This week, President Trump renewed his threats of a federal “takeover” of Washington, D.C., after a prominent member of the Department of Government Efficiency was allegedly beaten in an attempted carjacking last week. Trump has long ridiculed D.C. and other cities as “filthy and crime ridden.” What the president can and cannot actually do in terms of asserting control, is summarized here. In short, it is not impossible, but would be incredibly challenging to repeal the Home Rule Act of 1973 and actually achieve a federal takeover of the government in D.C. Even in a time when the unthinkable often becomes reality when it comes to the federal government seizing power, most analysts think a full takeover is extremely unlikely to even be attempted for many reasons–including because Congress would not want to assume liability for all of D.C.’s municipal lawsuits, for example. Still, the president could pursue more modest actions that stop well short of a complete takeover–steps he justifies with convenient, easy political talking points about high crime rates and has already started taking.

There are more substantive issues raised by the president’s post, which deserve serious discussion and consideration–not headline grabbing inflammatory outbursts. For example: What is the best approach to the tragedy of violent crimes committed by young people under the age of 18? How to best deal with homelessness; How to best deal with quality of life crimes. As to youth violence, according to Trump, the answer is simple: “Crime in Washington, D.C., is totally out of control. Local “youths” and gang members, some only 14, 15, and 16-years-old, are randomly attacking, mugging, maiming, and shooting innocent Citizens, at the same time knowing that they will be almost immediately released. They are not afraid of Law Enforcement because they know nothing ever happens to them, but it’s going to happen now! The Law in D.C. must be changed to prosecute these “minors” as adults, and lock them up for a long time, starting at age 14.”  But, of course, a lot of that is not accurate and it is not at all that simple. Rather, the government’s approach to youth violence shows how much of what is transpiring on the streets of D.C. right now is the creation of an old fashioned political red herring to justify further federal government control.

Let’s look at the facts. According to the Department of Justice, violent crime in D.C. was down 23% in 2024 compared to 2023 (so not “out of control”). However, violent crime among juveniles has gone up each year since 2020 in D.C., according to the Mayor and Police Department. While all violent crime is devastating, in crimes involving juveniles, often the victim and the perpetrator are young, and two lives are ruined way too soon. I confronted this devastating issue of young people committing serious crimes many times as the District Attorney in Westchester County. Time and again, I met with grieving families of victims devastated by the loss of a child and the feeling, often, that the perpetrator was not being held meaningfully accountable.  I also heard from parents of children who pleaded for their child’s life to not be determined by one awful decision. What I found is that the best, most informed policies, i.e. those that truly take into account the indisputable reality of brain development before 18, are also deeply–and understandably–emotionally unsatisfying to the victims’ families.

This is a controversial and hugely important topic in places like New York, where a debate rages regarding the State’s “Raise the Age” legislation that took effect in 2019.  The problem is that there is no “easy” solution to this devastating problem. One reason Trump’s “solution” to juvenile crime in D.C. makes no sense is that the law dealing with juveniles in D.C. is not remarkably different for how they are treated under federal law.  In both cases, they are brought initially to a family or juvenile court, but prosecutors may–under specific circumstances involving serious violent crimes–request that the case be transferred to adult criminal court. Which leaves one to wonder: Why is the president claiming that crime by juveniles in D.C. is the federal government’s problem to solve? It seems clear that this is another politically expedient excuse for an executive power grab, not an attempt at a serious solution to a serious problem.

In D.C., the Mayor and the police department seem to acknowledge that there is serious work demanding a “whole of government” approach to the issue of juvenile crime and how to prevent it.  We need more of this kind of thoughtful, reasoned debates and attempts at solutions. Political fear-mongering may grab headlines, but it does nothing to solve the complex challenge of youth violence and crime in general.