U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb found that the Trump administration unlawfully deployed the National Guard in Washington, D.C., using troops for non-military, crime-deterrence duties without a request from local authorities. The judge also said the government lacked authority to bring in out-of-state Guard members and noted the presence involved more than 2,000 troops. Cobb stayed the removal order and gave the federal government 21 days to appeal. The decision highlights tensions over federal power and civilian self-government in the District.
Judge Rules Trump Administration Illegally Deployed National Guard in Washington, D.C.; 21-Day Appeal Window
U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb found that the Trump administration unlawfully deployed the National Guard in Washington, D.C., using troops for non-military, crime-deterrence duties without a request from local authorities. The judge also said the government lacked authority to bring in out-of-state Guard members and noted the presence involved more than 2,000 troops. Cobb stayed the removal order and gave the federal government 21 days to appeal. The decision highlights tensions over federal power and civilian self-government in the District.
05:30 AM, 11/21/2025Politics
A federal judge has ruled that President Donald Trump and the Defense Department acted unlawfully when they deployed National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., using them for non-military, crime-deterrence duties without a formal request from the District’s civilian authorities.
In a written order, U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb concluded that the administration "exceeded the bounds of their authority" and "acted contrary to law" by deploying the D.C. National Guard for policing tasks. Cobb also found that the federal government lacked statutory authority to bring in out-of-state National Guard members for those missions.
"The Court finds that the District’s exercise of sovereign powers within its jurisdiction is irreparably harmed by Defendants’ actions in deploying the Guards," Judge Cobb wrote in the order.
Cobb acknowledged the unique constitutional status of the District of Columbia but emphasized that Congress has granted D.C. rights of self-government that are infringed when federal officials exceed their statutory authority. The judge cited Title 49 of the D.C. Code as providing no basis for the president to call out the D.C. National Guard to conduct routine patrols or law-enforcement duties without a local request.
The court found the contested deployments involved the day-to-day presence of more than 2,000 National Guard troops—roughly two-thirds the size of the District’s police force. Cobb also warned that the creation of a guard unit specifically assigned to law-enforcement tasks risked turning the federal incursion into a lasting arrangement contrary to governing statutes.
Although Cobb ruled the deployments were unlawful, she temporarily stayed the portion of her order that would require the Guard to leave the District, giving the federal government 21 days to file an appeal.
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said the president was "well within his lawful authority" to deploy the Guard to protect federal assets and assist local law enforcement, and characterized the lawsuit as undermining crime-prevention efforts.
DC Attorney General Brian Schwalb called the federal actions "unprecedented federal overreach," saying the Guard should return to "their everyday lives, their regular jobs, their families, and their children."
The ruling raises immediate legal and political questions about the limits of federal authority in the District and the appropriate role of military forces in domestic public-safety operations. With the 21-day appeal window now open, the dispute is likely to proceed through the courts.