The Brief

For the first time, internal TikTok communications have been made public that show a company unconcerned with the harms the app poses for American teenagers. This is despite its own research validating many child safety concerns.

The confidential material was part of a more than two-year investigation into TikTok by 14 attorneys general, including California, that led to state officials suing the company on Tuesday. The lawsuit alleges that TikTok was designed with the express intention of addicting young people to the app. The states argue the multi-billion-dollar company deceived the public about the risks.

In each of the separate lawsuits state regulators filed, dozens of internal communications, documents and research data were redacted — blacked-out from public view — since authorities entered into confidentiality agreements with TikTok.

But in one of the lawsuits, filed by the Kentucky Attorney General’s Office, the redactions were faulty. This was revealed when Kentucky Public Radio copied-and-pasted excerpts of the redacted material, bringing to light some 30 pages of documents that had been kept secret.

After Kentucky Public Radio published excerpts of the redacted material, a state judge sealed the entire complaint following a request from the attorney general’s office “to ensure that any settlement documents and related information, confidential commercial and trade secret information, and other protected information was not improperly disseminated,” according to an emergency motion to seal the complaint filed on Wednesday by Kentucky officials.

NPR reviewed all the portions of the suit that were redacted, which highlight TikTok executives speaking candidly about a host of dangers for children on the wildly popular video app. The material, mostly summaries of internal studies and communications, show some remedial measures — like time-management tools — would have a negligible reduction in screen time. The company went ahead and decided to release and tout the features.

Separately, under a new law, TikTok has until January to divest from its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, or face a nationwide ban. TikTok is fighting the looming crackdown. Meanwhile, the new lawsuits from state authorities have cast scrutiny on the app and its ability to counter content that harms minors. 

In a statement, TikTok spokesman Alex Haurek defended the company’s child safety record and condemned the disclosure of once-public material that has now been sealed.

"It is highly irresponsible of NPR to publish information that is under a court seal,” Haurek said. “Unfortunately, this complaint cherry-picks misleading quotes and takes outdated documents out of context to misrepresent our commitment to community safety.”

He continued: “We have robust safeguards, which include proactively removing suspected underage users, and we have voluntarily launched safety features such as default screentime limits, family pairing, and privacy by default for minors under 16.”

Kentucky AG: TikTok users can become ‘addicted’ in 35 minutes

As TikTok’s 170 million U.S. users can attest, the platform’s hyper-personalized algorithm can be so engaging it becomes difficult to close the app. TikTok determined the precise amount of viewing it takes for someone to form a habit: 260 videos. After that, according to state investigators, a user “is likely to become addicted to the platform.”

In the previously redacted portion of the suit, Kentucky authorities say: “While this may seem substantial, TikTok videos can be as short as 8 seconds and are played for viewers in rapid-fire succession, automatically,” the investigators wrote. “Thus, in under 35 minutes, an average user is likely to become addicted to the platform.”

Another internal document found that the company was aware its many features designed to keep young people on the app led to a constant and irresistible urge to keep opening the app.

TikTok’s own research states that “compulsive usage correlates with a slew of negative mental health effects like loss of analytical skills, memory formation, contextual thinking, conversational depth, empathy, and increased anxiety,” according to the suit.

In addition, the documents show that TikTok was aware that “compulsive usage also interferes with essential personal responsibilities like sufficient sleep, work/school responsibilities, and connecting with loved ones.”

TikTok: Time-limit tool aimed at ‘improving public trust,’ not limiting app use

The unredacted documents show that TikTok employees were aware that too much time spent by teens on social media can be harmful to their mental health. The consensus among academics is that they recommend one hour or less of social media usage per day.

The app lets parents place time limits on their kids’ usage that range from 40 minutes to two hours per day. TikTok created a tool that set the default time prompt at 60 minutes per day.

Internal documents show that TikTok measured the success of this tool by how it was “improving public trust in the TikTok platform via media coverage,” rather than how it reduced the time teens spent on the app.

