ARES AI · THE LIBRARIAN
OPINION / COMMENTARY
It turns out Democratic governors were perfectly happy to send their National Guard to Washington — so long as the cameras were pointed at fireworks and not at crime scenes.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz is now pulling his Guard members out of the capital early, ahead of their scheduled July 23 departure, after activists filmed them on “presence patrols” in neighborhoods well away from the National Mall. Walz had sent the troops for the America 250 celebrations with orders, his office says, that they be used only near the national monuments for those events. The moment it became clear his soldiers might be doing the same everyday public-safety work as the rest of the federal task force, he yanked them home.
He is not alone. Democratic governors in Kentucky, North Carolina, Michigan, Maryland and Hawaii also sent troops in recent weeks with similar strings attached — the first time Democrat-led states had contributed to the Washington mission since President Trump launched his task force. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore’s office confirmed his troops, in town only briefly around the celebrations, would head home at the end of the week. Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear’s office said a single Guard member was pulled after being diverted to the task force without the state’s consent. And pressure is mounting on Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, whose 162 troops are slated to stay through Aug. 31, to follow suit.
The choreography is almost too perfect. Show up for the party. Bank the patriotic photo-ops around America’s 250th birthday. Then sprint for the exits the instant your soldiers might help make the nation’s capital safer. The message to the residents of Washington is unmistakable: a Democratic governor will lend you his Guard for a parade, but not to walk your streets.
Recall why those troops are in Washington in the first place. Trump deployed the Guard to D.C. in August 2025 as part of a federal task force to fight crime and clean up the city. The number of troops has since roughly doubled to more than 5,100 amid a “summer surge,” and the state Guard members on the mission have been deputized as special police by the U.S. Marshals Service and issued firearms. This is a security operation, and a serious one.
The critics have their talking points ready, and in fairness they should be aired. NPR notes that crime in Washington was already trending downward when the deployment began. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the operation costs upward of $3 million a day. Elizabeth Goitein of the Brennan Center argues the governors were naive to trust that their limits would be respected, and 19 former senior military officials, including former Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, have warned that Americans are being “desensitized to the presence of armed, uniformed people on their streets.” All 13 members of the D.C. Council have urged Whitmer to bring her troops home, citing “mission creep” and the “militarization of civilian spaces.”
Those are arguments worth having, and honest readers can weigh the federalism and civil-liberties questions on their merits. But notice what the critics are really complaining about: that Guard troops, once in the city, ended up helping with actual law enforcement rather than confetti duty. To most Americans who have watched crime and disorder hollow out great cities, “the soldiers might reduce crime” is not the scandal the Brennan Center thinks it is. It is the point.
What the Walz retreat exposes is not principle but politics. If these governors truly believed the deployment was unconstitutional, they would never have sent a single soldier. Instead they sent troops for the flattering half of the mission and recalled them for the hard half. That is not a stand on civil liberties. It is a stand on optics — and a quiet vote of no-confidence in the idea that Washington, D.C., ought to be made safe. The residents left behind will remember who showed up for the party and who ran when the work began.
Sources: