Army extends orders for DC National Guard through Nov. 30: Officials
Members of the National Guard are seen standing near the Washington Monument, on September 02, 2025 in Washington, DC. Kent Nishimura/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The Army is extending orders for the Washington, D.C., National Guard to remain on active duty in the nation’s capital through Nov. 30, two U.S. officials told ABC News Thursday.
President Donald Trump could still cut the mission shorter than Nov. 30 if desired — or extend the deployment past that date, the officials noted. That essentially leaves the deployment open-ended for now.
Army Secretary Dan Driscoll signed off on the plan on Wednesday, enabling Brig. Gen. Leland D. Blanchard II, commanding general of the D.C. National Guard, to update the initial orders.
The Nov. 30 plan for the estimated 950 members of the D.C. Guard, which has not been previously reported, does not apply to the other 1,300 troops deployed to D.C. from other states, including Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, Tennessee, South Carolina, and West Virginia. Those troops remain under the control of their governors with many of them already under orders to remain through the end of December, one of the officials said.
Blanchard alluded to the plan in a video message on X released Thursday.
“Our mission is not complete,” he said. “I’ve made the decision to extend the encampment as we continue to work to ensure everyone that walks these city streets is safe.”
Trump mobilized the D.C. National Guard last month to address what he insisted was “out of control” crime.
Since then, troops have been seen hanging out around the National Mall and other low-crime areas, often posing with tourists or spreading mulch as part of Trump’s “beautification” project.
According to the latest update provided by the Guard, troops have cleaned roadways, collected more than 677 bags of trash and disposed of five truckloads of plant waste in coordination with the U.S. National Park Service.
The decision to extend the Guard through Nov. 30 was a practical one, sources told ABC News. Instead of reupping orders every 14 to 29 days as is typical, the troops can plan on the extended stay.
National Guard troops typically leave other full-time civilian jobs during the deployment, and this would allow their employers to make other arrangements, officials say.
The plan also ensures there would be no gap in pay or benefits, which can happen when tours of duty need to be reapproved several times.
A spokesperson for Joint Task Force-DC told ABC News that all Guards members who are deployed to D.C. have already been extended beyond initial orders — some which would have lapsed on Sept.10 — in order to secure their eligibility for benefits including pay and health care.
(WASHINGTON) — Action memos on pro-Palestinian protesters sent by government officials to Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the authority he used to strip their visas had never before been used and would likely face scrutiny, a government official testified in court Friday.
Rubio used what the government says is his authority to find someone deportable “if the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe that the alien’s presence or activities in the United States would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States,” citing the Immigration and Nationality Act.
A section of a government memo that was read in court noted “it is likely that courts will closely scrutinize this determination” because the basis of it could be considered “protected speech.”
The contents of the memo were revealed during an ongoing bench trial in which the Trump administration is accused of instituting a constitutionally illegal ideological deportation policy against pro-Palestinian protesters, including Columbia University’s Mahmoud Khalil and Mohsen Mahdawi and Tufts University’s Rumeysa Ozturk.
The lawsuit was filed by the American Association of University Professors and the Middle East Studies Association, which represents hundreds of professors and students across the country. An action memo sent by government officials to the secretary of state proposing Rubio strip Khalil and Yunseo Chung of their visas was cleared by 10 people and departments within 24 hours before it was sent to Rubio, John Armstrong, the senior bureau official in the bureau of consular affairs at the State Department, testified Friday.
The White House, Department of Homeland Security, State Department and Department of Defense had over 20 conversations about student protester visa revocations, most of which took place in March, Armstrong testified.
Armstrong also testified that he had conversations with people on the Homeland Security Council over the visa revocations, naming Homeland Security Adviser Stephen Miller and his deputy.
In a two-page memo from earlier this year outlining why Khalil should be deported, Rubio cited Khalil’s alleged role in “antisemitic protests and disruptive activities, which fosters a hostile environment for Jewish students in the United States.”
Asked about how officials identify what constitutes antisemitism, Armstrong testified Friday that he can’t remember receiving “any concrete guidance” as to what can be treated as antisemitic, and also testified that he doesn’t know of any of his deputies having received formalized training on what antisemitism is.
