A court is once again reviewing President Donald Trump’s decision to deploy armed National Guard troops across the District, as federal appeals court judges on Wednesday questioned whether the president could use military forces to police the nation’s capital despite objections from its elected leaders.
“It violates the law and the principles on which this country was founded to have the U.S. military policing the streets of any American community, including the District of Columbia,” D.C. Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb said following the hearing.
The confrontation before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit comes more than a year after Trump ordered troops into Washington in August 2025, declaring a crime-fighting mission even as violent crime was declining.
“For over a year, thousands of armed soldiers who are not from here and have limited law enforcement training have occupied our streets, spreading fear and confusion by patrolling near our schools, deploying next to ballot boxes, and marching through our neighborhoods,” Schwalb said. “This is not normal, or legal, and we cannot become numb to it.”
During Wednesday’s hearing, the three-judge panel pressed Justice Department attorney Eric McArthur to explain the limits on presidential authority to deploy National Guard troops.
Judge Cornelia T.L. Pillard questioned whether the administration’s interpretation effectively circumvented the Posse Comitatus Act, which limits the military’s involvement in domestic law enforcement.
Judge Judith Rogers also questioned the scope of presidential power.
“I think the limiting principle in our position is the president has to be calling out the guard in aid of the civil authorities,” McArthur responded.
The administration argues that Trump’s authority over the D.C. National Guard permits deployment and that troops are helping protect federal property and support law enforcement.
Schwalb’s lawsuit challenges three actions by the federal government. It alleges that the administration illegally deployed the D.C. National Guard for local law enforcement, brought troops from other states into Washington without the District’s consent, and asserted federal command over National Guard personnel who remained in state militia status.
The lawsuit also seeks to protect the District’s self-governing authority under the Home Rule Act and to ensure that civilian policing remains in legally authorized hands.
On Nov. 20, 2025, U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb ruled the deployment illegal and granted Schwalb’s request for a preliminary injunction.
The appeals court temporarily stayed the order, allowing troops to remain as the administration challenged Cobb’s ruling.
The deployment has continued, with about 2,900 troops remaining in Washington as of last week, according to an Associated Press report. The Defense Department has extended the mission through January 2029, and the federal government awarded a $292 million housing contract for personnel assigned to Joint Task Force-D.C.
Outside the courthouse, protesters reportedly demanded an end to the military presence and questioned why Washington residents should endure prolonged military patrols in their neighborhoods.
The appellate judges have not announced their decision. Their ruling could determine whether the president can continue to use National Guard troops for local law enforcement in Washington without the District’s consent.
Schwalb maintained that the military presence has already persisted far too long.
“It is long past time for this illegal deployment to end and for the National Guard to return to their homes, their families, and their regular jobs,” Schwalb said.
