Trump's D.C. Takeover Is a Fascist Spectacle
In a statement, the White House proclaimed that Trump had 'taken bold executive action to liberate Washington, D.C., from the cesspool of crime and homelessness that it has become after decades of unilateral Democrat leadership.' Trump himself told reporters during a press briefing that Monday should be regarded as 'Liberation Day,' a phrase he last used for the announcement of high tariff rates that sent stock markets tumbling this spring.
The repurposing of the slogan of a past failure is telling. Monday's move comes as the Trump administration finds itself struggling on a host of other policy fronts. Recent economic data showed that hiring is slowing amid the president's trade wars, which prompted Trump to fire the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner earlier this month. Trump and the Justice Department continue to resist calls to release the Epstein files, which reportedly describe Trump's politically damaging friendship with deceased child-sex-trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.
Early indications suggest that Trump's latest brainwave is more performative than substantive. One social media user filmed Drug Enforcement Agency agents patrolling the National Mall in full Kevlar gear on Monday morning. The greatest public safety threat that they will likely encounter there are the high prices for the nearby ice cream trucks that cater to passing tourists.
At the same time, it is utterly futile to ask whether this operation is really meant to reduce crime in D.C., whether it is a trial run for some future authoritarian maneuver, or whether it is a distraction from all of the administration's other setbacks and scandals. For fascists, shows of armed force are both a means and an end. At minimum, the White House will create some good B-roll footage for Fox News broadcasts to use when hyping fears of urban crime.
The plan to take over the city's police force began last week after Edward Coristine, a 19-year-old former DOGE staffer who now works for the Social Security Administration, was allegedly assaulted in a late-night attack near Dupont Circle. Police reports said that he was attacked by as many as 10 teenagers, with officers later apprehending two of them.
D.C. experienced an unusual surge in violent crime in 2023, which prompted widespread concern among district and federal leaders. Local crime statistics suggest that the district has turned a corner since then. The Justice Department reported in January that homicides and robberies had dropped by one-third since the post-pandemic peak, with armed carjackings down by half and some assaults at their lowest level in three decades.
Pointing to overall crime statistics and long-term trends is a fool's errand, however, since all it takes is a handful of incidents for the White House to claim a crackdown is needed. Trump posted a photo of Coristine's bruised and bleeding face on his personal social media platform shortly after last week's incident and promised action.
'If D.C. doesn't get its act together, and quickly, we will have no choice but to take Federal control of the City, and run this City how it should be run, and put criminals on notice that they're not going to get away with it anymore,' the president wrote. 'Perhaps it should have been done a long time ago, then this incredible young man, and so many others, would not have had to go through the horrors of Violent Crime. If this continues, I am going to exert my powers, and FEDERALIZE this City.'
Trump's threat to 'federalize' D.C. is nonsensical on its face. The District of Columbia is a federal enclave under Congress's control, not the president's. In one sense, it has been federalized ever since George Washington, who—borrowing from his ample experience as a land speculator in the region—helped select the 10-square-mile district's location during his presidency. Congress formally established the enclave in 1801 and experimented with a variety of different governance structures for the city's residents over the years.
In 1973, federal lawmakers enacted the Home Rule Act to allow D.C. to govern itself through an elected mayor and a City Council, similar to those found in other major cities. Richard Nixon, the president at the time, said that he supported the measure as part of his administration's overall commitment to promote local governance. D.C. residents had previously received the right to vote in presidential elections through the Twenty-Third Amendment; they still lack congressional representation to this day.
Though D.C. is Congress's responsibility, Trump does have unique powers within the district that he does not enjoy elsewhere. When the president staged a major immigration enforcement operation in Los Angeles earlier this summer, for example, he was able to federalize the state National Guard and send in federal agents from around the country to carry out various raids and suppress protests. At the same time, he had no legal authority to conscript California's civilian state and local law enforcement agencies to assist him.
D.C. is different. Among the Home Rule Act's provisions is Section 740, which allows the president to commandeer the Metropolitan Police Department, in whole or in part, whenever he concludes that 'special conditions of an emergency nature' require it. The president's control can only last for 48 hours unless he provides written notice and explanation to the House and Senate leadership of the committees that oversee D.C. governance. From there, the president has control over the MPD for a full month.
The House and Senate can choose to extend a president's control for longer by passing a joint resolution to authorize it. The Home Rule Act does not provide any further limits beyond that; its drafters apparently did not envision that an authoritarian president would hold office and misuse the emergency powers. If Congress does not act, it is unclear whether Trump could simply seize control of the D.C. police in 30-day increments for the remainder of his presidency.
