Damian Murphy: Point
America’s law-and-order problem is Donald Trump
Yes, America does have a law-and-order problem. It’s the president of the United States.
Throughout U.S. history, the best presidents have sparingly sought to use federal forces not to exacerbate tensions but as a last resort to de-escalate violence, protect constitutional rights and restore order. Whether Democratic or Republican, when faced with a challenge, these presidents recognized that inflaming violence could lead to loss of life or destruction of property.
Yet this week, we have seen just that: dramatic and chaos-inducing overreach by President Donald Trump as he activated National Guard and Marine troops on questionable legal grounds in a state that didn’t need them and hadn’t requested them.
Moreover, the open-ended nature of the administration’s order can be applied not only in Los Angeles but also beyond next week. This clear power grab represents the long-held goal of a president who wants to use the military as his personal police force.
U.S. history offers few cases where an American president activated National Guard troops over the objection of state authorities. We have to look abroad to find examples where a government unilaterally deployed the military against demonstrators. And those examples aren’t great.
In 1989, China deployed its military to suppress demonstrations in Tiananmen Square. In 2017, Venezuela’s government implemented Plan Zamora to mobilize its military in response to social and political protests. In 2021, the Burmese government used its military to crack down on protesters — a move that led to widespread violence and a civil war that continues today. All three of these nations used the pretext of civil unrest to expand central government authority, resulting in civilian casualties.
To date, local authorities in Los Angeles have proven their ability to manage the situation on the ground. The Pentagon estimates that the current deployment of military forces will cost at least $134 million. Those resources would be better spent reimbursing local law enforcement for overtime costs related to protest response. The administration’s claim that an insurrection and foreign invasion are happening is simply false, and California’s attorney general has asserted in a lawsuit that the president’s order is unlawful. All of this comes less than six months after Trump pardoned convicted seditionists for their violent attack on the 2020 vote count at the Capitol. So much for the law-and-order president.
Where are the champions of states’ rights as the authorities of the California governor and Los Angeles mayor are being trampled upon? We need look no further than Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who last year tweeted that “federalizing the National Guard would be a direct attack on states’ rights.” She went on to say as part of an interview with Sean Hannity that her home state of South Dakota “defends the Constitution.”
Republican Congressman Randy Weber of Texas also said last year that usurping or federalizing the National Guard “not only constitutes an overstep but also flagrantly violates constitutional bounds.” At the time, more than 20 House Republicans agreed with him.
While Noem and Weber’s amnesia may not be a surprise, their silence does expose a critical point. The Trump administration is eager to exercise raw power to target immigrants in a blue state while doing far less to target businesses in red states like South Dakota, which has meat-packing plants with migrant workers.
This is because the maelstrom Trump created is about much more than immigration. What we’re seeing play out is much broader — a president who sees an opportunity to reorder the use of power and potentially use it against U.S. citizens he dislikes.
As we’ve seen elsewhere in history, these are the early, chilling moves of an authoritarian government. Unless the American public and its leaders are willing to call out Trump’s authoritarian actions on a bipartisan basis, we should expect to see continued expansion of these abuses of power. The American people must stand up before it’s too late.
Damian Murphy is the senior vice president for national security and international policy at the Center for American Progress. He wrote this for InsideSources.com.
Jillian E. Snider: Counterpoint
Crime is down,
but chaos is up
Protests are erupting in Los Angeles and other cities, with streets filled with demonstrators clashing with police, National Guard troops and Marines deployed under a presidential order.
Scenes of civil unrest, from property damage and looting to tense standoffs clouded in tear gas, have dominated headlines, fueling a sense of chaos and uncertainty. The deployment of military forces and the escalation of political violence underscore a deeper anxiety: that law and order in America remains fragile, even as crime statistics indicate steady declines.
It’s true. Violent crime rates are falling. Homicides are down 20 percent nationwide, and places like Baltimore, Detroit, New York and Philadelphia are reporting their lowest murder counts in decades. The White House and city leaders are right to note this progress. However, the reality on the ground is far more complicated — and troubling.
For all the celebration about plunging murder rates, communities continue to be shaken by criminal incidents that shatter the sense of safety. In recent weeks, shootings in Chicago, Las Vegas and Myrtle Beach, S.C., have left dozens injured and several dead. Scenes of violence — targeted or random — are making headlines with alarming regularity. These events, although statistically less common than nonviolent crime, have an outsize effect on public perception and community well-being.
Official crime numbers do not tell the whole story. Half of all violent crimes and two-thirds of property crimes are never reported to police, meaning many criminal acts never enter official records.
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2023, only 44.7% of violent crimes and 29.9% of property crimes were reported to law enforcement. Many victims remain silent out of fear, distrust or the belief that reporting won’t help. Changes in crime reporting systems — such as the FBI’s shift to the National Incident-Based Reporting System — have created gaps and inconsistencies, making it harder to obtain a clear picture of public safety.
The real crime landscape is far more complex than the statistics suggest.
Even when crimes are reported, police often struggle to solve them. National clearance rates for murder and violent crime remain historically low. In 2023, less than 51% of homicides and 41% of crimes against persons cases were cleared. This means many offenders are never brought to justice, further undermining public confidence in law enforcement and emboldening those who would do harm.
The dangers faced by law enforcement are also a sobering reminder of the stakes. In the past month, at least seven police officers have been killed in the line of duty, including fatal shootings in Apache Junction, Ariz., Bloomfield, N.M., Chicago and elsewhere. Each of these tragedies reverberates through their departments and communities, amplifying the sense of vulnerability and loss.
A major driver of these problems is the recruitment and retention crisis in law enforcement. Departments nationwide are losing officers faster than they can hire, with many agencies shrinking by 10% or more in recent years. The New York Police Department continues to lose a few hundred officers monthly, while cities like New Orleans and Minneapolis are operating with forces significantly smaller than they were a decade ago. This “thinning blue line” leads to fewer patrols, slower response times and overburdened detectives — directly affecting clearance rates and the ability to control crime.
Transparency and consistency in police data reporting are also essential. Robust data transparency can help law enforcement agencies build legitimacy and trust with the public, providing a factual foundation for dialogue and system improvements allowing agencies to identify problems and disrupt cycles of violence.
The bottom line is this: Law and order in America is not perfectly restored just because crime rates are falling. As long as violence continues to shake communities, half of crimes go unreported, clearance rates remain low, and police departments struggle to maintain adequate staffing, the problem remains urgent.
Until every community feels safe — not just safer on paper — law and order will remain a pressing and persistent challenge.
Jillian Snider is a resident senior fellow on the criminal justice and civil liberties team at the R Street Institute and a lecturer at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. She wrote this for InsideSources.com.
