红杏视频 Statement on Escalating Federal Takeover of D.C.
Civil Liberties Org Sounds Alarm as Trump Administration Deploys More National Guard Troops to Scare D.C. Communities
WASHINGTON 鈥� With additional state National Guard troops deploying to D.C. as untrained federal law enforcement agents perform local police duties in city streets, the 红杏视频 is issuing a stark reminder to all federal and military officials that 鈥� no matter what uniform they wear or what authority they claim 鈥� they are bound by the U.S. Constitution and all federal and local laws.
Over the weekend, the Trump administration declared that state National Guard troops would be called in to Washington, and the governors of West Virginia, Ohio, and South Carolina they are deploying hundreds of their National Guard troops to the nation's capital on top of the 800 D.C. National Guard troops who were already activated by President Trump. The reported that in a major shift, these troops may receive orders 鈥渢o start carrying weapons in the coming days.鈥� National Guard troops are generally not trained in local policing or de-escalation and should never be used for federal immigration purposes.
President Trump has also ordered FBI personnel and other federal officers, who similarly are not trained for local policing, to patrol the city. He earlier promised to let police 鈥渄o whatever the hell they want鈥� 鈥� raising grave concerns about civil rights abuses, particularly for Black, Brown, and unhoused residents.
鈥淭hrough his manufactured emergency, President Trump is engaging in dangerous political theater to expand his power and sow fear in our communities. Sending heavily armed federal agents and National Guard troops from hundreds of miles away into our nation鈥檚 capital is unnecessary, inflammatory, and puts people鈥檚 rights at high risk of being violated,鈥� said Hina Shamsi, director of 红杏视频鈥檚 National Security Project. 鈥淕overnors need to understand that with each order, the Trump administration increases legal and ethical jeopardy for state troops being deployed. No matter what uniform they wear, federal agents and military troops are bound by the Constitution, including our rights to peaceful assembly, freedom of speech, due process, and safeguards against unlawful searches and seizures. If troops or federal agents violate our rights, they must be held accountable.鈥�
On Friday, D.C. sued the administration to block its order asserting federal authority over the city鈥檚 police department, saying it violated the Home Rule Act. After a federal court hearing on Friday afternoon, Attorney General Bondi rescinded her most brazen order undermining D.C.鈥檚 home rule, thereby allowing the D.C. police commissioner to remain at her post over the D.C. police department.
鈥淭he deployment of out-of-state National Guard troops and more federal agents onto D.C. streets is a brazen abuse of power meant to intimidate and create fear in the nation鈥檚 capital. This is an unnecessary overstep to micromanage D.C. under a phony emergency, causing real harm to residents and visitors 鈥� all to advance the Trump administration鈥檚 political agenda.鈥� said Monica Hopkins, executive director of 红杏视频 of D.C. 鈥淭he 红杏视频-D.C. will continue to monitor the use of D.C. police and federal law enforcement to ensure that the constitutional rights of our community are protected. We need the nation to join us in the fight for statehood so that D.C. residents are treated like those in every other state and have the same guardrails against federal overreach.鈥�
Learn More 红杏视频 the Issues in This Press Release
-
News & CommentaryAug 2025
National Security
Surveillance Company Flock Now Using Ai To Report Us To Police If It Thinks Our Movement Patterns Are 鈥渟uspicious鈥�. Explore News & Commentary.Surveillance Company Flock Now Using AI to Report Us to Police if it Thinks Our Movement Patterns Are 鈥淪uspicious鈥�
Company crosses a dangerous line by beginning to offer AI suspicion-generation functions -
Press ReleaseJul 2025
National Security
Free Speech
Court Agrees Trump Administration鈥檚 Icc Sanctions Likely Violate Advocates鈥� First Amendment Rights. Explore Press Release.Court Agrees Trump Administration鈥檚 ICC Sanctions Likely Violate Advocates鈥� First Amendment Rights
