SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
washington dc
Trump’s New Order: Making DC Safe, and Beautiful, and Compliant
The executive order’s timing, scope, and ambiguity suggest that the federal government is not preparing for peaceful civic engagement on April 5, but rather girding itself for defiance.
Apr 03, 2025
"We've seen encampments cleared, phones tapped, and permits held up—but this? This feels like they're preparing for war," said Marisol Jennings, a D.C.-based organizer who has coordinated protests since 2017.
Just days before thousands of Americans are expected to gather in Washington, D.C. to protest the Trump administration's policies, a sweeping new executive order threatens to transform the nation's capital into a showcase for authoritarian policing.
Signed on March 27, the order—Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful—appears less concerned with beautification than with containment. Its provisions call for surging federal law enforcement, accelerating immigration crackdowns, and strictly enforcing vague "quality-of-life" directives for the city. And its timing, just a week before what organizers are calling the most consequential day of protest since President Donald Trump's return to office, is raising alarm from civil rights lawyers, city officials, and veteran demonstrators.
April 5 could become a barometer for how far Americans are willing to go to resist encroaching authoritarianism—and how far their government is willing to go to stop them.
This aggressive reordering of public space arrives at a politically volatile moment. On April 5, demonstrators from across the country will convene under the banner "Hands Off!"—a coordinated protest against Project 2025, growing executive overreach, and the erosion of democratic norms. But these protests will unfold on ground that has just been legally redefined. The executive order establishes a federal task force with sweeping discretion to enforce federal statutes, remove homeless encampments, and sanitize public areas—rhetoric that critics fear is coded language for suppressing civil dissent. One of the EO's most striking directives calls for expanding the presence of federal law enforcement in Washington, D.C., and increasing enforcement of so-called "quality-of-life" regulations in public spaces, including parks and federal landmarks.
Civil liberties advocates point to the EO's targeting of "unpermitted" demonstrations and disruptive gatherings as a thinly veiled attempt to preempt large-scale mobilization. In a city where the right to protest has long been protected even under strain, the threat of being forcibly removed or detained for a sign, a chant, or an unauthorized step into the street carries profound implications. "You don't need to ban protests if you can criminalize every protester," one ACLU attorney told me. "Public noise ordinances, anti-loitering laws, unauthorized signage—those become the new tools of political suppression."
The fear is not hypothetical. Activists organizing the April 5 protests have already reported increased surveillance and delays in permitting. Groups representing immigrants and unhoused communities are reconsidering participation altogether. The EO directs federal agencies to maximize "enforcement of Federal immigration law" and redirect available "law enforcement resources to apprehend and deport illegal aliens in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area," a mandate that has already created a chilling effect among undocumented residents, some of whom now fear that attending a peaceful march could result in deportation. In response, the National Homelessness Law Center warned that the order "will worsen homelessness in D.C., violate rights, and waste resources," especially with the federal push to "promptly remove and clean up all homeless encampments."
Then there is the question of firearms. Nestled within the order is a provision directing local entities to expedite and reduce the cost of concealed carry licenses in the District of Columbia. In a city with some of the country's strictest gun laws, this shift could radically alter the atmosphere of a mass protest. Armed counterprotesters, legally carrying under the new directive, may now appear in greater numbers—creating conditions ripe for intimidation or escalation. Police, too, may respond with heightened aggression, assuming the risk of firearms in the crowd. As one security analyst from Georgetown University put it, "You're introducing legal ambiguity and lethal potential into an already volatile situation."
But the risk of physical violence is just one dimension of the broader threat.
For many organizers, the stakes are not just physical—they're existential. "This is a test run," said Rami Kareem, a civil rights attorney affiliated with the Brennan Center for Justice. "What they're doing in D.C. could easily be replicated in Atlanta, Phoenix, or Milwaukee if it succeeds. If people stop showing up out of fear, the right to protest dies quietly, without a single law being passed."
Legal analysts point out that the EO contains intentionally broad language, such as directing agencies to deploy a "more robust Federal law enforcement presence" to ensure "that all applicable quality of life, nuisance, and public-safety laws are strictly enforced." Additionally, the EO mandates "prompt removal and cleanup of all homeless or vagrant encampments and graffiti on Federal land." These directives could grant law enforcement considerable discretion to interpret and potentially suppress protest gatherings, signage, and activities under the guise of enforcing public safety and beautification measures.
Even before the order, Project 2025 had stirred significant public anxiety about the centralization of federal authority and the erosion of institutional norms. But this EO provides an immediate, tangible mechanism to contain dissent—not just in D.C., but in any city with significant federal presence. As national attention turns toward the capital on April 5, many movement leaders see it as a galvanizing moment: either a line is held in defense of civil resistance, or a line is crossed in the normalization of political suppression. "If people stay home out of fear, it tells them this worked. If we show up in mass, it tells them we still have power," Jennings said. "That choice is still ours."
