Here’s what we know about what exactly Trump has said about D.C., and what he and Republicans in Congress could do to exert power over the District.
By Jenny Gathright, WAPO, February 21, 2025
President Donald Trumpthis week reaffirmed a campaign promise topursuea federal takeover of the District, issuing his most extensive comments attacking the capital city and its local leadership since he retook office in January.
“We should govern D.C.,” he saidin response to a reporter’s question aboard Air Force One on Wednesday night. “I think the federal government should take over the governance of D.C. and run it really, really properly.”
Trump said that despite his good relationship with D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D), he believed local officials were failing to fix the city’s problems — among them crime, graffiti and homeless encampments. Bowser has said Trump’s impressions are outdated, and that there have been declines in the city’s crime rate and the homeless population.
Trump’s comments were similar to those he made on the campaign trail, where he repeatedly insulted the city. The difference now is that Trump is in office and therefore could have some power to act on the threats.
So what exactly has Trump said, and what could he and Republicans in Congress do to exert power over the District? Here’s what we know so far.
What has Trump said he’ll do to D.C.?
Trump said he believes the federal government should “take over” D.C. and run it, citing its crime, graffiti, and homeless encampments as a blight on the country. Trump said he wanted the city to look better for foreign leaders when they come to visit. And he said that while the city had a “great police department,” and while he “gets along great with” Bowser, he felt the city was poorly run.
Local officials, he said, weren’t doing their jobs properly. There is “too much crime, too much graffiti, too many tents on the lawns,” Trump added.
Trump did not offer any information on how he thought a federal takeover would actually work, and which city functions he would want to control.
His administration has been considering an executive order focused on crime and beautification in D.C., The Washington Post previously reported. As of Thursday, the order was still in a draft form and White House officials were still considering specifics, The Post reported.
Why might the federal government be able to take over D.C.?
Congress has oversight of D.C. through a provision in the Constitution. The city won limited self-government when Congress passedthe Home Rule Act in 1973. The act,which was signed into law by President Richard M. Nixon, gave D.C. residents the power to elect their own mayor and city council.
For the previous 100 years, the city had been run by a group of three presidentially appointed commissioners. For decades, Southern conservatives and segregationists in Congress fought attempts by D.C. residents to gain self-governance, preferring that the city’s majority-Black population remain under the federal government’s thumb.
The Home Rule Act greatly expanded D.C.’s autonomy, empowering residents to run a government for themselves.
But Congress also retained say over the District’s affairs, including the ability to overturn laws passed by the D.C. Council — a power Congress exercised in 2023 when it voted to block a rewrite of the city’s criminal code. Major swaths of D.C.’s criminal justice system are also controlled by the feds. Most adult crime in D.C. is prosecuted by the U.S. attorney for D.C., who is appointed by the president, and local D.C. judges must also be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
What power does Trump have over D.C.?
As president, Trump has the power to appoint the D.C. National Guard and deploy it without the consent of local D.C. officials. This gives Bowser less power than the governors of states, who control their own National Guards.
Trump also has some power to take over D.C.’s police department — at least for a short time. A broadly written section of the Home Rule Act states that when “special conditions of an emergency” require using D.C.’s police force for federal purposes, the president can order the mayor to temporarily provide the federal government with D.C. police services “as the President may deem necessary and appropriate.” Trump threatened to use this power in 2020, amid mass protests against police violence following the murder of George Floyd — but D.C. leaders, including Bowser, persuaded his administration to back off.
What about Congress?
SinceCongress granted D.C. Home Rule, it also has the power to alter it or take it away.
Republican lawmakers have proposed one such measure to repeal Home Rule entirely. The lawmakers, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rep. Andrew Ogles (R-Tennessee), named the legislation the “Bringing Oversight to Washington and Safety to Every Resident Act,” or the “BOWSER” Act.
But Republicans do not have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, meaning that Democrats in the minority would be likely to stop the bill from moving forward on the floor or through other must-pass legislation, presenting a significant barrier to its passage or an attempt to alter the Home Rule Act.
Congress also routinely interferes in local D.C. affairs through budget riders, provisions that are attached to must-pass spending bills. Two long-standing riders prevent D.C. from taxing and regulating marijuana and from using local funds to subsidize abortions. This path, in addition to overturning laws passed by the D.C. Council, is among the most readily available for federal lawmakers to target the District.
What would it look like to have a federal takeover of D.C.?
In short, it’s unclear.
The BOWSER Act, for example, offers nodetails about how Congress would actually run the city and simply repeals the Home Rule Act in one sentence.
Trump and his administration have not thus far spelled out a clear vision for a“takeover” or explained whether they want responsibility for the everyday functions that the D.C. government provides for its residents — things like trash collection, snow removaland public schools.
Has this ever happened before?
The most significant incursion on local autonomy during the Home Rule era came in 1995, when Congress appointed a control board to run city affairs amid a budgeting crisis that stymied the D.C. government’s ability to provide basic services under Mayor Marion Barry (D). Some of the city’s financial problems stemmed from decisions made in Congress, like the city’s inability to tax commuters. The control board, a federally appointed five-member panel, had significant power over city functions and took over all budgetary decisions.
A 1997 deal in Congress led the federal government to assume the city’s debts, take over the expensive task of running D.C.’s courts and housing its prisoners and take over a large pension liability for government employees. That deal, called the National Capital Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act, helped give the city a financial fresh start. Coupled with an expanding tax base and other positive economic trends, it helped lead to improvements in city balance sheets.
After four consecutive years of balanced budgets, the control board went dormant in 2001, when Mayor Anthony Williams (D) was in office. Its return could be triggered by certain financial missteps, like having cash deficits or defaulting on loans or a failure to make city payroll. However, it is unlikely these criteria would be met; the District has had a balanced budget every year since and has a high bond rating. It would take a separate act of Congress to bring back the control board absent a significant and sudden change in the District’s financial situation.
How are D.C.’s elected officials responding to Trump’s threats?
D.C. officials — from the mayor to lawmakers to representatives in Congress — have responded to Trump’s threats with a pretty unified message: D.C., they say, is doing a good job of governing itself.
Bowser said at a news conference Thursday that Trump’s comments and other efforts by Republican lawmakers to limit D.C.’s self-governance were an “unnecessary distraction,” reaffirming that she was the elected mayor of D.C. and retained authority to run the city.
Bowser and others touted the District’s growing population, clean financial audits and improvements with homelessness and crime. D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D) said in a statement that D.C.’s government is far more responsive to citizens than federally appointed commissioners were before home rule. He cited the 35 percent drop in violent crime the city saw last year and noted that D.C. is a leader in creating affordable housing and reducing homelessness.
Bowser has largely refrained from directly criticizing Trump, choosing to focus instead on their shared priorities, like returning federal workers downtown or cracking down on gun-related crime. On Thursday, she maintained her measured tone but said she believed unequivocally that the District was best governed by local leaders.
Paul Schwartzman and Emily Davies contributed to this report.
