U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro released a video Friday defending President Donald Trump’s deployment of federalized National Guard troops to Washington, D.C. The statement comes as Trump threatens a $5 billion defamation lawsuit against the Center for American Progress (CAP) over a report questioning the effectiveness of the troop surge. Pirro’s public support follows recent criticism from the president regarding her handling of a local vandalism case.
The Trump administration began deploying thousands of National Guard members to the capital approximately one year ago to address violent crime and assist with immigration enforcement. These troops, who patrol monuments, transit stations, and tourist areas, cost an estimated $1.65 million per day, according to administration figures provided to Congress. For comparison, the daily budget for the District’s local police force is approximately $1.5 million.
In her video, Pirro cited "undeniable" results and displayed clips of news reports discussing declines in violent and property crimes. However, a recent analysis by Reuters found that federalized troops accounted for less than 2 percent of criminal cases filed in D.C. Additionally, a CAP report released in July stated that violent crime and murder rates in 11 cities began declining between June 2024 and June 2025, a period before the National Guard was deployed to those locations.
The friction between Trump and Pirro stems from her office’s decision to drop charges against a 67-year-old former Olympian accused of vandalizing the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. Trump publicly stated that Pirro "choked" and "folded like an umbrella" after the dismissal. While the president maintains the pool was vandalized, his administration has also acknowledged that "contractor error" and "botched installation" likely caused the damage to the pool’s lining.
The conflict also centers on the legal rights of individuals and organizations to criticize government policy. A potential $5 billion lawsuit against the Center for American Progress could set a precedent for how think tanks and media outlets report on government data. CAP CEO Neera Tanden stated Friday that the threatened legal action is an attempt to silence evidence-based research. If the lawsuit proceeds, it would test First Amendment protections for publishing analysis that contradicts administration claims.
Further legal developments are expected in the Reflecting Pool case involving 67-year-old David Hearn. While Pirro moved to dismiss the case, her office filed a motion on Tuesday night seeking to dismiss it "without prejudice," which would allow prosecutors to re-charge Hearn if new evidence emerges. Hearn’s legal team is requesting a dismissal "with prejudice" to prevent future prosecution, calling the administration's continued interest "prosecutorial harassment." A judge has not yet ruled on these competing motions.