Trump is once again threatening to “straighten out” cities like Chicago, New York, and San Francisco by sending in federal forces. Here’s how this realistically plays out, based on law, precedent, and politics.
What Trump can’t do
Outside of D.C., he has no direct authority over local police and can’t just take over a city.
State National Guard units answer to their governors. A Democratic governor (like Pritzker in Illinois or Hochul in New York) would have to approve activation for their state, unless Trump invoked something extraordinary.
The Posse Comitatus Act (1878) restricts use of the U.S. military in domestic law enforcement. Regular Army/Marines can’t just be deployed into Chicago or NYC to “police the streets.”
What he could try to do
Invoke the Insurrection Act (1807). This is the only real legal back door that allows a president to use federal troops in domestic law enforcement without governor approval — but it’s supposed to be reserved for rebellion, obstruction of federal law, or when civil authorities are completely unable/unwilling to maintain order. Even then, it would spark immediate lawsuits and likely end up in the Supreme Court.
Send federal agencies (FBI, ATF, DHS, DEA) into cities under the guise of “crime task forces.” He’s done this before — Operation Legend in 2020 was a smaller version of this, where federal officers were sent into Kansas City, Chicago, Albuquerque, etc. That’s far more likely than tanks rolling down Michigan Avenue.
Why this is political posturing
He’s clearly using crime in Democratic-run cities as a political weapon. It riles up his base, lets him attack Democratic mayors, and gives him a “law and order strongman” narrative going into 2026.
Legally, his hands are tied unless something extreme (riots, civil unrest, rebellion) happens that he can exploit. Governors will resist, courts will block, and Congress would weigh in.
The idea of the military “making Chicago safe” is pure theater — it appeals to a certain audience but collapses under legal and practical scrutiny.
How it could play out
The Bluff (Most Likely)
He ramps up federal task forces (FBI, ATF, DHS, DEA), calls a press conference, and claims victory. It’s noisy, politically useful, but limited in scope. No military, no city takeover.
The Insurrection Act Gambit (Worst-Case)
He tries to invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act to override governors and deploy troops. That triggers immediate lawsuits, national protests, and likely a showdown in the Supreme Court. The Pentagon itself might resist being used this way. It would be a full-blown constitutional crisis.
Bottom line
This is either political theater to rally his base, or an unprecedented abuse of power that collapses under legal and political resistance. The “uproar” is already there — but a lot of this is more about optics than actual authority.
= new reply since forum marked as read