President Trump Orders National Guard Withdrawal from Key Cities Amid Legal Disputes
January 1, 2026
Business News

President Trump Orders National Guard Withdrawal from Key Cities Amid Legal Disputes

Despite Crime Reduction Claims, Federal Forces to Exit Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland with Conditional Return Plan

Summary

President Donald Trump declared the removal of National Guard troops from Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland, citing reduced crime rates. The decision follows judicial challenges to the federal deployment of troops, with the possibility of returning forces if crime increases. Local officials and court rulings have contested the federal presence, underscoring ongoing tensions between state and federal authority.

Key Points

President Donald Trump has ordered the National Guard to withdraw from Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland.
Trump claims that the presence of National Guard troops led to a significant reduction in crime in these cities.
Local leaders and Democrats have criticized these federal deployments as unnecessary and an overreach of federal authority.
A federal appellate court ruled that California National Guard troops must be returned to state control, reflecting judicial resistance to the federal actions.

On Wednesday, President Donald Trump announced the planned withdrawal of National Guard personnel from three major American cities: Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland. This move came amid a series of legal obstacles faced by Trump's administration regarding the federal deployment of troops in these urban areas.

Communicating via his social media platform, Truth Social, the president declared the National Guard would be pulled out despite what he described as a significant drop in crime attributed to their presence. ``We are removing the National Guard from Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland, despite the fact that CRIME has been greatly reduced by having these great Patriots in those cities,'' he wrote.

The announcement comes in the context of criticism from local authorities and Democratic leaders. According to reports, these officials have argued that the deployment of federal troops was both unnecessary and an overextension of federal power. They asserted that individual incidents had been magnified to rationalize the military presence, which they viewed as disproportionate.

Nonetheless, President Trump stressed the importance of these deployments in lowering crime rates and safeguarding federal properties. However, his message contained a clear warning that the National Guard forces might be redeployed if crime were to escalate once more. ``We will come back, perhaps in a much different and stronger form, when crime begins to soar again – Only a question of time!'' he added.

This withdrawal notice was made shortly before a federal appellate court mandated that California National Guard troops stationed in Los Angeles must be returned to the control of Governor Gavin Newsom. The judiciary has played a pivotal role in these developments, curbing federal attempts at deploying the Guard in several jurisdictions.

Previously, the U.S. Supreme Court blocked President Trump's efforts to station troops in Illinois, thereby weakening the administration's legal standing for ordering similar deployments in other states. The court underscored that federal authority over National Guard units typically applies only in exceptional situations.

In response to the federal announcement, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson presented crime statistics that showed a significant drop in violent offenses through 2025, reaching the lowest levels recorded in over a decade. This data has been a point of reference in debates over the efficacy of the National Guard's involvement.

Military officials have concurrently begun scaling back their deployments as legal battles continue to shape the operational landscape. The decision to recall California troops signifies a key juncture in the protracted legal conflict between state governments and the federal administration.

Risks
  • Potential resurgence in crime rates could prompt the redeployment of National Guard forces, as warned by President Trump.
  • Ongoing legal disputes between federal and state governments create uncertainty about future National Guard deployments.
  • Criticism from local leadership may escalate tensions regarding federal involvement in state security matters.
Disclosure
Education only / not financial advice
Search Articles
Category
Business News

Business News

Ticker Sentiment
N - neutral
Related Articles
Maximizing Your 401(k): Understanding the Power of Employer Matching

Overestimating investment returns can jeopardize retirement savings. While it's prudent to plan cons...

Commerce Secretary Lutnick Clarifies Epstein Island Lunch Amid Scrutiny Over Relationship

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick acknowledged having a family lunch with convicted sex offender Jef...

Why Retirement Savings Remain Stagnant and How to Address Common Pitfalls

Many individuals find themselves concerned about the insufficient growth of their retirement account...

Paramount Enhances Hostile Proposition to Thwart Netflix-Warner Bros. Discovery Merger

Paramount Pictures has escalated its aggressive pursuit to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery by introdu...

Strategic Stress Testing of a Retirement Tax Plan with $1.8 Million in Savings at Age 58

A 58-year-old nearing retirement with $1.8 million across various accounts assessed the robustness o...

Social Security to Revamp Appointment Scheduling and Claims Processing from March 7, 2026

Starting March 7, 2026, the Social Security Administration (SSA) will implement significant operatio...