Trump's MARTIAL LAW playbook is normalizing a permanent POLICE STATE
By ljdevon // 2025-08-18
Copy
 
Every American should be alarmed by the accelerated descent into a police state that President Trump’s administration is leading. By federalizing the National Guard in cities across the nation, the administration is setting a dangerous precedent for future presidents, regardless of party, to suppress dissent and expand federal power. Under the guise of restoring order, the Trump administration is dismantling our constitutional republic, one city at a time. In April 2025, President Trump signed an executive order authorizing mass round-ups of "violent criminals" and "gang members," empowering federal agencies and military support for domestic law enforcement. By June, armed federal agents and the National Guard were deployed to California to quell protests over immigration arrests. By August, they were in Washington, D.C., clearing homeless encampments because the president declared the city "dirty" and "dangerous." The administration’s playbook is a relentless cycle: identify a threat, stoke fear, and expand executive power, all carefully timed to avoid widespread public backlash. This strategy has already paved the way for a new tier of domestic militarization. What began as a war on crime swiftly expanded to include the homeless, and now threatens to encompass protesters, journalists, or anyone deemed a nuisance. This is not about political posturing; it is a direct assault on the Constitution. The Posse Comitatus Act, which bans the military’s domestic policing role, is being ignored, and the courts have yet to intervene. This dangerous trend is being normalized, blending into the permanent state of crisis that now defines our national security policies. Key points:
  • Trump's "Liberation Day" tactics involve federalizing the National Guard and other federal forces to quell perceived threats.
  • These actions have expanded executive power, sidestepping the Constitution.
  • What began as a targeted response to "crime" is now a sweeping tool for federal control.
  • Martial law is being normalized, with little public resistance.
  • This trend will likely continue under future administrations, regardless of party.

From emergency powers to permanent control

The Trump administration argues that its actions are necessary to combat crime and illegal immigration. But this reasoning is a mask for something far more insidious. By invoking emergency powers, the administration is creating a new norm of federal control over local governance, one city at a time. Each step expands the government's reach, justifying more militarized policing and suspending rights in the name of security. Once seized, these powers are rarely relinquished. Historically, expansions of power under the guise of emergency have often become permanent. The PATRIOT Act, the NSA’s mass surveillance, and the TSA’s intrusive searches all began as temporary measures to combat terrorism but quickly solidified as fixtures of daily life. Today, we have reached a precipice where the police state can pivot from one crisis to the next in a matter of months, with each step accelerating the erosion of liberty. The expansion from immigration crackdowns to homeless sweeps shows how quickly the boundaries shift. Next, who might be targeted? Dissenting voices, political activists, or anyone challenging the status quo. The transition from "restoring order" to "suppressing dissent" could occur at the speed of a tweet.

The inevitable descent toward a police state

The playbook is clear: identify a new threat, create fear, and expand authority. Each crisis enables the next, with the public growing more accustomed to life under federal control. The government’s ability to suspend rights, militarize police, and monitor citizens becomes normalized. This gradual process erodes the very institutions that should protect us from tyranny. In 1998, the U.S. military produced a training video titled "Megacities: Urban Future, the Emerging Complexity." This video warned of the need for a "Domestic Civil Disturbance Quick Reaction Force" to quell domestic unrest in large cities like Baltimore, Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York. Trump’s recent actions in D.C. mirror this script, laying the groundwork for what the future may hold. The question of whether the President should have the authority to federalize the National Guard for emergencies declared unilaterally is a deeply concerning one. What if a future administration declared you to be a "public health threat" and quarantined you in camps indefinitely? What if a future administration analyzed your social media profiles and determined your opinions posed a "domestic terror threat," leading to your unjust detainment? What if the homeless, removed from the streets in the name of safety, were in dire need of assistance, and their basic human rights were violated by a federalized National Guard force? What if someone was deported without due process, simply because the administration made an error or deemed them complicit in crime when they were innocent? These scenarios raise profound concerns about the concentration of power and the potential for abuse. While federalization can serve as a tool of federal authority, it also risks infringing on individual liberties. The balance between national security and individual rights is delicate, and granting unchecked power to the executive branch introduces the potential for grave injustices. Any discussions on federalization must ensure that safeguards are in place to protect the civil liberties of all citizens, even during emergencies. Sources include: Rutherford.org TheGuardian.com Politico.com
Copy