WASHINGTON – House Democrats have launched a legislative challenge to President Donald Trump's recent federalization of the Washington, D.C. police force, introducing a measure on Friday to terminate the emergency declaration that placed the local law enforcement agency under executive branch control.

The move, spearheaded by Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, argues that the President overstepped his authority and violated the principles of the District of Columbia's Home Rule Act. The confrontation sets the stage for a high-stakes battle over local autonomy, executive power, and the governance of the nation's capital.

A Challenge to Executive Authority

The resolution, officially a joint resolution of disapproval, aims to immediately nullify the crime emergency President Trump declared on July 28, 2025. Citing a spike in violent crime statistics and arguing for the need to secure federal property, the President invoked national security provisions to assume command and control of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD).

"The President's takeover of the MPD is a dangerous and unprecedented assault on American self-government," Rep. Raskin stated in a press conference on Capitol Hill. "The residents of the District of Columbia have the right to local control over their local police force. This is not a federal security state; it is a city of 700,000 American citizens, and we are here to defend their constitutional rights."

The Democratic measure contends that the President's actions lack a sufficient legal basis and create a troubling precedent for federal intervention in local affairs. Proponents of the resolution argue that crime rates, while a serious concern, are a matter for the city's elected mayor and council to manage.

The White House Defends its Position

The Trump administration has vigorously defended the federalization as a necessary step to restore order. A White House spokesperson on Friday called the Democratic resolution "a reckless political stunt that prioritizes ideology over the safety of residents and federal workers."

In previous statements, the administration has pointed to a series of high-profile incidents in the capital as justification for the emergency order. They maintain that the D.C. city government had failed to adequately address public safety, forcing federal intervention.

"The President will not stand by while crime spirals out of control in the capital of the United States," the spokesperson said. "The federal government has a unique and solemn responsibility to ensure this city is safe. The MPD is now better equipped and coordinated with federal partners to do its job effectively."

A Clash Over D.C. Home Rule

The conflict taps into the long-standing and contentious debate over D.C.'s political status. Under the 1973 Home Rule Act, Congress granted the District a degree of self-governance, including an elected mayor and city council. However, Congress retains ultimate authority over the city's laws and budget, a power that has been a frequent point of friction.

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser has decried the President's move as a "complete usurpation of our authority" and has thrown her full support behind Raskin's resolution. "This is our city, and our police department knows our communities best," Mayor Bowser said. "We don't need or want federal overreach dictating how we police our own streets."

The move has left the leadership of the MPD in a difficult position, caught between their loyalty to the city they serve and their new chain of command leading directly to the executive branch.

The resolution's path forward is uncertain. While it is expected to pass the Democrat-controlled House, it faces significant opposition in the Senate. Even if it were to clear both chambers, it would almost certainly face a presidential veto, requiring a two-thirds majority in both the House and Senate to override—a difficult threshold to meet in the current political climate.