After tests, TikTok found the tool had little impact – accounting for about a 1.5-minute drop in usage, with teens spending around 108.5 minutes per day beforehand to roughly 107 minutes with the tool. According to the attorney general’s complaint, TikTok did not revisit this issue.

One document shows one TikTok project manager saying, “Our goal is not to reduce the time spent.” In a chat message echoing that sentiment, another employee said the goal is to “contribute to DAU [daily active users] and retention” of users.

TikTok has publicized its “break” videos, which are prompts to get users to stop endlessly scrolling and take a break. Internally, however, it appears the company didn’t think the videos amounted to much. One executive said that they are “useful in a good talking point” with policymakers, but “they’re not altogether effective.”

Document: TikTok demoted people it deemed unattractive on its feed

The multi-state litigation against TikTok highlighted the company’s beauty filters, which users can overlay on videos to make themselves look thinner and younger or to have fuller lips and bigger eyes.

One popular feature, known as the Bold Glamour filter, uses artificial intelligence to rework people’s faces to resemble models with high cheekbones and strong jawlines.

Internal documents show TikTok is aware of the harm that beauty filters, like Bold Glamour, can cause young users

(

Image created by NPR's Grace Widyatmadja

/

TikTok

)

TikTok is aware of the harm these beauty filters can cause young users, the documents show.

Employees suggested internally the company “provide users with educational resources about image disorders” and create a campaign “to raise awareness on issues with low self esteem (caused by the excessive filter use and other issues).”

They also suggested adding a banner or video to the filters that included “an awareness statement about filters and the importance of positive body image/mental health.”

This comes as the documents showcase another hidden facet of TikTok’s algorithm: the app prioritizes beautiful people.

One internal report that analyzed TikTok’s main video feed saw “a high volume of … not attractive subjects” were filling everyone’s app. In response, Kentucky investigators found that TikTok retooled its algorithm to amplify users the company viewed as beautiful.

“By changing the TikTok algorithm to show fewer ‘not attractive subjects’ in the For You feed, [TikTok] took active steps to promote a narrow beauty norm even though it could negatively impact their Young Users,” the Kentucky authorities wrote.

TikTok exec: algorithm could deprive kids of opportunities like ‘looking at someone in the eyes’

Publicly, TikTok has stated that one of its “most important commitments is supporting the safety and well-being of teens.”

Yet internal documents paint a very different picture, citing statements from top company executives who appear well-aware of the harmful effects of the app without taking significant steps to address it.

One unnamed TikTok executive put it in stark terms, saying the reason kids watch TikTok is because of the power of the app’s algorithm, “but I think we need to be cognizant of what it might mean for other opportunities,” said the company executive. “And when I say other opportunities, I literally mean sleep, and eating, and moving around the room, and looking at someone in the eyes.”

TikTok’s internal estimate: 95% of smartphone users under 17 use TikTok

TikTok views itself as being in an “arms race for attention,” according to a 2021 internal presentation.

And teenagers have been key to the app’s early growth in the U.S., but another presentation shown to top company officials revealed that an estimated 95% of smartphone users under 17 use TikTok at least once a month. This lead a company staffer to state that it had “hit a ceiling among young users.”

TikTok’s own research concluded that kids were the most susceptible to being sucked into the app’s infinitely flowing feed of videos. “As expected, across most engagement metrics, the younger the user, the better the performance,” according to a 2019 TikTok document.

In response to growing national concern that excessive social media use can increase the risk of depression, anxiety and body-image issues among kids, TikTok has introduced time-management tools. These include notifications informing teens about how long they are spending on the app, parental oversight features and the ability to make the app inaccessible for some down time.

At the same time, however, TikTok knew how unlikely it was these tools would be effective, according to materials obtained by Kentucky investigators.

“Minors do not have executive function to control their screen time, while young adults do,” read a TikTok internal document.

TikTok pushes users into filter bubbles like ‘painhub’ and ‘sadnotes’

TikTok is well aware of “filter bubbles.” Internal documents show the company has defined them as when a user “encounters only information and opinions that conform to and reinforce their own beliefs, caused by algorithms that personalize an individual’s online experience.”

