Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., left, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, greets Air Force Gen. Gregory Guillot the commander of U.S. Northern Command, before hearing Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025, at the Capitol in Washington. (Eric Kayne/Stars and Stripes)
WASHINGTON — Military officials under congressional questioning on Thursday defended the deployment of the National Guard to American cities, saying the mobilization was lawful and troops were thoroughly trained to understand the limits of their authorities.
Air Force Gen. Gregory Guillot, the commander of U.S. troops in North America, said military personnel have detained one civilian since being deployed as part of President Donald Trump’s stated campaign to use troops to support federal law enforcement, protect federal facilities and combat crime.
The person detained in June in Los Angeles was promptly handed over to proper law enforcement personnel, Guillot told the Senate Armed Services Committee, noting that National Guard troops are instructed not to perform law enforcement activities such as make arrests or search for evidence.
“It is essential that everyone involved in this mission understands precisely what they are authorized to do, but perhaps more importantly, what they are authorized not to do,” he said.
Guillot acknowledged that troops do not receive any specific training on how to deal with people with mental health issues but are trained to de-escalate tense situations. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said police in Washington often interact with people experiencing mental health episodes.
Trump started calling up troops to Democrat-led cities in June amid protests in Los Angeles over his administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration. He has since ordered deployments to Washington, D.C.; Chicago; Memphis, Tenn.; and Portland, Ore., over the objections of local leaders.
Democrats have questioned the legality of the moves, arguing they put troops in jeopardy and detracted from readiness amid growing threats from foreign adversaries. Two West Virginia National Guard members deployed to Washington were shot — one fatally — last month as they patrolled near the White House.
Sen. Tammy Duckworth, of Illinois, a combat veteran who served in that state’s Army National Guard, said she called for the Senate Armed Services Committee to hold a hearing on the matter because troops were being mobilized under false pretenses.
“The power to deploy troops domestically must remain exceptional, accountable and rooted in law — not in one man’s judgment about what constitutes disorder,” she said.
She said the administration has spent more than $340 million on deployments to Illinois, Oregon, Washington and Tennessee. A report released by Democrats on Wednesday found the Pentagon had committed at least $258 million to support Trump’s orders to deploy troops, not including to Washington.
Mark Ditlevson, the Pentagon official overseeing the policies and plans related to the missions, said Thursday that the deployments are a “modest burden” on the Defense Department, and most of the incurred costs are reimbursable by the Department of Homeland Security.
“We are constantly assessing all costs related to these deployments, readiness costs, fiscal costs, and I can say without a shadow of a doubt this is not having a negative effect,” he said.
Guillot said about 700 National Guard troops have been federalized and only the 100 troops in California have been allowed to carry out their mission of protecting federal functions and facilities. Courts have blocked deployments in Oregon and Illinois, and a federal judge in California on Wednesday ruled that the Trump administration must return control of troops to the state.
A legal fight over the deployment of more than 2,000 National Guard troops to Washington, where Trump has unique law enforcement powers, is ongoing. Several members of the public who attended the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Thursday wore “Free DC” T-shirts.
Trump administration officials declined to make commitments to senators on whether National Guard personnel would be deployed from one state to another in the future on authorities that extend beyond their current mission to protect federal law enforcement and facilities.
Ditlevson said any orders would be evaluated to make sure they are “100% legal.”
Republicans on Thursday voiced their support for Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to tamp down on violence that they said local and federal law enforcement were too underfunded and stretched thin to handle.
Sen. Roger Wicker, of Mississippi, the committee’s chairman, said the mobilizations were “not only appropriate but essential.” He dismissed concerns from Democrats that the deployments were a waste of money, reduced readiness or violated a law prohibiting the use of the military for domestic law enforcement.
“In my judgment, mobilizing the Guard is an excellent opportunity for units to enhance cohesion, complete mission-essential tasks and ensure training is complete,” he said. “Moreover, Guardsmen operate with the highest degree of professionalism — they serve purely in support roles, never crossing the line into law enforcement functions.”
