Blumenthal Grills Hegseth on Deployment of Active Duty Military in U.S. Cities

[WASHINGTON, D.C.] – At a Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing today, U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) pressed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on the Trump Administration’s deployment of active-duty troops in cities across the United States. Blumenthal’s line of questioning comes as President Trump has sent Marines and National Guard troops to Los Angeles in response to protests against a series of immigration raids in the city. In response to Blumenthal’s questions, Hegseth was unable to provide a clear answer about the Administration’s future plans to deploy active-duty military forces in other cities in the United States.

“I have been deeply disturbed and alarmed by the use of active-duty troops, Marines, in Los Angeles. And President Trump has made clear his intention to continue to use the military to suppress dissent and likely inflame tensions there, and elsewhere, all under the guise of enforcing the law. What he is doing may well be illegal. I want to ask you about contingency plans for the use of active duty military in other cities,” said Blumenthal. “I take it from your answer that you do have contingency plans for the use of military in other cities.”

In response to Blumenthal’s remarks, Hegseth said, “We have never and will not illegally deploy troops. All have been under existing and well-established authorities to use troops to support federal law enforcement officers.”

Blumenthal slammed Hegseth for his lack of a definitive answer, saying, “But you do have such plans. I find that answer deeply alarming. So far, there has been no legal justification. It’s been challenged successfully. I think that it will prevail, those challenges will prevail in the courts.”

Blumenthal went on to grill Hegseth on the absence of the Department of Defense budget request, and questioned the Department’s preparedness to face growing threats to our national security.

The transcript of Blumenthal’s full questioning can be found below, and a video is available here.

U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT): Secretary Hegseth, you have been asked about options for the use of force abroad. I want to ask about the use of our military at home. I have been deeply disturbed and alarmed by the use of active-duty troops, Marines, in Los Angeles. And President Trump has made clear his intention to continue to use the military to suppress dissent and likely inflame tensions there, and elsewhere, all under the guise of enforcing the law. What he is doing may well be illegal. I want to ask you about contingency plans for the use of active duty military in other cities. Do you have such contingency plans?

U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth: Senator, I would just say we share the President's view that, as you characterized it, we are deeply disturbed and alarmed that ICE officers are being attacked while doing their job in any city in America. And so, allowing National Guard or active troops under existing authorities to defend them is important–

Blumenthal: And we can be alarmed by these attacks on ICE officers, yes. But we ought to be equally alarmed by the illegal use of active duty Marines or other military. I take it from your answer that you do have contingency plans for the use of military in other cities.

Hegseth: We have never and will not illegally deploy troops. All have been under existing and well-established authorities to use troops to support federal law enforcement officers –

Blumenthal: But you do have such plans. I find that answer deeply alarming. So far, there has been no legal justification. It’s been challenged successfully. I think that it will prevail, those challenges will prevail in the courts. And I want to ask you right now to submit to this panel those contingency plans for the use of active-duty military in other cities.

I want to move onto another area of questioning. The Chairman has said that you have submitted precious little detail. to quote him, precious little detail about the budget. I think there is no detail. This budget is literally a rough outline, with shortsighted shortfalls. For example, the shortfall on the Columbia-class, two billion dollars. Only about one billion dollars for Virginia-class. There is virtually no outline or specificity as to how you are going to provide drones to defend and also engage in offensive outline and maneuvers.

The nature of warfare is changing right before our eyes in real-time. Unmanned aerial and undersea warfare is happening in Ukraine and elsewhere. And I think that you owe this Committee and the American public more specificity in that budget, because we will be at risk—we are at risk right now—in the Middle East, and I want to know whether we have contingency plans to protect our U.S. personnel in the region from the kind of swarm of drones that have proved devastating already to three of our service people in the Middle East on a base in Jordan. Do you have such plans to protect against drones there?

Hegseth: Senator, we work hand in glove with the Joint Staff and CENTCOM, and every COCOM, especially right now, to ensure everything at our disposal is available to ensure maximum force protection against any contingency, including the one you described, sir.

Blumenthal: Well, I have no assurance that we have the capacity to safeguard against a swarm of small, lightweight, slow-moving drones that are, in my view, our major vulnerability, and right now, if we engaged in the Iran conflict, would put us and U.S. personnel at risk there.

Let me ask you about Ukraine. I have just returned from my seventh trip to Ukraine. I am the advocate, chief sponsor, with Senator Graham in the Russia Sanctions bill. You said that the United States, and the Ranking Member cited it, that we must start by recognizing that returning to Ukraine's pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective and will only prolong the war. My question to you is, when will you release the PDA four billion dollars in equipment that Ukraine desperately needs? It’s sitting there. Ukraine deserves it. When will it be released?

Hegseth: We are aware of PDA 75, and that is a decision we can make in the future.

Blumenthal: My time has expired, but I do not consider that answer adequate.

-30-