The company knows the dangers of filter bubbles. During one internal safety presentation in 2020, employees warned the app “can serve potentially harmful content expeditiously.” TikTok conducted internal experiments with test accounts to see how quickly they descend into negative filter bubbles.

“After following several ‘painhub’ and ‘sadnotes’ accounts, it took me 20 mins to drop into ‘negative’ filter bubble,” one employee wrote. “The intensive density of negative content makes me lower down mood and increase my sadness feelings though I am in a high spirit in my recent life.”

Another employee said, “there are a lot of videos mentioning suicide,” including one asking, “If you could kill yourself without hurting anybody would you?”

In another document, TikTok’s research found that content promoting eating disorders, often called “thinspiration,” is associated with issues such as body dissatisfaction, disordered eating, low self-esteem and depression

Despite these heedings, TikTok’s algorithm still puts users into filter bubbles. One internal document states that users are “placed into ‘filter bubbles’ after 30 minutes of use in one sitting.” The company wrote that having more human moderators to label content is possible, but “requires large human efforts.”

TikTok’s content moderation missing self-harm, eating disorder content

TikTok has several layers of content moderation to weed out videos that violate its Community Guidelines. Internal documents show that the first set of eyes aren’t always a person from the company’s Trust and Safety Team.

The first round typically uses artificial intelligence to flag pornographic, violent or political content. The following rounds use human moderators, but only if the video has a certain amount of views, according to the documents. These additional rounds often fail to take into account certain types of content or age specific rules.

According to TikTok’s own studies, the unredacted filing shows that some suicide and self-harm content escaped those first rounds of human moderation. The study points to self-harm videos that had more than 75,000 views before TikTok identified and removed them.

TikTok also has scattershot policies on content that includes disordered eating, drug use, dangerous driving, gore and violence. While TikTok’s Community Guidelines prohibit much of this content, internal policy documents say the company “allows” the content. Often, the content is findable on TikTok and just not “recommended,” meaning it doesn’t show up in users’ For You feeds or took a lower priority in the algorithm.

The company has talking points around its content moderation work. One example highlighted in the documents details a child sent to the emergency room after attempting a dangerous TikTok challenge. When dealing with the negative fallout from the press, TikTok told employees to use an internal list of talking points that said, “In line with our Community Guidelines, we do not allow content that depicts, promotes, normalizes, or glorifies [dangerous] behavior, including dangerous challenges.”

TikTok acknowledges internally that it has substantial “leakage” rates of violating content that’s not removed. Those leakage rates include: 35.71% of “Normalization of Pedophilia;” 33.33% of “Minor Sexual Solicitation;” 39.13% of “Minor Physical Abuse;” 30.36% of “leading minors off platform;” 50% of “Glorification of Minor Sexual Assault;” and “100% of “Fetishizing Minors.”

TikTok slow to remove users under 13, despite company policy

Kids under 13 cannot open a standard TikTok account, but there is a “TikTok for Younger Users” service that the company says includes strict content guardrails.

It is a vulnerable group of users, since federal law dictates that social media sites like TikTok cannot collect data on children under 13 unless parents are notified about the personal information collected. And even then, social media apps must first obtain verifiable consent from a parent.

In August, the Department of Justice sued TikTok for violating the federal law protecting the data of kids under 13, alleging that the app “knowingly and repeatedly violated kids’ privacy.”

In the internal documents, however, company officials instructed TikTok moderators to use caution before removing accounts of users suspected to be under 13.

An internal document about “younger users/U13” says TikTok instructs its moderators to not take action on reports of underage users unless their account identifies them as under 13.

The previously-redacted portions of the suit suggest the company is aware these young users have accounts – through complaints from parents and teachers — but does little to remove them.

TikTok in crisis mode after report on TikTok Live being ‘strip club filled with 15-year-olds’

After a 2022 report on Forbes about underage kids stripping on TikTok’s live feature, the company launched its own investigation.

That’s when TikTok officials realized there was “a high” number of underage streamers receiving digital currency on the app in the form of a “gift” or “coin” in exchange for stripping — real money converted into a digital currency often in the form of a plush toy or a flower.

