Remarks by United States Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and President Donald Trump at a joint address to top military leaders on September 30, 2025, raise grave concerns that the administration will seek to deploy combat forces in domestic law enforcement roles, Human Rights Watch said today. If implemented, these proposals would be in brazen violation of US law and risk widespread human rights violations.
In his remarks at a Marine Corps base in Quantico, Virginia, President Trump claimed that the US military should be used domestically to confront a "war from within," and declared that US cities should serve as "training grounds" for the armed forces. This speech comes after the Trump administration's unlawful use of lethal force against boats from Venezuela, and days after the White House issued a memorandum instructing the government to investigate civil society groups for links to "terroristic conspiracies."
"The administration first says that it wants the military to be more lethal and less accountable and then threatens to deploy troops in a show of force to US cities," said Tanya Greene, US program director at Human Rights Watch. "This is a recipe for disaster."
Several US laws govern the boundary between the US military and domestic law enforcement. The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of the US army or air force to execute domestic law unless expressly authorized by US Congress. The Trump administration has nevertheless deployed forces to US cities using a patchwork of contested authorities including a presidential memorandum to federalize National Guard units and claims of a need to protect federal property or "federal functions." The legality of these moves has been hotly contested.
Hegseth outlined plans to pursue "maximum lethality," lower standards for misconduct, and weaken what Hegseth called "politically correct" rules of engagement. Whether he implements those plans or not, such rhetoric risks creating a permissive environment for human rights violations and makes the prospect of an illegal domestic deployment even more alarming, Human Rights Watch said.
While international human rights law does not prohibit states from using the military in law enforcement roles, military forces are generally ill-suited to the task. International human rights standards around policing emphasize restraint and respect for human rights, with force and firearms only to be used in extremely limited circumstances.
Military forces are trained primarily for combat, not in the effective conduct of rights-respecting law enforcement, and this misalignment creates an inherent risk of serious violations. In the United States, one of the most traumatic episodes of the Vietnam War era occurred at Kent State University in Ohio in 1970, when National Guard troops opened fire on unarmed students, killing four.
Human Rights Watch has documented violations in countries around the world linked to the use of military forces to quash dissent or assume law enforcement roles. Zimbabwe military forces used excessive, lethal force to crush nationwide protests in mid-January 2019. In Mexico, successive governments have relied on the military to combat criminal activity, with soldiers committing extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, and torture.
In Brazil, military forces deployed for law enforcement have committed abuses, including killings and torture, which have not been properly investigated or punished. Myanmar, Egypt, and Thailand, among others, have all conducted lethal crackdowns on protests with their military forces.
Hegseth's stated plan to eliminate anonymous complaints and to restrict internal dissent would silence whistleblowers and victims of harassment, Human Rights Watch said. Such measures could violate protections under US law and undermine service members' ability to seek redress.
State and local officials, especially governors with their authority over National Guard forces, should speak out against any effort to turn the military into a domestic police force, Human Rights Watch said. Congressional leaders in both parties should make clear that they expect the US military to act according to the highest standards of professionalism. Whistleblower channels should be protected.
"The Trump administration has conjured up a series of absurd fabrications with serious human rights consequences during its time in office," Greene said. "There is no reason and no legal justification for any disastrous use of military forces on US soil."
