The Rising Crisis of Domestic Militarization in America

Federal equipment transfers, immigration enforcement expansion, and National Guard deployments are reshaping policing, budgets, and community safety nationwide.

By Peace Economy Project | Domestic Militarization Watch

The militarization of American communities is no longer a fringe concern or a temporary response to crisis. It has become a defining feature of federal policy—shaping policing, immigration enforcement, and even the role of the military inside U.S. cities.

A new Domestic Militarization Watch research brief from the Peace Economy Project documents the unprecedented scale of this shift. The findings are stark: through multiple federal programs, tens of billions of dollars in military equipment, personnel, and enforcement authority are now embedded in domestic governance—often with little public oversight and significant consequences for workers, communities, and democratic accountability.

Three Pathways of Militarization

The brief identifies three interconnected federal pathways driving domestic militarization:

1. The Pentagon’s 1033 Program
Since 1997, the Department of Defense has transferred $7.6 billion in military surplus equipment to more than 8,200 law enforcement agencies nationwide. This includes armored vehicles, assault rifles, tactical gear, and night-vision equipment originally designed for war zones. While much of the equipment is labeled “free,” local departments bear the real costs—maintenance, storage, training, and deployment—diverting funds away from community policing, civilian staff, and de-escalation training.

2. Immigration Enforcement Expansion
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) now represents the largest domestic militarization initiative in U.S. history. Federal plans allocate $75 billion through 2029 for detention and enforcement—enabling the daily detention of more than 100,000 people and potentially up to one million deportations annually. This expansion includes hiring 10,000 new ICE personnel and broadening programs that deputize local police as immigration agents, pulling community law enforcement into federal enforcement roles and straining local capacity.

3. National Guard Domestic Deployments
The National Guard is increasingly deployed not only for disaster response, but for border operations and urban policing. Thousands of Guard members have been stationed at the U.S.–Mexico border, while recent deployments into cities like Washington, D.C., Chicago, and Memphis blur the line between military and civilian authority. These missions divert Guard resources away from emergency management and undermine state readiness for natural disasters and public health crises.

Why Scale Changes the Conversation

These programs are not marginal. Their scale matters.

• The ICE allocation alone exceeds the annual defense budgets of most U.S. states.
• Military equipment transfers under the 1033 Program cost taxpayers twice—once to procure, and again to maintain locally.
• National Guard deployments extract personnel and funding from state emergency response systems.

Most critically, this is a budget choice. Federal resources directed toward militarization are resources not invested in job training, violence prevention, mental health services, or economic development—interventions with far stronger evidence for improving long-term public safety.

Community and Workforce Impacts

Militarization reshapes local economies and employment patterns:

• Police departments acquiring military equipment often reduce investment in training, community liaison roles, and civilian support staff.
• ICE expansion creates federal enforcement jobs while simultaneously displacing hundreds of thousands of immigrant workers, destabilizing local economies.
• National Guard deployments pull workers away from state-based emergency response and resilience roles.

These impacts cascade through communities, particularly in rural areas, low-income jurisdictions, and immigrant-dependent local economies.

Militarization Is Not Inevitable

The brief makes clear that domestic militarization is the result of policy decisions—and policy can change.

Among the recommendations:

• Restrict or eliminate military equipment transfers to civilian police.
• Reorient immigration funding away from mass detention and deportation.
• Limit the use of National Guard forces for routine civilian policing.
• Dramatically expand investment in workforce transition programs, community-based public safety, and economic security.

Why This Matters Now

Domestic militarization often advances quietly—through budget line items, interagency agreements, and emergency authorities that later become normalized. By documenting its full scale, this brief establishes a baseline for public accountability and informed debate.

Future briefs in the Domestic Militarization Watch series will examine specific community impacts, racial and economic justice dimensions, and evidence-based alternatives. But the core finding is already clear: the United States has chosen militarization over community investment—and communities are paying the price.

📄 Read the full research brief: The Scale and Scope of Domestic Militarization in the United States