WHY TRUMP IS RIGHT ON DC CRIME. President Donald Trump‘s public safety initiative for the District of Columbia faces two great obstacles. The first is the persistence of crime there. The second is residents, local officials, and national Democrats who will resist Trump’s efforts.
“The president taking over local control of [the Metropolitan Police Department] and putting the US military onto the streets of DC under the guise of public safety is wrong,” D.C. Councilman Charles Allen posted. “It’s an extreme, outrageous, and dangerous move for our city and the safety of all our residents.”
Recommended Stories
- Don’t fear the Supreme Court’s shadow docket
- Jon Ossoff cares more about violent illegal immigrants than victims like Laken Riley
- Trump's collecting record-high tariffs. Who's paying them?
“Violent crime in Washington, DC is at a thirty-year low,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) posted. “Donald Trump has no basis to take over the local police department. And zero credibility on the issue of law and order. Get lost.”
The main argument of Trump’s critics is that violent crime in Washington is going down, so there is no reason for Trump to take over the MPD or call in the National Guard or direct federal law enforcement to the city’s streets. It is true that violent crime statistics are going down, although there have been questions about the accuracy of the police department’s crime reporting. But the undeniable fact is that crime is going down from some very high levels during the pandemic. Plus, just because the incidence of a particular crime is down from last year does not mean it is low today.
In any event, crime remains a serious, quality-of-life-changing issue in the district. In 2023, a bad year for crime in the district, there were 40 murders per 100,000 residents. In 2024, that number fell to 27 per 100,000. So is that good? It is certainly a positive thing to have fewer murders, but 27 per 100,000 is still quite a lot. In fact, according to figures compiled by the Rochester Institute of Technology Center for Public Safety Initiatives, the homicide rate of 27 per 100,000 is the fourth-highest among U.S. cities.
In raw numbers from the MPD, the city had 274 murders in 2023, followed by 187 murders in 2024. Now, in 2025, if current trends continue, it appears the district might be headed for around 170 murders. So you can look at it two ways: One, it’s good that murders might go down from 187 last year to 170 this year, or two, 170 murders is still a lot.
Beyond homicide and other violent crime, there’s no doubt that a sense of just-below-the-surface danger and disorder keeps many district residents in a state of unease. One of the reasons Trump decided to act was the attack on a former official in the Department of Government Efficiency effort, Edward Coristine, who was badly beaten in an attempted carjacking in the city. After the Coristine attack, Trump pledged to federalize law enforcement in the district.
Of course, the Coristine beating was not unusual. Events like it caused the city to impose a curfew on young people this summer. That is evidence enough that a city has a crime problem. But a recent Washington Post story added this: “Hours after Coristine was attacked, residents in a nearby block were rattled awake by shouting on their usually quiet, tree-lined street. One person described peeking out their window and seeing a rowdy crowd of youngsters, some in masks. Later, they saw a young man, beaten and bloodied.”
Police came and could not find any suspects or the young beating victim, either. That was another crime that will not go into the statistics. Then more from the Post: “The weekend’s incident unnerved residents. … ‘This is a safe city, but overhearing and witnessing gang threats and then watching the camera footage of the thuggery is disturbing,’ said one resident, speaking on the condition of anonymity over concerns of personal safety. The crowd of teens, he said, was roaming the street and appeared to be checking for unlocked cars and things to steal.”
On the one hand, the resident said the city is safe. On the other hand, he did not feel safe enough to speak on the record. What kind of safety is that?
The resident who was afraid to give his name also told the Post, “The language Trump uses to describe DC is wrong, but clearly there is something bad going on that needs to stop.” Living in Washington, he no doubt felt he had to denounce Trump. But he was still worried about crime.
Now comes the political debate. In opposing Trump, will Democrats end up defending crime in the district or defending its right to have a high crime rate? Some are already doing just that. It puts them on the wrong side of another lopsided issue, like they are with the border.
But here is the thing. Trump is imagining a Washington with a far lower crime rate than its residents have become accustomed to. Even though they stand to benefit enormously if he succeeds, many of those residents and their political representatives will oppose Trump for trying. In the process, they will become almost protective of their crime rate now that Trump is threatening it. That is crazy. But it might be where we are headed.