New Executive Order Raises Alarms Over Expanded Power to Institutionalize Individuals

A new Executive Order signed by President Donald Trump, titled “Ending Crime and Disorder on America’s Streets,” is sparking serious concerns among civil liberties advocates, health experts, and community leaders.

Though framed as a response to rising public disorder and homelessness, the order grants sweeping authority to detain and institutionalize people not only experiencing homelessness, but anyone deemed a threat to themselves or others due to mental illness, addiction, or perceived instability.

The order directs federal agencies to:

• Support civil commitment laws, allowing for the forced institutionalization of individuals seen as unsafe — with or without their consent.

• Push states to dismantle legal barriers that limit such detentions, including overturning court rulings and removing consent decrees that protect civil rights.

• Prioritize funding to jurisdictions that ban urban camping, loitering, and public drug use, while cutting off support for housing-first and harm reduction programs.

• Encourage data sharing between health systems and law enforcement, raising privacy and surveillance concerns.

Critically, the language of the EO does not limit enforcement to homeless individuals. It applies broadly to “individuals who pose a danger to themselves or others,” opening the door for the forced removal of people with mental health or substance use issues — regardless of housing status.

Why It Matters 

This policy shift mirrors controversial systems of the past, when people were institutionalized en masse under vague definitions of mental illness or public threat.

Civil rights groups like the ACLU have warned this could result in mass involuntary detentions, especially among vulnerable populations, with few safeguards and limited transparency. There is also concern that nonviolent individuals could be targeted simply for how they appear or where they are.

“This is not just about clearing encampments — it’s about redefining public safety in a way that bypasses due process,” said a spokesperson from the National Homelessness Law Center.

Supporters argue the EO addresses the urgent need for public safety and mental health care. But critics stress the need for voluntary, evidence-based treatment, affordable housing, and respect for individual rights.

As the order takes effect, Americans are urged to stay informed, ask questions, and advocate for humane solutions that protect both safety and civil liberties.

This is a pivotal moment. The conversation now is not just about how we respond to homelessness or disorder — it’s about who gets to decide who belongs where, and why.