APRIL 2025
DoD’s Shifting Homeland
Defense Mission
Could Undermine the
Military’s Lethality
By Melissa Dalton
T
he Trump administration’s issuance of the executive order on an Iron Dome for America
(now called Golden Dome), along with its emphasis on the Department of Defense’s (DoD) role
in border security, marks a signicant shift in U.S. defense stratey, the domestic use of the
military, and the capabilities and resources allocated to these missions and activities, with implications
for the overall health of U.S. civil-military relations. In fact, the associated costs and trade-os could
lead to inecient use of taxpayer dollars and undermine the administration’s own stated priority of
improving the military’s lethality.
Moreover, putting the U.S. military centrally into a border security role increases risks to service members
who are not trained or equipped for this mission. While DoD has not released full details of the recent
vehicle accident in New Mexico that killed two Marines and seriously injured another, the incident raises
important questions about why Marines were performing this task instead of law enforcement agents and
whether they had the appropriate training and equipment to conduct the task safely.
Overall, such a dramatic shift in homeland defense merits congressional oversight in the review of the
administration’s interim strategic guidance, the forthcoming 2026 National Defense Stratey, and the
submission of the FY 2026 budget, to assess trade-os with other priorities vital to strengthening the
military’s lethality. The administration and Congress should closely examine the aordability of Golden
Dome—including its phasing, pace, and required level of investment—relative to other priorities, and
review the trade-os for modernization and readiness. Finally, the administration and Congress should
fully resource the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other agencies with the statutory lead,
expertise, and experience for the border security mission.
