Maryland Democratic Sen. Chris Van Hollen has introduced legislation that would strip the president of unilateral authority over the District of Columbia National Guard, a move spurred by ongoing legal battles between city officials and the Trump administration.
The measure, S.2688, titled the “District of Columbia National Guard Home Rule Act,” was introduced with 11 Democratic cosponsors, including Democratic Sens. Cory Booker (N.J.), Bernie Sanders (Minn.), Angela Alsobrooks (Md.), and Tammy Baldwin (Wis.). The bill would give the mayor of Washington, D.C., the same authority over the Guard that governors exercise in the states — from responding to natural disasters and civil disturbances to overseeing administration and personnel.
The legislation rewrites portions of an 1889 law that placed the Guard under the president’s command. It substitutes the words “Mayor of the District of Columbia” for “President of the United States” throughout the statute, including sections on officer appointments, calls to duty, retirements, and court-martial authority.
The bill comes as the District has filed a lawsuit against Trump’s deployment of more than 1,000 Guard troops across the city. Attorney General Brian Schwalb said the surge “essentially amounts to an involuntary military occupation,” and his filing contends the president violated the 1973 Home Rule Act by acting without the mayor’s consent.
RELATED: D.C. Sues Trump Over National Guard Deployment, Alleging Illegal Federal Takeover
A federal judge in California recently ruled Trump’s earlier use of the Guard in Los Angeles unlawful, though the ruling does not directly apply to Washington, where federal control remains stronger.
Trump has vowed to expand federal interventions to other Democrat-led cities such as Chicago and Baltimore.
Members of the D.C. National Guard have had their orders extended through December, which Van Hollen said raises fears that the deployment would continue indefinitely despite local opposition.
Supporters of Van Hollen’s bill argue it would prevent presidents from weaponizing the Guard for political gain and place decision-making where it belongs, which the senator said is in the hands of local leadership.
The supporters note that the District’s lack of authority has been highlighted repeatedly, including during the Jan. 6 insurrection, when Guard mobilization was delayed by federal approval requirements.
The White House has not commented on the lawsuit, and the bill now awaits consideration in the Senate Armed Services Committee.
District residents “deserve the same protections and autonomy as every other American city,” Schwalb said, emphasizing that unchecked presidential power over local forces “is both unlawful and dangerous.”