TikTok discovered “a significant” number of adults direct messaging underage TikTokkers about stripping live on the platform.

As part of this internal probe, TikTok officials found that in just one month, 1 million “gifts” were sent to kids engaged in “transactional” behavior.

In an understated assessment, one TikTok official concluded: “[O]ne of our key discoveries during this project that has turned into a major challenge with Live business is that the content that gets the highest engagement may not be the content we want on our platform.”

Copyright 2024 NPR

Los Angeles City Councilmember Curren Price Jr. was ordered to stand trial on corruption charges Wednesday.

Superior Court Judge Shelly Torrealba made the decision after a six-day preliminary hearing where prosecutors presented a wide range of evidence against the 75-year-old Price, including documents showing he voted to support projects that benefitted his wife’s business.

Price faces 12 felony counts: five counts of grand theft by embezzlement of public funds, four counts of conflict of interest and three counts of perjury by declaration.

If convicted on all charges, he faces up to 11 years behind bars.

“I’m glad that we were able to put on the evidence and the judge heard it and we get to move forward,” said Deputy District Attorney Casey Higgins, who presented the case.

Price has pleaded not guilty.

“We’re obviously disappointed,” said Price defense attorney Michael Schafler. “We are going to continue to fight.”

Price declined to comment after the hearing.

Conflict of interest charges

Price, who represents a large swath of South L.A., is termed out of office at the end of the year. He is a veteran L.A. politician who has served in the state senate and assembly and on the Inglewood City Council.

The conflict of interest charges relate to Price’s failure to recuse himself on votes involving projects in which his wife benefitted, according to prosecutors. Delbra Price Richardson provides relocation services and community engagement on big projects.

During the hearing, prosecutors presented evidence that the city’s Housing Authority and LA Metro paid Price’s wife more than $800,000 at the same time Price voted to award the agency's multimillion-dollar contracts.

Prosecutors also presented evidence that Del Richardson & Associates, a company owned solely by Price’s wife, received payments totaling more than $150,000 between 2019 and 2021 from developers before he voted to approve their projects.

Former Price staffers testified about their system for flagging projects where there was a conflict of interest. But they conceded some projects slipped through the cracks.

Schafler said Price didn’t know about the conflicts at the time.

“There is no evidence Mr. Price knew of conflicts or that he acted with any wrongful intent,” the defense attorney said. “Prosecutors presented no evidence of Price's state of mind.”

He also noted the projects “overwhelmingly” passed the City Council and that Price’s vote made no difference.

Higgins, the deputy district attorney, argued it was ultimately Price’s responsibility to recuse himself from voting on projects involving his wife. The prosecutor told the judge Price tried to “create a wall around himself” with staffers who would give him “plausible deniability.”

The perjury charges relate to Price allegedly failing to include Richardson’s income on disclosure forms. Schafler said the statute of limitations had run out on the charge.

Price is also accused of embezzling approximately $33,800 in city funds from 2013-2017 to pay for medical benefits for Richardson, whom he falsely claimed was his wife while still legally married to Lynn Suzette Price.

“He's nickel and diming the government at every turn,” Higgins told the court.

“Your honor, this is not the kind of case with strippers and hookers and bags of cash and cocaine,” he said. “It's a long secret corruption.”

Statement from Price’s office

After the judge’s decision, Price’s spokesperson Angelina Valencia-Dumarot issued a statement.

“The testimony presented during the hearing, including from key witnesses, clearly shows that Councilman Price did not act with any intent to do wrong and that the case rests on speculation rather than facts. While the court’s ruling is disappointing, the Councilmember remains fully committed to fighting these charges, clearing his name, and is confident the truth will ultimately prevail.”

No trial date has been set. The next court date is March 13.

As a series of winter storms barreled toward Southern California around the start of the new year, the 211 LA hotline prepared to hand out motel vouchers and reserve shelter beds for people seeking refuge from wet weather.

The hotline received more than 12,700 calls for assistance between Dec. 22 and Jan. 6, when the Emergency Response Program was activated in response to the severe weather.