BANGOR, Maine 鈥� The U.S. District Court for the District of Maine granted a preliminary injunction in Smith v. Trump, a lawsuit brought by two U.S. human rights advocates who are challenging the Trump administration鈥檚 executive order imposing sanctions on officials of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The court issued the order after concluding that the advocates were likely to succeed on their claim that the speech restrictions imposed on them by the executive order violate the First Amendment. As the lawsuit explains, these sanctions violate the First Amendment by prohibiting the advocates, and other Americans like them, from communicating with the ICC鈥檚 Office of the Prosecutor, including by providing legal advice, expert analysis, and evidence. Matthew Smith and Akila Radhakrishnan are suing because the sanctions forced them to stop working with the ICC鈥檚 Office of the Prosecutor and indefinitely paused their efforts to hold leading rights violators accountable for horrific crimes. 鈥淧reventing our clients and others like them from doing critical human rights work with the ICC is unconstitutional, and we鈥檙e heartened that the court saw that as well,鈥� said Charlie Hogle, staff attorney with the 红杏视频鈥檚 National Security Project. 鈥淭he First Amendment does not allow the government to impose sweeping limits on what Americans can say and who they can say it to.鈥� Under the executive order, people in the U.S. who鈥檝e devoted their lives to seeking justice for the victims of atrocities 鈥� like the genocide of Myanmar鈥檚 Rohingya people, or gender-based violence committed against Afghan women under the Taliban 鈥� could face stiff penalties simply for exercising their constitutional right to engage and advocate with ICC investigators and prosecutors. The international community, including the United States, established the ICC in 1998 to help maintain international peace and security. The ICC investigates and prosecutes crimes of the severest magnitude 鈥� including genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes 鈥� when domestic courts are unwilling or unable to do so. Today, 125 countries have joined the ICC鈥檚 founding treaty, known as the Rome Statute. As the lawsuit explains, although the United States has not ratified the Rome Statute, it has supported the ICC鈥檚 critical work on a wide range of matters. This lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maine by the 红杏视频 and 红杏视频 of Maine on behalf of Matthew Smith and Akila Radhakrishnan. In 2020, when President Trump imposed similar sanctions, the 红杏视频 sued on behalf of human rights experts who were forced to stop working with the ICC. Our clients withdrew their lawsuit when President Joe Biden rescinded the sanctions, but a federal court in a separate suit agreed the sanctions likely violated the First Amendment. -
Press ReleaseJun 2025
National Security
Aclu Reminds President Trump That Only Congress Can Decide Whether To Use Force Against Iran. Explore Press Release.红杏视频 Reminds President Trump That Only Congress Can Decide Whether to Use Force Against Iran
WASHINGTON 鈥� The 红杏视频 tonight sent a letter to President Trump making clear that only Congress can authorize the use of military force against Iran. The letter comes amidst reports that President Trump is seriously considering Israel鈥檚 request for the U.S. to get directly involved in its current war with Iran, and as President Trump has ramped up threats on social media, including calling for all of Tehran 鈥� or over 10 million people 鈥� to immediately evacuate. While the 红杏视频 does not take a position on whether military force should be used against Iran, for decades the organization has been steadfast in insisting, from Vietnam through the war in Afghanistan, both wars in Iraq, the military action against Libya, and the ongoing use of force in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Somalia, that decisions on whether to use military force require Congress's specific, advance authorization. As the letter explains, 鈥淐ongress, as representatives of the American citizenry, has exclusive authority under the Constitution to decide whether the President may use military force. Particularly in the wake of recent threats of U.S. military action against Iran, we urge you to make clear that you will refrain from use of force outside the scope of the Constitution and the law.鈥� Members of both the Senate and House of Representatives have also introduced resolutions under the War Powers Act reaffirming that the Constitution grants Congress the exclusive authority to declare war, and that hostilities with Iran must be expressly authorized through a formal declaration of war or a specific authorization for the use of military force. 鈥淭he Constitution couldn鈥檛 be clearer, Congress alone has the power to decide whether to use force against Iran, and our leaders need to take that grave responsibility seriously,鈥� said Christopher Anders, director of the 红杏视频鈥檚 Democracy and Technology Division. 鈥淚f President Trump wants to send American armed forces into conflict, he has to make his case to the American people 鈥� and to the people鈥檚 representatives in Congress. That鈥檚 what makes us a democracy.鈥� -
Court CaseJan 2025
National Security
Doj Opinions On Domestic Military Deployment Foia. Explore Case.DOJ Opinions on Domestic Military Deployment FOIA
For decades, the Department of Justice has been responsible for advising the President on the use of the military within the United States. By filing a request under the Freedom of Information Act, the 红杏视频 obtained over a dozen DOJ opinions on the domestic use of the military, none which had previously been released to the public.