Key points:
- President Donald Trump announces National Guard takeover of Washington, D.C. police for 30 days.
- Trump issues executive order to “end vagrancy” and prioritize urban camping prohibitions.
- Critics argue Trump’s approach prioritizes removal over long-term housing solutions.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – On August 11, 2025, President Donald Trump announced the National Guard would assume control of the Washington, D.C., police department for 30 days. During the announcement, Trump said people experiencing homelessness were being removed from public parks and suggested the effort could expand to other cities.
The move follows an executive order Trump issued on July 24 that directed federal agencies to “end vagrancy” and prioritize resources for communities that “enforce prohibitions of urban camping and loitering.” The order was one of several steps by the administration signaling a more aggressive, enforcement-heavy approach to homelessness nationwide.
Trump suggested on Truth Social that “we will give you places to stay,” though no plan was outlined in his press conference or in the order. The vagueness of the commitment has fueled concerns that the administration’s tactics will emphasize removal and policing over housing, shelter, and long-term services.
Experts and advocates have warned that criminalizing homelessness does not solve the problem. Instead, they say it leads to disruption, worsens conditions for unhoused people, and consumes public resources that could otherwise go toward housing solutions.
Research cited by the Urban Institute shows that policies criminalizing homelessness or clearing encampments without connecting people to services have no measurable effect on reducing the number of people living outside. Instead, such actions increase stress and make it harder for people to access housing or medical care.
Evidence also shows that encampment sweeps and forced relocation often sever people’s ties to organizations providing food, health care, and employment opportunities. Citing or arresting people for activities associated with homelessness can result in the loss of critical documents such as Social Security cards and birth certificates, prolonging their time without stable housing.
Criminalization also comes at a financial cost. In Denver, police logged 2,789 hours on minor homelessness-related offenses in 2018, according to research cited by the Urban Institute. A shift toward housing-focused strategies could have saved nearly half of those hours. In Hawaii, a 2016 report showed that $15,000 per week was spent on encampment clearing, but those efforts only temporarily displaced people instead of moving them into stable housing.
“Encampments raise significant, legitimate concerns about the health and safety of neighborhoods and local businesses,” said Jeff Olivet, executive director of the U.S. Interagency Council on Homelessness, in a statement to States Newsroom. “However, the criminalization of homelessness is ineffective, expensive, and inhumane. Housing and health care, not handcuffs and fines, solve homelessness.”
The National Homelessness Law Center has tracked the rapid growth of punitive policies since the Supreme Court ruled in June that cities could penalize people for sleeping outside even when shelters are full. According to the group, 99 ordinances restricting camping were passed in 26 states after the ruling, with another 66 pending by November.
Jesse Rabinowitz, communications and campaign director for the law center, said, “The main two things they all have in common are that none of them solve homelessness and all of them will make homelessness worse.”
Eric Tars, senior policy director for the National Homelessness Law Center, described the stark reality unhoused people face under such laws. “Almost nowhere in America can you do all of the activities that you and I do every day and take for granted,” Tars said. “Eating, sleeping, resting, sitting. We’re all sitting right now. If we were doing that and we were homeless and doing that outside in a public space, it might be considered a crime.”
These developments come amid a broader national conversation about homelessness, housing shortages, and rising public pressure to “do something.” In 2023, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development estimated 654,104 people experienced homelessness on a single night in January, a 12 percent increase from the previous year. Advocates argue the number is an undercount, given the challenges of measuring transient populations in one-night surveys.
Marcy Thompson, vice president for programs and policy at the National Alliance to End Homelessness, told States Newsroom that raw data on homelessness often fails to capture the scope of the crisis. “If you just look at that data, it’s easy to assume that things aren’t working and that homelessness response systems aren’t doing their job, or that resources aren’t being spent appropriately,” she said. “What you don’t see in those numbers are things like, how many people are becoming homeless each year for the first time.”
Thompson added that low wages, lack of affordable housing, barriers to health care and mental health services, and systemic racism are major drivers of homelessness.
Even as punitive laws expand, cities that have invested in evidence-based housing strategies are showing progress. Washington, D.C., despite being portrayed by Trump as failing, reported a 9 percent decrease in homelessness from 2024 to 2025. The city credited its progress to permanent housing initiatives and supportive services. Similar results were reported in Dallas, Denver, and Los Angeles.
Multiple decades of research affirm that the most effective approaches to ending homelessness involve permanent housing and services tailored to individuals’ needs. Housing vouchers and permanent supportive housing have proven especially effective. The Urban Institute reported that the faster communities add permanent supportive housing, the quicker chronic homelessness declines.
These programs also help redirect police resources. Communities that focus on reducing homelessness through housing approaches allow officers to prioritize other public safety responsibilities, such as traffic enforcement and outreach, rather than responding repeatedly to homelessness-related calls.
But these interventions remain underfunded. Only 20 percent of eligible households receive federal housing assistance, and just 16 percent of people experiencing homelessness obtain permanent housing interventions. Advocates argue that such gaps mean effective programs appear weaker than they are. The Urban Institute compared the situation to a hospital with only five EpiPens for 25 patients suffering allergic reactions: the medicine works, but there isn’t enough supply.
Trump’s proposed budget includes deep cuts to federal housing and social programs, further fueling concerns that his approach will lean heavily on enforcement and military resources instead of long-term solutions.
In his second term, Trump has vowed to “use every tool, lever and authority to get the homeless off our streets.” He has proposed an urban camping ban and suggested creating tent cities on inexpensive land, staffed with doctors, social workers, and job rehabilitation specialists. Critics argue that the proposals echo detention-style encampments rather than permanent housing.
“Once people are homeless, they (Trump administration) have no plan to address it other than literally rounding people up and putting them in detention camps,” Rabinowitz said.
Advocates also point out that punitive tactics are not limited to Republicans. Democratic officials, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, have also moved to clear encampments in response to public pressure. After the Supreme Court ruling, Newsom signed an executive order directing state agencies to remove encampments that pose “an imminent threat to life, health, safety or infrastructure.”
“There’s often little daylight between what Democrats like (Gov.) Gavin Newsom and what far right extremists like Donald Trump want to do in regards to homelessness,” Rabinowitz said.
While officials defend these measures as necessary for public health and safety, critics maintain that without a significant scale-up in affordable housing, supportive services, and federal assistance, the cycle of displacement and criminalization will continue.
“Housing combined with supportive services tailored to each person’s needs remains the evidence-based solution to homelessness,” the Urban Institute concluded. “Instead of an ineffective, expensive bid to use the military to address homelessness in D.C. and potentially other cities, this administration and all state and local governments should follow the evidence by putting resources toward housing, shelter, and connections to meaningful services.”