But it had only 140 motel vouchers to distribute — 50 from the city of Los Angeles and 90 from the county. All vouchers were handed out within a day, according to the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, known as LAHSA, which helps distribute funding.

Only one shelter in the program, in Long Beach, was open at that time and it was full during the two-week activation period, according to LAHSA. Another winter shelter program offers 335 beds but was mostly full at the time, officials said.

The situation highlights long-running challenges 211 LA has faced during weather emergencies, including inadequate staff and long wait times. Officials say hotline callers are often frustrated when they find out that so few resources are available.

“A lot of the responses that we get from callers is anger … about not being able to provide them with that resource that they were told they can call us for,” Nancy Dueñez Velazquez, 211 LA’s housing director, told LAist.

She noted that when city and county officials encourage people to call 211 LA for shelter during a storm, they often don’t make clear that resources are "extremely limited.”

County supervisors say they’re working to address 211’s challenges, but there are budget constraints. The county is considering major cuts to homeless services and programs in the next budget year as it faces increased costs and funding losses.

Other county officials say they’re working to improve messaging around 211 and are shifting more funding through LAHSA to boost staffing.

Supervisor Janice Hahn told LAist she wants the county to look into providing more shelter beds during storms.

“In an emergency when lives are on the line, we have to be able to do better,” Hahn said.

LAist reached out to several authorities in the city of L.A., including Mayor Karen Bass, but none responded by the time of publication.

Thousands of calls; limited resources

Southern California experienced historic rainfall in late December — Christmas Eve and Christmas Day were the wettest on record — followed by more rain in early January.

During that time, the 211 hotline received 12,784 calls for assistance, Dueñez Velazquez said. But it didn’t have enough staff to handle them all.

The hotline had funding for 17 agents, working around the clock, who were able to field about three quarters of those calls. The rest disconnected before reaching an agent. Ideally, the hotline needs nearly 60 agents to handle the call load, according to 211 LA estimates.

Officials said they can boost staffing during emergencies by paying staff overtime. During the recent storms, 211 LA added about 58 hours of overtime, officials said.

Fewer staff can mean people wait longer to get connected to an agent for assistance. The average wait time for people calling during the storms was a little under eight minutes.

The longest wait time happened on Dec. 23, a day before Gov. Gavin Newsom declared a state of emergency in L.A. and five other counties because of the weather. Some 211 callers waited two hours to reach an agent.

Long wait times are not new to 211. In February 2024, as an atmospheric river was pummeling the region, LAist called the hotline and waited three hours and 30 minutes before reaching an agent. That was a little longer than the average wait for most callers that day, officials said at the time.

Officials from 211 LA have communicated those challenges in multiple after-action reports, most recently in June 2025. The reports highlight strained capacity, extensive wait times, frustrated callers and delayed funding.

Dueñez Velazquez said 211 LA has the ability to respond quickly to emergency events and assist people in need, it just needs the resources and budget to support the work. On a typical day, the hotline is “able to handle the call volume,” she said, but callers’ needs fluctuate with the weather.

Resources can run out quickly, so 211 LA provides whatever assistance is available at the time of the call, Dueñez Velazquez said.

“Whether that's a motel voucher, whether that's placement in a winter shelter site or whether that's information and referral to the next possible best resource that we can connect you to,” she said. “We really are here to help.”

She added that 211 LA updates its website with information about the number of available motel vouchers so callers with access to the site can decide whether to stay on the line.

LAHSA officials said the agency's goal is to serve as many unhoused people as possible each winter, and they’re proud to have “maximized resources” during the latest emergency.

“We would welcome additional resources, but we understand there are several competing priorities,” Ahmad Chapman, LAHSA’s director of communications, told LAist.

County officials respond

L.A. County officials say they’re working to fix some of the problems facing 211.

Supervisor Hilda Solis, chair of the Board of Supervisors, told LAist her office is improving public messaging so people calling 211 get the most up-to-date information on how many vouchers and other emergency resources are available.

