President Donald Trump’s bold move to seize control of Washington, D.C.’s police force has sparked a fierce legal battle. The capital’s Attorney General, Brian Schwalb, filed a lawsuit Friday, calling the White House’s actions a direct assault on D.C.’s cherished autonomy.
The Daily Beast reported that on Monday, Trump declared a “public safety emergency,” unleashing National Guard troops and federal law enforcement to patrol D.C. streets for at least 30 days.
The lawsuit, filed by Schwalb, challenges this takeover, specifically targeting the appointment of Terry Cole as the city’s “emergency police commissioner.” This dramatic escalation follows an alleged assault on a former Department of Government Efficiency employee, though official data shows D.C.’s violent crime rate at a three-decade low.
Schwalb’s lawsuit argues that the White House’s actions threaten the safety of D.C. residents and undermine the city’s self-governance.
“The Administration’s unlawful actions are an affront to the dignity and autonomy of the 700,000 Americans who call D.C. home,” Schwalb posted on X. Nice try, Attorney General, but painting this as a noble stand for “dignity” ignores the reality that federal oversight might just be the wake-up call D.C.’s leadership needs.
Trump’s emergency declaration on Monday set the stage for this showdown. It authorized federal agents to work alongside the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD), effectively sidelining local control. Critics, including Schwalb, see this as a power grab dressed up as public safety.
On Thursday night, Attorney General Pam Bondi upped the ante by installing Terry Cole, head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, as D.C.’s new police commissioner.
Cole now holds “all powers and duties” of the MPD chief, forcing current Chief Pamela Smith to seek his approval for any directives. This move, while bold, risks turning a well-oiled police force into a bureaucratic mess.
Schwalb didn’t mince words, claiming the order “threatens to upend the command structure of MPD and wreak operational havoc.” He warned that confusion over leadership could endanger both officers and the public. While Schwalb’s concern for clarity is valid, his alarmist tone smells more like political posturing than genuine fear for safety.
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, swiftly rejected Bondi’s order, vowing not to comply. “There is no statute that conveys the District’s personnel authority to a federal official,” Bowser declared on X. Her defiance, while spirited, sidesteps the legal weight of a presidential emergency declaration.
Bowser further argued that D.C. law requires the MPD to assist federal efforts during a presidentially declared emergency. Yet, she insists the city retains control over its personnel. It’s a classic case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too—cooperation on paper, rebellion in practice.
The lawsuit also highlights how Cole’s appointment could disrupt D.C.’s status as a sanctuary city. By allowing MPD to collaborate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the order challenges the city’s progressive immigration policies.
Schwalb’s team might cry foul, but aligning local police with federal immigration efforts could streamline law enforcement in a city that’s long dodged accountability.
Official data reveals an inconvenient truth: D.C.’s violent crime rate is at its lowest in 30 years. This statistic undercuts Trump’s rationale for declaring a public safety emergency. If crime is down, why the heavy-handed federal intervention?
The alleged assault on Edward “Big Balls” Coristine, a 19-year-old former DOGE employee, seems to be the spark for this federal overreach.
Two teenagers reportedly attacked Coristine, but details remain murky, and Schwalb’s lawsuit doesn’t directly tie the incident to the broader emergency. It’s hard to see how one assault justifies upending an entire city’s police structure.
Schwalb’s X post called this “the gravest threat to Home Rule that the District has ever faced.” Hyperbole aside, the real issue is whether D.C.’s leadership can maintain order without federal babysitting. The lawsuit’s focus on “Home Rule” feels like a rallying cry for local pride rather than a substantive legal argument.
Schwalb warned that “there is no greater risk to public safety” than uncertainty over who commands the MPD. He’s got a point—chain-of-command chaos could hamstring police operations. But let’s be real: if D.C.’s leaders were serious about public safety, they’d welcome federal support rather than fight it tooth and nail.
Neither Schwalb nor the Department of Justice responded to the Daily Beast’s requests for comment, leaving some questions unanswered.
The silence suggests both sides are digging in for a protracted legal battle. Meanwhile, D.C. residents are caught in the crossfire of this political tug-of-war.