This is a far cry from 'federalizing' the district, even if one sets aside the misconception behind that term. D.C.'s civilian government remains intact and operational. D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb claimed in a post on Twitter on Monday that Trump's actions were 'unprecedented, unnecessary, and unlawful' and suggested, without elaboration, that district officials were 'considering all their options' on a potential response.
Mayor Muriel Bowser, who has adopted a conciliatory stance with the Trump administration since its return in January, said that she 'can't say we were totally surprised' by Monday's announcement. She also described it as 'unsettling and unprecedented,' then tried to emphasize recent reductions in violent crime that showed Trump's intervention was unnecessary.
For Trump and his supporters, the actual reduction in crime in the nation's capital is probably beside the point. His public remarks depicted the nation's capital as covered in 'filth and decay' and overrun by 'tents, squalor, filth, and crime.' The reality does not matter, only the fascist spectacle that he can manufacture and sell to Fox News viewers. Conservatives have worked tirelessly to convince themselves that urban areas are terrifying and that Democrats are synonymous with crime and disorder.
In his comments on Monday, the president even suggested that he would allow the police officers now under his command to abuse citizens at will. 'The police are standing and they're told, 'Don't do anything under any circumstances,'' he said, perhaps referring to protesters of some kind. 'And you can see they want to get at it. And they're standing there, and people are spitting in their face, and they're not allowed to do anything. But now they are allowed to do whatever the hell they want.' Well, at least for the next 30 days.
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gov. Cox defends Utah Senate president
Utah Gov. Spencer Cox stood by state Senate President Stuart Adams on Thursday, defending the top lawmaker's decision not to disclose his personal connection to a law inspired by the criminal case of his granddaughter. During a tense exchange with reporters, Cox said there is no need for an investigation into Adams' behavior because he and Senate Majority Leader Kirk Cullimore, R-Draper, have openly stated the extent of their involvement in the law's passage. 'There's nothing to investigate,' Cox said. 'The facts of this are very, very clear.' What is the new law? The provision, which passed in 2024 as part of SB213, allows 18-year-old high school students to be charged as 17-year-olds if they engage in noncoercive sexual activity with teenagers who are 13. In a stated effort to keep the process fair, Adams did not tell legislators, except for Cullimore — the bill's primary sponsor — that his granddaughter was currently the defendant in a Davis County criminal case falling into that category. Cullimore has said that after Adams told him about his granddaughter's situation in 2023 he contacted her defense attorney, Cara Tangaro, to identify statutory changes to prevent high school students from being charged with child rape when no force was involved. The change was discussed in committee hearings and floor debates before passing as part of the 49-page criminal justice omnibus bill. The law did not apply retroactively to Adams' granddaughter, but it was referenced at her sentencing. Court observers disagree on the extent to which the law may have shaped the eventual plea bargain that let the granddaughter avoid a prison sentence and sex offender designation. 'I don't think there are any facts in dispute,' Cox said. 'He talked to the Senate majority leader. The Senate majority leader took that information and he proposed a piece of legislation.' Calls for Adam to resign State Sen. Nate Blouin, D-Salt Lake City, Utah Democratic Party Chair Brian King, and activist groups across the political spectrum have called on Adams to resign, alleging that he abused his power. But Cox said these criticisms are unfounded. This is the process taken by many pieces of legislation, the governor said, and by not disclosing his personal situation, including to Cox, Adams allowed lawmakers to focus on the policy's merits. 'Every single legislator has experiences in their life where they see something that they feel may be unjust, and that influences the way they bring legislation to the table,' Cox said. Cox pushed back against some legislators who have said the provision was snuck into the bill late in the process. It was part of the initial draft and was debated by stakeholders, Cox said, adding that those who say they didn't know about the provision are 'lying to you, or they're a terrible legislator.' Review will happen Cox repeatedly said he was 'grateful' that Adams had not told him 'this was impacting someone in his family' because it may have changed how he 'reacted to the bill.' But Cox said he and others now have a chance to revisit the legislation if needed. On Friday, Utah House Speaker Mike Schultz announced the creation of a working group of policy experts to 'review' SB213 and analyze state laws related to unlawful sexual activity among high school students. In an interview with Deseret News and last week, Adams said he had no participation in the drafting of the provision, or its placement in SB213, and said the way the bill became law 'was done ethically and morally perfect.' Cox said on Thursday that Adams made the right call by staying out of the legislative process as much as he could as it related to the provision — even if it was initiated by his concerns tied to a family connection. 'I think it was appropriate for the top person in the Senate not to weigh in on this bill, which is exactly what happened,' Cox told reporters. 'He did not weigh in on this bill — I can only imagine what you would have written if he had.' Play Farm Merge Valley
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration not eyeing equity in companies that are increasing US investment, WSJ reports