“Extreme weather events highlight both the importance and the limits of motel vouchers,” Solis said. “While they are an essential emergency tool during storms, they are resource-intensive and difficult to scale quickly enough to meet the full level of need.”

Measure A, a half-cent sales tax increase passed by voters in 2024, directs funding to 211 LA to help ramp up capacity during the winter shelter season, Solis said. Cities can use their Measure A dollars to help add emergency shelters beds and motel vouchers to the overall inventory.

Supervisor Kathryn Barger told LAist the county’s new Department of Homeless Services and Housing is focused on making the most of limited resources while working with LAHSA on outreach.

“While emergency shelters are one critical tool, they are not the only option — motel vouchers and other interventions are also part of the County’s response — but all of this is constrained by fiscal realities,” Barger said. “That’s why we continue to look for ways to better coordinate, communicate, and stretch resources as effectively as possible.”

Officials with the Department of Homeless Services and Housing told LAist that more emergency shelter units were available during the winter storms, nearly half of which were allocated to 211 LA.

The department said in a statement to LAist it connects with people experiencing homelessness to make sure they’re aware of incoming storms, moves them out of areas prone to flooding and provides temporary shelter for as many as possible. Outreach teams also have their own motel vouchers to hand out, according to officials, in addition to 211 LA.

“[The department] has taken steps to support 211 in addressing an influx of callers seeking support during inclement weather, including shifting funding through LAHSA to pay for around-the-clock staffing to meet urgent needs,” the statement read.

Officials with the city of L.A. have expressed concerns about the region's storm response in the past.

Councilmember Nithya Raman has said previously that her office struggled to get people seeking shelter into temporary rooms during winter storms in 2024, and that there needed to be better lines of communication between LAHSA, 211 and the city.

Raman, chair of the Housing and Homelessness Committee, and Councilmember Ysabel Jurado, vice-chair of the committee, didn’t respond to LAist’s questions about the recent storm response.

Mayor Karen Bass’ office did not respond to LAist’s request for comment.

On Wednesday, Bruce Springsteen released a protest song condemning the violence of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Minneapolis. The song memorializes the lives of Renee Macklin Good and Alex Pretti, who were fatally shot by federal agents this month.

"I wrote this song on Saturday, recorded it yesterday and released it to you today in response to the state terror being visited on the city of Minneapolis," The Boss wrote on social media. "It's dedicated to the people of Minneapolis, our innocent immigrant neighbors and in memory of Alex Pretti and Renee Good. Stay free."

"Streets of Minneapolis" is a full-band rock and roll song, complete with an E Street Choir singalong. Springsteen's raw and raspy voice is full of indignation as he calls out "King Trump" and his "federal thugs," and promises to remember the events unfolding in the streets of Minneapolis this winter. The verses narrate the killings of Good and Pretti respectively, and underline how eyewitness videos of their deaths contradict government officials' statements.

"Their claim was self defense, sir / Just don't believe your eyes," Springsteen sings. "It's our blood and bones / And these whistles and phones / Against [Stephen] Miller and [Kristi] Noem's dirty lies."

Following the shooting of 37-year-old nurse Alex Pretti on Saturday, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem referred to Pretti's actions as "domestic terrorism," saying he "brandished" a gun and "attacked" officers. Noem used similar language to describe Renee Macklin Good's behavior shortly before she was shot by an officer. A preliminary government review of Pretti's case diverts from Noem's initial statements, instead claiming that Pretti resisted arrest before being shot by two Customs and Border Protection officers.

The release of "Streets of Minneapolis" follows public comments made by Springsteen regarding the ongoing protests. During an appearance at the Light of Day festival in New Jersey earlier this month, he dedicated his performance of "The Promised Land" to Renee Macklin Good, and echoed sentiments expressed by Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey that "ICE should get the f*** out of Minneapolis."

Springsteen, who has written politically-driven music for decades, has heavily criticized President Trump's policies since he was first elected to office in 2016. Last spring, he released the live EP Land of Hope & Dreams, which included on-stage comments from a show in England calling out the "corrupt, incompetent, and treasonous administration."

