The current administration has made unprecedented intrusions into state and local law enforcement, from deploying the National Guard onto California city streets to taking over the police department in Washington, DC.
Administration officials say that they are responding to a crime emergency. In reality, crime has continuously fallen in many cities, including in DC, according to local police data. History and recent experience both show that successful crime prevention requires careful planning and investment keyed to a city’s particular circumstances and needs. Heavy-handed actions such as deploying the soldiers will not deliver long-term safety, even if they produce some results in the short run.
Here’s what we know about recent crime trends and what works to reduce crime.
Communities have different needs
Experience shows that the most effective approaches to public safety are led by local government and police with the support of the federal government, not the other way around. That’s because they know the situation on the ground, what drives conflicts that lead to crime, what resources are available, who the trusted community voices are, and more. And these dynamics vary greatly from city to city and state to state.
This is especially critical in a city as complicated as Washington, where the justice system is fragmented between local and federal control. The consequences of this divided sovereignty are surprisingly far-reaching, and will not be solved by the National Guard. For example, vacant and hard-to-fill judgeships have caused court delays, undermining the system’s legitimacy and ability to hold perpetrators accountable.
Other communities face different challenges, and local leaders will have the best insights for identifying them and developing solutions. For example, one city may have a program or strategy that is working to reduce homicides, while another may be struggling to reduce carjackings. The federal government can support these efforts by sharing best practices learned in other jurisdictions and providing funding to make them sustainable, increasing the likelihood of building long-term safety. But none are likely to be solved by deploying the military.
Proven crime-reduction solutions
Effective crime-prevention strategies focus on targeted interventions and investments in communities — and they are rarely controversial. On the contrary, many of these strategies have broad and bipartisan support among policymakers, law enforcement professionals, and advocates for justice reform.
Violence prevention programs that have shown promise in cities like Newark and Chicago can help deescalate conflicts before crime occurs, contributing to recent declines in violence in both cities. One program reduced shooting and homicide arrests by more than 60 percent among participants. More than three quarters of all murders grow out of intense and unpredictable interpersonal conflict, and about 8 in 10 murders involve a firearm. Deterring illegal gun carrying can prevent these conflicts from becoming deadly. Police and community organizations both have a role to play in this important work.
Increasing trust between police and communities by ensuring that interactions are not solely about crime responses. One study found that, “a single, positive, nonenforcement-related encounter enhanced the legitimacy of police officers and increased people’s willingness to cooperate with the police.” Investing in after-school or summer job programs like those in Boston led to a 35 percent reduction in charges for violent crime by keeping kids occupied and off the streets when they are not in school. A growing body of research shows that building and repairing green spaces and adding outdoor lighting can cut crime by creating safe places for people to play and build community.
Further, between 40 and 50 percent of homicides are never solved, and “clearance” rates are even lower for nonfatal violent and property crimes. Closing evidence processing backlogs and filling investigator and detective staffing shortages can ensure more crimes are solved, increasing trust in the system and reducing cycles of violence. Additionally, the risk of recidivism can be reduced by deploying evidence-based programs, like in-prison education and job training, or criminal record sealing laws that help people secure housing and a job.
Follow the data
The administration’s latest actions have rested on the theory that crime is uniquely high in American cities with Democratic leadership. The truth is that rural areas, as well as states and cities led by Republicans, struggle with crime rates just as much, if not more. Indeed, governors who deployed National Guard soldiers to fight crime in DC at the president’s request often faced equally serious public safety challenges in their own back yards.
The national picture also diverges from the administration’s framing. Crime, especially violent crime, rose across the country during the first years of the Covid-19 pandemic. Those increases occurred in communities of all types — cities, suburbs, and rural areas — regardless of whether they leaned towards Democrats or Republicans.
Since then, crime has fallen dramatically. Last year, the national murder rate fell by a record 16 percent, continuing a multiyear decline. As a result, murders were less common in 2024 than they were in 2019, and city-level data suggests that the national murder rate is continuing to fall. Other categories of crime have also declined. According to crime data analyst Jeff Asher, “The nation’s reported violent and property crime rates stood at the lowest levels since the 1960s in 2024.”
Many of America’s largest cities have seen similar drops in crime and violence. Murders continue to decline in New York, where they are down 17 percent year to date. The same is true of Philadelphia (also down 17 percent) and Chicago (a remarkable 30 percent drop). And the most recent data from Memphis indicates that the city has begun to reverse recent increases in murder, assault, and motor vehicle theft. Similarly, in Washington, police statistics show a 33 percent decline in violent crime through midyear compared to 2024. That continues a series of declines that began in 2023, a trend which makes it hard to know what short-term effect, if any, federal interventions have had on crime the city. Simply put, it’s too soon to tell.
Despite the nationwide gains in controlling crime, concerns certainly remain. Not all cities or neighborhoods have seen such declines, and city by city, certain crimes are still more common than they were before the pandemic. In New York City, for example, assault and shoplifting are still elevated even as murder rates have plummeted. But the country is not in the middle of a crime wave or public safety emergency, especially when it comes to the most dangerous and deadly offenses.
We should be investing in proven strategies, not impeding them with insufficient funding — a problem that the Trump administration’s arbitrary budget cuts have only worsened. Crime prevention works when it builds on community trust and the evidence, not performative displays of force.
