With President Donald Trump’s 30-day crime emergency in Washington, D.C. set to expire next Wednesday, many D.C. residents — not to mention government officials and staff — have wondered what would come next. Would the city revert back to its previous levels of crime? Would Congress act to extend Trump’s intervention beyond 30 days? The answer provides a surprising contrast to Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D), who seems inexplicably determined to resist any real efforts to mitigate his city’s crime problem.

On Tuesday, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) ordered local officials to coordinate law enforcement activities with federal agencies “on a continuing basis” and to “the maximum extent allowable by law.” Bowser ordered the establishment of a “Safe and Beautiful Emergency Operations Center (‘SBEOC’),” led by the deputy mayor for Public Safety and Justice, to manage the city government’s coordination with the federal government.

If “safe and beautiful” sounds more like a Trumpism than something the D.C. city government would coin, that’s because it is. On March 27, Trump issued an executive order “Making the District of Columbia Safe and Beautiful,” which established “the Safe and Beautiful Task Force.” Bowser directed the SBEOC “to manage the District’s response to the Task Force, the Presidential declaration of emergency, and on a continuing basis.”

This timetable signals that the D.C. government will continue to cooperate with federal authorities beyond the 30-day federal surge period. The center would “coordinate centralized communications; formulate post-emergency planning; formulate post-emergency operations; and ensure coordination with federal law enforcement to the maximum extent allowable by law within the district.”

However, it remains unclear whether the D.C. Metro Police Department (MPD) will maintain its cooperation with federal immigration officers. “Emergency planning will include coordination of any continued enhanced federal law enforcement efforts,” Bowser wrote, “and shared resources with the United States Marshals Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, the United States Park Police, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the United States Capitol Police, and the United States Secret Service.”

On one hand, she authorized coordination with “any … federal law enforcement efforts.” On the other hand, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) were omitted from the list of agencies with which D.C. will share resources.

In any event, Bowser’s ongoing cooperation with the Trump administration marks a sharp departure from the course set by her fellow Democrats in places like California, Maryland, and Illinois, who have opposed President Trump’s efforts to clean up crime-infested streets.

Bowser has multiple good reasons to chart another course. First, the federal district is inherently subject to federal power and has no state-like sovereignty to resist the federal government’s demands. This means that, if the D.C. government were to pick a fight with the federal government, it would be hopelessly outgunned and would most likely lose.

The calculation is that the D.C. government can at least keep a seat at the table to advocate its own priorities if it cooperates. To this end, Bowser wrote, “The SBEOC will also continue to advance requests to federal partners that they adhere to effective community policing practices to maintain community confidence in law enforcement, such as by not wearing masks, clearly identifying their agency, and providing identification during arrests and encounters with the public.”

A second, related reason for Bowser to play ball with the Trump administration is that D.C. autonomy (and eventual statehood) has long been the top priority for most D.C. voters and every (successful) D.C. politician. If Bowser openly opposes President Trump, and he persuades congressional Republicans to revoke or substantially revise the Home Rule Act, it would spell disaster for the D.C. statehood movement, not to mention Bowser’s political career. If Bowser directs MPD to cooperate with federal law enforcement — something they already do regularly — she could satisfy Trump’s desire to restore law and order, preempt the need for any congressional action, and forestall the entire scenario of disaster. Shrewdly, Bowser has chosen the second option.

A third reason for Bowser to cooperate with federal law enforcement is that their activity has made Washington, D.C. a much safer city. “The difference between this 20-day period of this federal surge and last year represents a 87% reduction in carjackings,” Bowser observed in a press conference last Wednesday. “Neighborhoods feel safer and are safer” because of the surge.

The most salutary value that liberals retain is a care to preserve human life (at least after birth), even if their liberal sentiments often produce policies not very conducive to achieving this end. Thus, as a Washington native, Bowser cares greatly about the safety of people in her city. Whatever differences she may have with the methods, she cannot complain about the results of the federal law enforcement surge in Washington, D.C., and she seems inclined to see them continue.

Democratic mayors in other large cities would do well to heed Bowser’s course of action. Although their structural situation in relation to the federal government may be different, the results still speak for themselves. Decades of a “softer, gentler” approach to crime have yielded poor results in America’s largest cities, and it’s high time for basic policing to recapture bipartisan support. It turns out, after all, there is no alternative for putting officers on the streets and letting it be known that crimes will not be tolerated.