(Reuters) -The Trump administration is considering taking equity stakes in companies receiving funds from the 2022 CHIPS Act but has no plans to seek shares in bigger semiconductor firms that are increasing their U.S. investments, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, citing a government official. The development follows comments made by U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who on Tuesday said the government is continuing to work on the possibility of taking a 10% stake in troubled chipmaker Intel. However, the administration does not intend to take equity stakes in companies like TSMC, which are ramping up investment, the official told the Journal. Businesses not increasing their commitments may need to offer equity to the government in exchange for subsidies. "The Commerce Department is not looking to take equity from TSMC and Micron," the official told WSJ. TSMC executives have already had discussions about giving back their subsidies if the administration asks to become a shareholder, according to the report. The White House and TSMC did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment. TSMC, which counts Nvidia and Apple as key clients, announced plans for a $100 billion investment in the United States during an event with President Donald Trump at the White House in March. This investment is in addition to $65 billion committed for three manufacturing facilities in the state of Arizona. The U.S. Commerce Department, which oversees the $52.7 billion CHIPS Act, formally known as the CHIPS and Science Act, late last year finalized subsidies of $6.6 billion for TSMC to produce semiconductors in the United States. Besides Intel, Micron, TSMC and Samsung were among the biggest recipients of CHIPS Act funding. In the past, the U.S. government has taken stakes in companies during periods of economic uncertainty to provide financial support and restore confidence. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'It's alarming': Education Department revokes guidance on English learning services
The U.S. Education Department has rescinded critical guidance to schools regarding how they provide English language learning services for roughly 5 million students in U.S. schools. The Education Department on Tuesday rescinded a 2015 Dear Colleague letter on its website, which served as a guide for school districts that are serving English learners to ensure they're providing adequate resources to their students under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In a statement to ABC News, the Education Department said the document was "overly prescriptive" and that it micro-managed states. MORE: Immigrant families fear Trump's deportations as children return to school "States have vastly different needs for this important population of students and are best equipped to determine how best to educate these students while following all applicable federal laws," the department said in the statement. The document is still available online for "historical purposes only," according to a notice. The Washington Post was the first to report the guidance had been rescinded. Advocates worry the decision removes federal oversight and accountability, which could lead to school districts opting to discriminate against English learners. Despite those concerns, removing the guidance does not strip resources from schools nor does it alter state curriculums, which are handled by state and local agencies. Roxanne Garza, director of higher education policy at the Education Trust, suggested the move could further the fears of immigrant students wary of returning to school amid the Trump administration's measures to curb illegal migration. "I think it could add to the overall feeling of fear -- like making these people, these families, feel like they don't belong in their communities." MORE: Education leaders split on how Department of Education cuts will affect families Montserrat Garibay, former assistant deputy secretary and director of the Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA) during the Biden administration, equated the now-rescinded English-learners document to the Bible for English language instructors. During her tenure, she said the letter was instrumental to her office in providing resources to the students who needed it most. Garibay, who said nearly three quarters of students in English Language Acquisition programming are U.S. citizens, argued the move could have a lasting impact if it results in scaled-back resources. "These are children who eventually are going to be paying our Medicare and Medicaid, right? Our Social Security, because they are U.S. citizens. And it's outrageous that we are not providing them with the resources that they need to be successful in the 21st century." Garibay also said lifting the long-standing guidance appears to fly in the face of an executive order Trump signed earlier this year designating English as the official language of the United States. Education advocates decried the agency's decision. MORE: Trump admin live updates: US, European Union announce 'Framework Agreement' on trade ImmSchools Co-Founder Viridiana Carrizales told ABC News "It's alarming because, you know, it feels like this administration is stripping away every right, every protection, funding, access to resources etc. that are so critical for those 5 million students in the country who are learning English." Carrizales, whose organization partners with school districts to create more welcoming and safe schools for K-12 immigrant students, said the recent move is a significant shift for classroom educators because immigrant protections, overall, are "diminishing." "We're hearing a lot more concerns from educators themselves, who're trying to figure out how they can meet and support this population when their resources and protections are being taken away," she said. Anne Kelsey, senior policy analyst for disability rights at the Young Center for Immigrant Children's Rights, argued the decision will harm immigrant children and families. "Language access is a fundamental right that builds safer, smarter, and more connected communities, and ensures children can receive a full and fair education while keeping their parents actively involved," Kelsey wrote in a statement to ABC News, adding "These programs welcome parents and families fully into the school community and we know it leads to stronger educational outcomes for students." The effort to return education responsibilities and decisions to the states is arguably President Donald Trump's top K-12 education priority. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon kicked off her 50-state "Returning Education to the States" tour last week.