Trump Plans National Guard Deployment to Memphis Amid Crime Concerns/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ President Donald Trump announced plans to send the National Guard to Memphis to address rising crime. Trump said both the city’s Democratic mayor and Republican governor support the move. The decision reflects his broader strategy of deploying troops to major U.S. cities facing violence.
Trump Sending National Guard to Memphis: Quick Looks
- Trump confirmed National Guard troops will be deployed to Memphis.
- He said both the mayor (a Democrat) and governor (a Republican) support the move.
- Trump described Memphis as “deeply troubled” and in need of intervention.
- The move echoes earlier deployments in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.
- Trump suggested he would have preferred Chicago but called it “hostile.”
- Past deployments included Marines and Guard troops under federal jurisdiction.
- California sued Trump’s administration over his Los Angeles intervention.
- D.C.’s National Guard remains under direct presidential authority, allowing broader use.
Trump Plans National Guard Deployment to Memphis Amid Crime Concerns
Deep Look
President Donald Trump announced Friday that the National Guard will be sent to Memphis, marking his latest move to intervene in American cities he views as overwhelmed by crime and unrest.
Speaking on Fox News Channel, Trump said the plan has the backing of both Memphis’ Democratic mayor and Tennessee’s Republican governor.
“The mayor is happy, the governor is happy,” Trump claimed, framing the deployment as a bipartisan effort to stabilize a city he described as “deeply troubled.”
Linking Memphis to Past Deployments
Trump compared the Memphis plan to earlier federal interventions in Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles, where he ordered National Guard and federal law enforcement surges. He argued those measures helped restore order, adding, “We’re going to fix that just like we did Washington.”
The president has frequently floated sending troops to cities he identifies as Democratic strongholds plagued by violence. Chicago and Baltimore have been recurring targets of his rhetoric, but he acknowledged local resistance in Chicago, calling it a “hostile” city with “professional agitators.”
History of Federal Troop Deployments
Trump’s decision to send the National Guard to Los Angeles in early June drew controversy, particularly because it bypassed the state’s Democratic leadership. By invoking Title 10 authority, he placed the California National Guard under federal control despite Gov. Gavin Newsom’s objections.
That deployment escalated further when Trump ordered 700 active-duty Marines to join 4,000 Guard members, citing the need to protect federal property during immigration protest crackdowns. California responded by suing over what it considered federal overreach, though Guard members were eventually used to protect law enforcement during immigration arrests.
In Washington, Trump has faced fewer legal hurdles due to the unique status of the D.C. National Guard, which operates under presidential command. This authority allowed him to use the Guard not only for security patrols but also for auxiliary tasks such as trash cleanup, bypassing state-level restrictions that usually govern law enforcement roles.
Political Implications of Memphis Deployment
The Memphis deployment highlights Trump’s strategy of positioning himself as a law-and-order president willing to act unilaterally. By emphasizing bipartisan support from local leaders, Trump framed his decision as pragmatic rather than partisan, contrasting it with pushback he faced in other cities.
The announcement comes as crime rates and public safety remain central to political debates ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. For Trump, sending troops to Memphis may reinforce his messaging on crime reduction while testing the balance between federal power and state authority.
As details of the deployment plan unfold, questions remain about the scope of Guard operations in Memphis and how residents will respond to a federal presence on city streets. Past interventions have sparked both praise from supporters who welcome stronger security and criticism from opponents concerned about militarization of public life.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.