It’s my understanding that “antisemites will try to hide their views and say they are not against Jews, they are just against Israel” — but “it’s a dodge” to hide their antisemitism, Armstrong said.
Support for a foreign terrorist organization or terrorist activity is grounds for a visa revocation, Armstrong testified, saying, “Support for Hamas will get your visa revoked.”
Asked by plaintiffs attorneys, Armstrong also testified that criticizing Zionism, criticizing Israel’s actions in Gaza, saying that the actions of the Israeli government are “worse than Hitler,” saying “from the river to the sea,” calling Israel an apartheid state and calling for an arms embargo could all be considered cause for removal under the executive order combatting antisemitism.
Armstrong, who personally authorized the decision to strip Ozturk of her visa, testified that he based the decision on her actions protesting Tufts’ relationship with Israel and her “activities and association” with groups that are “creating a hostile environment for Jewish students.”
That alleged association was based on an op-ed she co-authored with someone who is part of a student group that supported the call for Tufts to divest and cut ties with Israel — a proposal that was made by Tufts Students for Justice in Palestine, a group which is now banned from campus.
DHS and Homeland Security Investigations found that Ozturk was not part of the activities that resulted in Tufts SJP’s ban from Tufts, according to documents read aloud in court by attorneys. Nonetheless, Armstrong maintained that Ozturk had ties to Tufts SJP.
Ozturk’s visa was revoked under a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that allows the government to revoke a visa for any reason, Armstrong testified.
On Thursday, Andre Watson, the assistant director for the national security division at Homeland Security, testified that he has made 10 to 15 referrals of student protesters to the Department of State for possible visa revocation since the establishment of the Tiger Team task force looking into student protesters.
He said he referred every individual on whom the Homeland Security Investigations task force has filed a report, including Khalil, Ozturk and Mahdawi.
After the conclusion of testimony on Thursday, U.S. District Judge William Young informed the parties of definitions he will be relying on while making a decision after the conclusion of the bench trial.
“Criticisms of the state of Israel are not antisemitism. They are political speech, protected speech,” Young said.
Commentary on “conduct of the state of Israel, if it involves war crimes, involves genocide … is protected speech with respect to our constitution,” Young said.
While condemning antisemitism and saying the government should discourage antisemitism and hate against any group of people, he said, “Antisemitism … is not illegal. It is protected under the First Amendment.”
On the pivotal question of whether visa holders and lawful permanent residents have the same First Amendment rights as U.S. citizens, the judge said, “Probably they do.”
Young also said criticizing the state of Israel “does not constitute pro-Hamas support.”
After new evidence is entered on Monday, closing arguments will begin in the trial.
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Monday said he is still prepared to order National Guard troops to American cities besides the nation’s capital, but that he wanted local officials to request his help.
The comments come after Trump threatened Chicago as the next city he would target after his administration’s federal takeover of Washington, prompting pushback from Democratic Gov. JB Pritzker, who on Monday afternoon called the proposed actions “un-American.”
“They should be saying, ‘Please come in,'” Trump told ABC News Correspondent Jay O’Brien as he took questions from reporters the Oval Office after signing executive orders.
Trump still railed against Chicago, which he called a “disaster,” and Pritzker, who he said was a “slob.”
“I made the statement that next should be Chicago, because, as you all know, Chicago is a killing field right now, and they don’t acknowledge it. And they say, ‘We don’t need him. Freedom. Freedom. He’s a dictator. He’s a dictator.’ A lot of people are saying ‘maybe we like a dictator.’ I don’t like a dictator. I’m not a dictator. I’m a man with great common sense and a smart person,” the president said.
“But I’m really saying, and I say this to all of you, in a certain way, we should wait to be asked,” Trump continued.
Trump went back and forth repeatedly on Monday over whether the government should wrest control or wait to be asked.
“We may wait. We may or may not. We may just go in and do it, which is probably what we should do,” Trump said. “The problem is, it’s not nice when you go in and do it and somebody else is standing there saying, as we give great results, say, ‘Well, we don’t want the military.'”
Meanwhile, Pritzker and Chicago officials are speaking out against Trump’s threat to deploy the National Guard.
