Attorney General Nessel Joins Multistate Coalition in Support of D.C.’s Challenge to Trump National Guard Takeover

LANSING – Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has filed an amicus brief (PDF) in support of D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb’s lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s unlawful deployment of National Guard troops to the District of Columbia. Attorney General Nessel joined a coalition of 22 attorneys general in asserting that the deployment of National Guard troops without the consent of D.C. is unlawful, unconstitutional, and undemocratic. Domestic use of the military has long been recognized as antithetical to American values. While California and D.C. were the first places subjected to unlawful federalized deployments, President Trump has made clear that this is the beginning — not the end — of the military occupation of American cities. In the brief, Attorney General Nessel and the coalition urge the District Court for the District of Columbia to grant a preliminary injunction and make clear that the Constitution prohibits the use of soldiers as local law enforcement.

“President Trump has made it clear that he plans to illegally deploy the National Guard to states across the country,” Nessel said. “Such actions blatantly violate the Constitution. The National Guard is not a police force and should not be used as a political tool against the American people. I stand with the District of Columbia in defending the rule of law that protects all of our communities.” 

The experience of California, as the first state to experience President Trump’s deployment of the National Guard without its governor’s consent, serves as a warning of the harm caused by a continuous military presence in a state. For more than three months, federalized California National Guard troops have been deployed in California’s communities. During this time, the troops’ presence has stoked fear among Californians, causing the public to stay home, fail to report for work, and avoid areas where the military is deployed. The use of federalized National Guard troops has damaged trust between local law enforcement and the community, as troops have been tasked with civilian law enforcement and were widely present during immigration raids in the first few weeks of their deployment. These troops were diverted away from essential state functions, like fighting wildfires. In June 2025, the majority of the California Guard’s specialized fire crews were diverted from their wildfire-fighting task force in the midst of peak fire season and instead deployed into the streets of Los Angeles.

With California’s recent experience as a lesson, Attorney General Nessel and the coalition argue that:

• Using the military for local law enforcement, as the President has done in the District, upsets the careful balance between civilian and military authority set forth in the Constitution.
• The deployment of National Guard troops infringes on the police powers reserved to States and localities. The Constitution establishes a federal government of limited, enumerated powers — general police power is not among them.
• National Guard troops are not prepared to engage in civilian law enforcement, lacking training in criminal procedure, civil rights, criminal investigation, and de-escalation. This introduces complications and dangers to both the public and the troops engaging with them.
• States need the National Guard to be available for vital natural disaster and security functions.

Attorney General Nessel joins the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaiʻi, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin in filing the brief.

###