What's at stake goes far beyond the fate of one demonstration. April 5 could become a barometer for how far Americans are willing to go to resist encroaching authoritarianism—and how far their government is willing to go to stop them. If the demonstrators are met with violence, surveillance, or mass arrests, it may radicalize a new generation of resistance. If they succeed in holding ground peacefully, it may mark the resurgence of a national movement grounded in visibility and defiance.
Either way, this is not just a march—it is a test. Of power, of will, and of what kind of country this is becoming. Washington, D.C. is not only a geographic location; it is the symbolic heart of American democracy. If peaceful protests in the capital can be stifled under a vague mandate of "beautification," it sets a precedent that ripples outward. Critics argue this beauty is being defined in opposition to presence, protest, and poverty. The message is clear: Public dissent may now be treated as public disorder. That message is not lost on organizers, some of whom now fear their demonstration may be remembered not for its power—but for its suppression.
City leaders are in a bind. Mayor Muriel Bowser has offered cautious criticism of the order, noting that her administration already addresses crime and homelessness through existing programs. But the new federal task force was created without local input, and its presence sharply curtails D.C.'s home rule. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton warned that the order strips power from D.C. residents under the guise of national pride. In her statement, she added the order was "thoroughly anti-home rule" and "insulting to the 700,000 D.C. residents who live in close proximity to a federal government, which continues to deny them the same rights afforded to other Americans." Yet legally, city officials may have little recourse. On federal land, the task force's authority is unchecked.
As April 5 approaches, the atmosphere in Washington is one of deep unease. The executive order's timing, scope, and ambiguity suggest that the federal government is not preparing for peaceful civic engagement, but rather girding itself for defiance. If protesters are met not with the protections of the Constitution but with barricades, surveillance, and selective enforcement, then this spring may be remembered not as the moment democracy was defended in the streets—but the moment it was quietly roped off, one barricade at a time.
Keep ReadingShow Less
11 Arrested at DC Office Demanding Schumer 'Stand With Working People'
"Instead of standing with young and everyday people, Schumer is compromising on our lives and futures," said an 18-year-old who was arrested at the protest.
Mar 14, 2025
Protesters were arrested at U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer's Washington, D.C. office Friday morning while opposing the New York Democrat's plan to help congressional Republicans prevent a government shutdown with a stopgap funding measure that critics warn will further empower President Donald Trump and his billionaire allies, including Elon Musk.
The Sunrise Movement, a youth-led campaign to fight the climate emergency and create green jobs, said 11 protesters were arrested while urging the Schumer not to help the GOP advance the House-approved continuing resolution (CR). Although Republicans have a Senate majority, it is too slim to force final votes on most legislation without Democratic support.
"If Schumer prioritizes deal-making with Trump and Musk over standing up for the people, he is unfit to lead."
"Schumer must stand with working people and young people, not billionaires. This budget is a corrupt giveaway that sells out everyday Americans and our planet to Trump and Musk's greed. If Schumer prioritizes deal-making with Trump and Musk over standing up for the people, he is unfit to lead," Sunrise executive director Aru Shiney-Ajay said in a statement.
"We demand courage, not cowardice," she added. "This is bigger than politics. It's about protecting our communities, our democracy, and our planet from corruption and corporate greed. Schumer must fight back—now."
The protesters carried banners and signs with messages that included, "Schumer: Step Up or Step Aside," "Schumer: Don't Be a Coward," and "Our Future Is on Fire, Act Like It Is." The protesters echoed those messages.
"Instead of standing with young and everyday people, Schumer is compromising on our lives and futures," said 18-year-old Carly Bryant, who was arrested outside his office. "This bill guts services that working people like me need, just to make the rich richer. If Schumer won't step up and fight for us, he needs to step aside."
D.C. resident Ayesha Nagaria also accused Schumer of siding with Trump and "his billionaire agenda instead of communities across the country and in this city." The 22-year-old stressed that "the people of D.C. cannot afford to have our education and healthcare systems shut down, and Schumer is turning his back on us. If he won't have a backbone and stand up for us, we need to stand up for ourselves."
The GOP push to pass the CR before a shutdown begins at midnight comes as Trump and his billionaires—from Cabinet leaders to Musk, head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—are gutting the federal government. Although they are running into some roadblocks in court, the administration is also showing its willingness to ignore judges' orders. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress are aiming to give the rich tax cuts by slashing programs for the working class.
Protesters who gathered at Schumer's home in New York City Friday morning shared similar messages, holding signs that said, "People Over Billionaires," "Schumer, Vote No or Go," and "Schumer: Do Not Comply in Advance, Say No to Cloture."
"I Wish AOC Was My Senator," read one sign, a reference to growing calls for Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) to launch a primary challenge against Schumer. She has been a leading critic of his plan to vote for cloture, or to end debate.
