10 USC 12406, a federal code that allows him to wield his authority as president to federalize the National Guard but only under very limited circumstances. Those circumstances include: an actual foreign invasion or the threat of a foreign invasion, an actual or threatened rebellion against 'the authority of the government of the United States,' or when the president is unable to executive the nation's laws with 'regular forces.' Before boarding Air Force One on Sunday, Trump was asked by reporters whether he intended to invoke the Insurrection Act outright. 'Depends on whether or not there's an insurrection,' he said, adding that he wouldn't let protesters 'get away with it.' 'We're not going to let them get away with it. We're going to have troops everywhere, we're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart,' Trump said. California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass have objected to the White House's use of the National Guard, and Newsom has said he intends to sue the administration. Newsom called the move by Trump to federalize California's National Guard 'purposefully inflammatory.' Typically, it is a state's governor who has control over that state's Guard, not the federal government. And notably, within Trump's proclamation is language that appears to clarify this. Under Title 10, the president is allowed to call the Guard into federal service in any state but 'orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States.' The Insurrection Act of 1807 — which is a bit of a misnomer since it is actually a combination of several statutes enacted by Congress from 1792 to 1871 — is a federal law that gives the president the power to deploy the military or National Guard to put down domestic rebellions, uprisings or other fits of civil unrest. The act uses Congress' constitutional authority to 'provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.' When the Insurrection Act is invoked, it suspends the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the military from getting involved in local or state law enforcement. Invoking the law is rare; it has occurred just 30 times in history. The last time was in 1992 as riots gripped Los Angeles following the acquittal of police officers accused of viciously beating Rodney King and California's governor called on then-President George H.W. Bush for help. Trump floated the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act in 2020 after the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis sparked a wave of nationwide protests, most of which were peaceful. Martial law and the Insurrection Act are not one and the same. The Insurrection Act is invoked, typically, to have the military assist civilian law enforcement. Martial law refers to when the military becomes enforcers of local and state laws. The Supreme Court has never ruled on whether the president can unilaterally declare martial law or whether he would need Congress to approve the declaration. A president can use the Insurrection Act in a number of ways. For example, its provisions state that troops can be deployed under the act regardless of whether a state asks for them to be sent there. And the law cites various reasons presidents may send them. Troops can be deployed to quell violent unrest or to simply enforce federal law in a given locality. (The latest president to invoke the Insurrection Act against a state's will was Lyndon Johnson when he federalized the Alabama National Guard to protect civil rights protesters that marched from Selma to Montgomery.) The president does not need congressional approval to invoke the Insurrection Act, though he is required to at least issue a proclamation first that demands anyone causing unrest leave that area before troops are sent in. Many provisions built into the Insurrection Act are vague. One statute gives the president the right to suppress rebellion, domestic violence or some 'unlawful combination or conspiracy' in any state impeding U.S. law. Conspiracy is not defined in this Insurrection Act statute, meaning, as the Brennan Center for Justice notes, this provision under the Insurrection Act umbrella could be interpreted to mean that the president can use military force against any two people he thinks are conspiring to break the law. Trump Sets National Guard On Los Angeles As Protesters Counter Immigration Raids: Live Updates California Governor Plans To File Lawsuit Against Trump Over National Guard Deployment To Protests 'Arrest Me, Let's Go': Newsom Punches Back At Trump Border Czar Kamala Harris Torches Trump Over 'Cruel, Calculated' Move Targeting Los Angeles Trump Deploys National Guard As Los Angeles Protests Against Immigration Agents Continue

USA Today
4 hours ago
- USA Today
Feds ask to keep Kilmar Abrego Garcia in jail pending trial
Feds ask to keep Kilmar Abrego Garcia in jail pending trial The detention request comes after Garcia was mistakenly deported to Salvador in March and then returned to face criminal charges in Tennessee. Show Caption Hide Caption Trump on the return of deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia President Trump spoke with reporters on Air Force One on the return of deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Acting U.S. Attorney Robert McGuire argued that Garcia is 'a serious risk' to flee or threaten witnesses in the case. Justice Department lawyers contend Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran immigrant wrongfully deported to his home country and now returned to face criminal charges, should remain jailed while the case is argued. U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw in Tennessee scheduled a detention hearing to consider the question on June 13. Garcia is charged with conspiracy to transport undocumented immigrants and unlawful transportation for financial gain. He faces a maximum of 10 years in prison for each person transported, and the indictment unsealed last week charged him with driving a van with nine other people in it. Acting U.S. Robert McGuire argued in a filing June 9 that one of the immigrants transported in the conspiracy was a minor, which would justify detention. Garcia 'is a serious risk' to flee or to threaten, injure or intimidate witnesses in the case, McGuire argued. 'It is not simply that he would face serious prison time,' McGuire said in the filing. 'It is that, if convicted, he would likely lose forever the opportunity to remain lawfully in the United States.' 'This motivation is substantially different from a citizen defendant who, while he may face prison time, does not face that permanent expulsion from a country where his family currently resides,' McGuire said. Garcia was among hundreds of immigrants deported March 15 to a notorious Salvadoran prison as an alleged gang member, in his case MS-13. Immigration officials acknowledged an 'administrative error' in removing him despite a court order preventing his deportation while he sought asylum in the U.S. Garcia has denied being a member of MS-13. His lawyers have said he needs to meet with his Maryland family and lawyers to mount his defense, but that he has not gotten a fair trial in the court of public opinion.