Copyright 2026 NPR

President Donald Trump's unprecedented use of the National Guard could cost $1.1 billion this year if domestic deployments remain in place, according to data released by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

During his second term, Trump sent troops to six Democratic-led cities in an effort to suppress protests, tackle crime or protect federal buildings and personnel. Half of those mobilizations ended this month, namely in Los Angeles, Chicago and Portland, Ore. But the continued military presence in Washington, D.C., Memphis and New Orleans, along with 200 members of the Texas National Guard still on standby, is expected to carry a steep cost.

On Wednesday, the CBO said that at current levels, these deployments will require an additional $93 million per month. The operation in D.C. alone, which currently includes over 2,690 Guard members, is projected to reach upwards of $660 million this year if it runs through December as expected by the CBO.

The CBO's findings were issued in response to 11 U.S. senators — led by Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon — who, back in October, urged the budget office to conduct an independent probe into deployment costs.

"It's a massive use of national treasure that should be going into healthcare, housing and education," Merkley told NPR on Wednesday.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

For months, the Trump administration has offered little information about the price tag associated with the Guard operations. The CBO's findings on Wednesday come as Trump's use of National Guard troops has already faced legal scrutiny in the courts and sparked serious conversations about soldiers' morale.

In 2025, $496 million spent on domestic deployments 

Trump first deployed the Guard in June to Los Angeles in response to protests over immigration raids. In the months that followed, the president ordered troops to D.C. and Memphis, arguing that they were needed to crack down on crime. Guard forces were also mobilized to Chicago and Portland, Ore., after the administration said they were needed to protect federal buildings and personnel, though they were blocked by federal courts from conducting operations. Most recently, at the end of December, troops arrived in New Orleans after Republican Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry requested federal assistance to improve public safety.

According to the CBO, these mobilizations cost about $496 million in 2025. That total includes:

• $193 million in Los Angeles 
• $223 million in D.C.
• $33 million in Memphis
• $26 million in Portland, Ore.
• $21 million in Chicago

The cost for a single service member — which includes pay, health care, lodging, food and transportation — ranges from $311 to $607 per day, the budget office said.

At large, the nation's defense budget will surpass $1 trillion for the first time in U.S. history as a result of Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act. But Gabe Murphy, a policy analyst from the nonpartisan budget watchdog Taxpayers for Common Sense, said the deployments' multimillion-dollar price tag shouldn't be overlooked.

" No one wants to see their tax dollars wasted," he said.

Murphy argued that using federalized Guard members to tackle crime, like in D.C. and Memphis, is not cost-effective since they are not allowed to conduct actual law enforcement duties, such as performing arrests or searches. He added that deploying the Guard is not a long-term solution to reducing crime.

"It would be far more cost effective to invest in local law enforcement," he said.

Trump has repeatedly defended the use of troops, asserting that cities with a Guard presence have become safer.

"Can't imagine why governors wouldn't want us to help," Trump said at a press conference on Jan. 3.

If Trump orders more deployments, it could cost up to $21 million per 1,000 soldiers

Earlier this month, the Trump administration withdrew the Guard from California, Oregon and Illinois after the Supreme Court refused to allow troops into Chicago, at least for the time being.

Despite the setback, Trump has continued to suggest using military force domestically. Most recently, he threatened to activate troops via the Insurrection Act to quell protests in Minneapolis following the shooting of Renee Macklin Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent.

To support additional Guard deployments, the CBO estimates that it could cost between $18 million and $21 million for every additional 1,000 soldiers.

Lindsay Koshgarian, the program director of the National Priorities Project who has been tracking deployment costs, worries that at some point, these expenses will affect funding for other important military priorities. The NPP is a research group within the progressive think tank, the Institute for Policy Studies.

A cautionary tale comes from 2021. After some 25,000 Guard forces were sent to D.C. in the wake of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, the Army National Guard warned that the money used for that deployment had diverted funds away from military training and readiness. Congress later approved $521 million to reimburse the Guard.

"At some point, this is going to either take away from other things that people want and need or it's probably going to have to be funded with additional money," she said.
Copyright 2026 NPR