Congressman Jonathan L. Jackson Decries Trump’s Federal Takeover of D.C. Police, Citing Dark History of Military Occupation of Black Communities

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

WASHINGTON, D.C.— Congressman Jonathan L. Jackson (D-IL) today expressed strong opposition to President Donald Trump’s decision to place the Washington, D.C. Police Department under federal control and to deploy the National Guard in response to recent unrest. His statement highlights the significance of this move, which echoes the dark history of military occupation in Black communities during the Civil Rights era—a history marked by federal overreach, suppression of civil liberties, and systemic discrimination.

“The President’s actions go far beyond what is necessary for public safety,” Jackson stated. “They threaten to turn our nation’s capital into a militarized zone, reminiscent of the oppressive tactics used to silence Black voices during some of the darkest chapters of our history. This is not just a local issue—it is a matter of constitutional principle and civil rights.”

Historical context is essential here. In 1968, following the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., President Lyndon B. Johnson authorized the deployment of over 13,000 federal troops on April 5—a federal action executed under Public Law 90-374, also known as the Civil Rights Act of 1968, which included provisions for federal intervention in civil disturbances. Residents recall that event with sadness and frustration, as it marked a period of military occupation in their communities. Similarly, in Chicago, approximately 5,000 federal troops were dispatched alongside 6,700 Illinois National Guardsmen—deployments framed as restoring order but often perceived by Black communities as acts of intimidation and suppression of civil rights.

While this current deployment does not constitute martial law—a legal condition that would suspend civilian authority—it raises serious concerns under the U.S. Constitution and federal law. The First Amendment, protected by the Constitution of the United States, guarantees free speech and assembly, rights that should be respected even amid protests. The deployment of troops and federal police in such a manner potentially violates principles enshrined in the Tenth Amendment, which affirms the rights of states and local governments to govern themselves.

The data speaks volumes: in 2024, violent crime in D.C. decreased by 35% compared to 2023, with homicides down 32% and armed carjackings plummeting by 53%, according to statistics from the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Metropolitan Police Department. Despite these positive trends, the federal government’s unilateral efforts to federalize the D.C. Metropolitan Police—over the objections of Mayor Muriel Bowser—are a clear overstep of authority. Under the District of Columbia Home Rule Act of December 24, 1973 (Public Law 93-198), D.C. has autonomous legislative and administrative powers, and any attempt to override these powers without proper process contravenes this statute.

This federal intervention also breaches policy directives issued by the D.C. Homeland Security and Emergency Management Agency and runs counter to executive orders, including Executive Order 26-20, which emphasizes respecting local governance and civil liberties during emergency responses.

Congressman Jackson pledged to work with local officials to oppose what he calls a “dangerous and authoritarian precedent.” He urged his colleagues in Congress to stand firm against this overreach, which threatens the foundational principles of democracy and self-governance. With over 700,000 residents, Washington, D.C., deserves a federal government that upholds constitutional rights and respects local authority rather than overrides it through militarized tactics.

“We will not stand by as our capital is turned into a zone of occupation that recalls some of the darkest moments in our history,” Jackson proclaimed. “This is an assault on our democracy and the rights of D.C. residents—an affront to everything we stand for under the Constitution and the rule of law. We must push back against this overreach and ensure that the people of Washington, D.C., retain their right to self-governance without unwarranted federal interference.”

###