By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a recent Oval Office address, former President Trump threatened to deploy active-duty military personnel to Chicago, citing an “incompetent mayor” and rampant crime. This move, similar to his actions in Washington, D.C., aims to “straighten out” the city, despite potential legal challenges under the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts military involvement in civilian law enforcement. Trump claimed this plan, following his successes in D.C., would be welcomed by Chicago’s Black community. He also mentioned similar plans could be implemented in New York.
Read the original article here
So, it seems like we’re talking about some pretty serious threats, specifically concerning the potential deployment of the military in major American cities. The core of this discussion centers around Trump’s intention to send “regular military” forces into Chicago, with New York City seemingly next on his list. The rationale, as presented, is to “straighten things out” due to perceived issues with crime and governance.
This raises immediate and significant concerns. The idea of deploying the military for law enforcement purposes within the United States is a sensitive one, bumping up against the long-standing principles enshrined in the Posse Comitatus Act. This 1878 law exists precisely to limit the military’s involvement in civilian law enforcement, a measure born from the reconstruction era following the Civil War. Using active-duty military personnel in this way, particularly without the consent of state authorities, would represent a considerable overreach and a potential constitutional crisis.
The statements also suggest an explicitly political motivation. Trump’s comments point to an “incompetent mayor” and “Democratic-run city” in Chicago. He explicitly stated that he had not spoken to the incumbent mayor of Chicago, Brandon Johnson. The implication is clear: This isn’t about objective problem-solving; it’s about targeting specific political entities. The rhetoric further adds fuel to the fire, accusing a specific Black population of “screaming” for his assistance. This kind of framing is very divisive.
The threat extends to New York City, raising the specter of a broader plan. This could suggest a systematic targeting of liberal-leaning cities, stoking fears of a politically motivated campaign. And we’ve seen the signs from every warning about “Project 2025”.
The response from the potential targets will be critical. It is believed that the state governments will call up their national guards to defend themselves. The governor of Illinois, for example, has the power to block such an intervention and could potentially take action to protect Chicago’s residents. The question of when and how state governments will act becomes paramount.
One of the most alarming aspects is the potential impact on the upcoming midterm elections. It begs the question of what would happen if military personnel were positioned at polling locations. What could be their purpose? The potential for voter intimidation and the subversion of the democratic process is obviously very high.
The discussions also highlight broader anxieties about the direction of the country. Concerns are raised over Trump’s fitness for office, his motives, and the degree to which his actions align with or violate the principles of the Constitution. There is talk of a “fascist takeover,” and “civil war,” reflecting a deep-seated fear of erosion of democratic norms. The calls for worker solidarity and general strikes, while possibly aspirational, reveal the desperation felt by some. The calls for the military to refuse orders are obviously related to the gravity of the situation.
The arguments also address the fact that crime is down in Chicago. One possible explanation is that the Covid money allocated to the city was spent on hiring the most social workers since the 1950s and the most jobs for teens since the 1990s. It is also pointed out that there are a lot of red cities with way, way worse homicide, violent crime, rape, and other crime rates, as opposed to the city of Chicago.
The article seems to indicate that this is all a plan of deception by the Trump administration, and that the intentions are nefarious, and not actually about improving the lives of Americans.
The calls for the military to uphold its oath to the Constitution, rather than to any individual, underscore the severity of the situation as perceived by many. If the military were to become involved in such an action, that would be considered an egregious violation of the separation of powers, and the principles the military is supposed to represent.
The fact that such statements are being made and are not being immediately met with forceful condemnation and legal action from political and other authority figures reveals the depth of the political divisions in the US right now, and the fact that the political discourse has been very obviously polarized. The questions raised, about the role of the military, the integrity of elections, and the future of American democracy, go far beyond the issue of crime in Chicago and NYC. They strike at the very heart of the foundations of American society.