Maryland joins 21 states challenging Trump's DC National Guard deployment

Chevall Pryce, Baltimore Sun on Sep 16, 2025

By clicking submit, I authorize Arcamax and its affiliates to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Privacy Policy , (2) add to information that I provide with other information like interests inferred from web page views, or data lawfully obtained from data brokers, such as past purchase or location data, or publicly available data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email or other means with offers for different types of goods and services, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

Maryland has joined a lawsuit opposing President Donald Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to Washington, D.C.

Maryland Attorney General Anthony G. Brown filed an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for D.C. against Trump on Monday, becoming the 22nd state to join. The lawsuit was filed by D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb earlier this month. The suit declares the deployment of the National Guard without the District’s consent is “unlawful, unconstitutional and undemocratic.”

On Sept. 4, Trump ordered the National Guard to remain deployed in Washington until December. The original deployment began Aug. 24. Trump has made several comments about deploying the National Guard to Baltimore, with opposition from Gov. Wes Moore and Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott.

In the amicus brief filed by Brown, he said the use of military in domestic areas like the nation’s capital is unnecessary and unlawful while undermining the local jurisdictions they occupy.

“It is also inconsistent with one of our nation’s founding principles, namely that freedom depends on subordinating the military to civilian authority,” Brown said. “Indeed, from the birth of the republic, our leaders recognized that standing armies represent an inherent threat to liberty and, in peacetime, must not be deployed without the consent of the local populace.”

Brown and the coalition of other attorneys general listed four specific reasons they are opposing the National Guard being deployed in Washington:

—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.

Brown joined attorneys general from California, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin in the lawsuit.

_____