“Earlier today, in the Oval Office, Donald Trump looked at the assembled cameras and asked for me personally to say, ‘Mr. President, can you do us the honor of protecting our city?’ Instead, I say, ‘Mr. President, do not come to Chicago,'” Pritzker said at a news conference in Chicago on Monday afternoon.
“What President Trump is doing is unprecedented and unwarranted. It is illegal. It is unconstitutional. It is un-American,” the governor added.
Crime statistics from Chicago’s Police Department show murders year to date and robberies are down 31% and 33% respectively compared to the same period in 2024. Overall, the statistics show crime in the city is down 13% year to date compared to 2024.
“There is no emergency in Chicago that calls for armed military intervention,” Pritzker said on Monday. “There is no insurrection. Like every major American city in both blue and red states, we deal with crime in Chicago. Indeed, the violent crime rate is worse in red states and red cities.”
ABC News Senior Political Correspondent Rachel Scott pressed Trump on whether he would send troops to Republican-led states and cities experiencing high crime. Trump said yes but appeared to brush off that it would ever be necessary.
“Sure,” Trump responded. “But there aren’t that many of them.”
Trump continued to focus on Democrat-led areas and railed against cashless bail policies, though a report from Axios that analyzed FBI crime data showed 13 of the 20 U.S. cities with the highest murder rates were in Republican-run states.
The president on Monday defended the first 11 days of his administration’s takeover of Washington, which includes more than a thousand National Guardsmen deployed to the nation’s capital, some permitted to carry weapons for personal protection.
As part of his crime crackdown, Trump signed an executive order aimed at ending cashless bail in Washington and threatening to revoke federal funds for other areas around the country that have similar policies.
The president also signed an order directing the Justice Department to investigate instances of flag burning for possible charges, despite a 1989 Supreme Court ruling that the government cannot criminalize destruction of an American flag when done as an act of expression.
Catelin Drey, Democratic candidate for the Iowa State Senate, is seen in an advertisement for her campaign. Catelin Drey Campaign
(WASHINGTON) — National Democrats are celebrating the results of a special election for the Iowa State Senate, after Democrat Catelin Drey won in a district President Donald Trump carried by 11 points in 2024 to break a Republican supermajority of the chamber.
Republicans argue the low turnout race won’t reflect the voters who come out to support the party in the midterms, and that the results are influenced by the Democratic National Committee’s efforts to inject national money and volunteers into the race.
But the results are a potential warning sign for Republicans and suggest Democratic voters may be more engaged heading into next year’s elections, where control of Congress is at stake.
Drey won with 55% of the vote, with Republican Christopher Prosch garnering 44%, according to preliminary results from the Woodbury County Auditor’s Office.
“For the fourth special election in a row, Iowa voted for change,” Iowa Democratic Party Chair Rita Hart said after Drey’s victory.
“Our state is ready for a new direction and Iowa Democrats will keep putting forward candidates who can deliver better representation for Iowans,” Hart added.
Ken Martin, chair of the Democratic National Committee, said on Wednesday the party mobilized more than 30,000 volunteers to aid Drey and Iowa Democrats.
Martin, in a statement touting Drey’s victory, said Iowans are “putting Republicans on notice and making it crystal clear: any Republican pushing Trump’s unpopular, extreme agenda has no place governing on behalf of Iowa families.”
“That’s why all year long, Iowans have been electing Democrats ready to fight for working Iowans. Make no mistake: when Democrats organize everywhere, we win everywhere, and today is no exception,” Martin said.
This is the second time this year that Democrats have won a special election in Iowa. In January, they flipped another Iowa State Senate seat in a GOP area that President Trump won by 21 points last November.
The result of Tuesday’s special election also has practical implications for the state. Without a supermajority, Republicans can no longer confirm the governor’s appointees without Democratic support.
Iowa Republican Party chair Jeff Kaufman, on social media, downplayed the win for Democrats.
“National Democrats were so desperate for a win that they activated 30,000 volunteers and a flood of national money to win a state senate special election by a few hundred votes,” Kaufman wrote on X. “If @DNC thinks things are suddenly so great again for them in Iowa, they will bring back the caucuses.”