While Ocasio-Cortez is a leading progressive, intense criticism of Schumer's position—that preventing a shutdown with this CR is the best of various bad options—is coming from across the "big tent" of the Democratic Party, including its House leaders.
The demonstration at Schumer's Brooklyn residence was organized by a local arm of the progressive group Indivisible.
The protest was "a testament to how many people are upset," Indivisible Brooklyn organizer Lisa Raymond-Tolan toldSalon, noting that hundreds of people "came out at 8 o'clock in the morning on a weekday to let the senator know that he is off course and capitulating to fascism—and we won't stand for it."
"He is not the leader for this moment," Raymond-Tolan told the crowd, according to Salon. "We need him to fight back or get the fuck out."
So far, in the Senate Democratic Caucus, only Schumer and Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) had publicly made clear that they intend to vote "yes" on cloture, though Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) is also widely expected to, after she was overheard "speaking quite loudly" against a shutdown during a Thursday lunch with colleagues.
Whatever happens with the CR and looming shutdown, there is now a movement to oust Schumer from Democratic Party leadership—and as of Friday it includes the "Pass the Torch" campaign that pressured former President Joe Biden to drop out of the 2024 contest.
"Chuck Schumer is unwilling and unable to meet the moment. His sole job is to fight MAGA's fascist takeover of our democracy—instead, he's directly enabling it," said Pass the Torch. "Americans desperately need a real opposition party to stand up to Trump. It's clear that will not happen as long as Schumer remains in charge of Senate Democrats. It's time to 'chuck' Schumer out. Chuck Schumer must resign as minority leader and make way for leaders who will actually fight for the American people."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Nothing Short of Fiscal Sabotage': GOP Spending Bill Would Blow $1 Billion Hole in DC Budget
One D.C.-based observer accused the GOP of "attempting to casually cut the budget of a major city simply because they hate us and they can."
Mar 12, 2025
The government spending bill passed by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives on Tuesday that aims to avert a government shutdown would effectively cut Washington, D.C.'s budget by almost $1.1 billion dollars, a move that city leaders warned would be devastating for city services, schools, and more.
"The proposed one billion [dollar] cut to D.C.'s budget is senseless, reckless, and would have devastating consequences for our nation’s capital," a spokeswoman for Democratic D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser's office said in a statement that was sent to multiple outlets.
The dilemma stems from the fact that Congress has the final word over D.C.'s budget.
The Republican spending bill is a continuing resolution and largely freezes federal spending at levels approved in the prior fiscal year, with $13 billion in cuts to non-military spending. Generally, Congress includes language in the continuing resolution that allows D.C. to spend its locally generated revenue at spending levels it has separately approved, but did not include that provision this time. In 2024, D.C. passed a 2025 budget of $21 billion, funded largely with local tax revenues.
"Republicans opted instead to treat D.C. the same as a federal agency, freezing funds and thus forcing the city to revert to its fiscal year 2024 budget—even as the city has been operating under its larger fiscal year 2025 budget since last October," explained the local D.C. outlet The 51st.
Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) released a statement Monday blasting the text of the bill.
"With this bill, House Republicans have intentionally committed nothing short of fiscal sabotage against D.C.," said Norton. "D.C. has not been treated as a federal agency for funding purposes in more than 20 years precisely because doing so can force dramatic overnight cuts to essential services, including police, sanitation, and schools. Cuts to these services would work against Republicans' stated goal of improving public safety and order in D.C."
A memo from D.C. officials explains that reducing local spending by over $1 billion would force a 16% cut to all remaining funds that are not expended. A cut that large would result in layoffs of direct services workers and a reduction or elimination of direct services, per the memo.
The Washington Post reported that it's hard to predict exactly how the cuts will play out, but budget officials believe the reduction could cause $200 million in cuts to D.C. Public Schools and $166 million in cuts to charter schools.
D.C. Water, which distributes drinking water and provides regional wastewater treatment services, could see $51 million in cuts.
"The federal government saves no money from reducing D.C.'s locally funded expenditures," according to the memo from the District, which also noted that the cuts could cause D.C.'s bond rating to be downgraded.
"This is all completely pointless," wrote one observer on X. "There should not be a single vote in Congress in favor of these catastrophic cuts."
Another D.C. resident shared the Post's story and wrote the GOP is "attempting to casually cut the budget of a major city simply because they hate us and they can."
The spending bill now heads to the Senate. Democrats can try to block the measure, though that carries the risk of being blamed for a government shutdown, which would go into effect if no spending bill is passed by Friday.
"Big vote upcoming for Senate Democrats," wrote Post reporter Jeff Stein on Wednesday. "The Trump administration is asserting massive new powers to control federal spending unilaterally, and many Dems view the shutdown bill as their only possible point of leverage. We'll see what they do soon."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular