Crime rates across the United States experienced a significant decline in 2025, affecting both urban and rural areas across all regions, including the Midwest, South, Northeast, and West, and states with diverse political affiliations. This reduction encompassed substantial decreases in both violent and property crimes.
Overview of Declines
Data compiled by the Real Time Crime Index, which gathers local crime information from nearly 600 jurisdictions nationwide, indicated a substantial reduction in criminal activity. Murder rates decreased by approximately 20% in 2025 compared to 2024. Other violent offenses, such as rape, robbery, and aggravated assault, also saw declines. Property crimes, including motor vehicle theft and burglaries, similarly experienced reductions.
John Roman, director of the Center on Public Safety & Justice at NORC at the University of Chicago, characterized 2025 as a notable year for crime reduction, describing it as the most favorable year for crime in his 27 years of observation in the field.
Attributed Factors
Researchers studying crime trends, policing, and criminal justice have identified several factors potentially contributing to the decline in crime rates:
- Pandemic Recovery: The nation's recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic was cited as a factor, with the current trend representing a movement beyond the surge in homicide rates observed during 2020 and 2021.
- Reduced Stressors: Adam Gelb, president of the Council on Criminal Justice, noted that the pandemic introduced various stresses—economic, financial, and psychological—and reduced the presence of both the public and law enforcement in public spaces. Disruptions to government services, such as mental health care and community centers, also occurred.
- Government Workforce Rebound: The local government workforce, which saw an approximate 10% reduction between March and May 2020, has since rebounded.
- "Epidemic" Theory of Violence: Roman proposed viewing violence as an epidemic, suggesting that decreases in serious crimes can lead to increased law enforcement resources for investigating individual cases, potentially creating a self-reinforcing reduction.
Divergence from Political Statements
Some researchers highlighted a divergence between the observed nationwide decrease in crime and public statements made by President Trump during the year, particularly concerning cities with Democratic leadership. Statements had described Chicago as the "most dangerous city in the world" and Washington, D.C., as "overtaken by violent gangs." Federal law enforcement deployments were subsequently initiated in these and other cities, targeting crime and immigration.
Despite these statements, both Chicago and Washington, D.C., experienced crime rate reductions in 2025, consistent with national trends. These cities have historically reported higher crime rates than some other U.S. cities.
Tahir Duckett, director of the Center for Innovations in Community Safety at Georgetown Law, cautioned that employing crime threats to justify interventions could lead to civil rights restrictions or expanded governmental authority. Tanya Meisenholder, director of police research at New York University School of Law's Policing Project, indicated that federal interventions, especially regarding immigration enforcement, could damage trust between local police forces and communities. She noted that a public perception not distinguishing between various law enforcement agencies could reduce willingness to report incidents or cooperate as witnesses in investigations.
Outlook for 2026
Experts expressed reservations about the sustained continuation of the crime reduction trend into 2026, with some suggesting a potential rise in rates following the significant drop in 2025.
Ames Grawert, senior counsel in the justice program at the Brennan Center for Justice, raised concerns about federal funding reductions. In April, the Justice Department decreased grants to hundreds of organizations focused on community safety, including programs for school violence prevention, community violence intervention, and rural police training. These cuts have compelled some affected organizations to scale back services or reduce staff. Grawert also commented on the importance of these programs for reducing gun violence and supporting communities, noting the early stages of understanding their efficacy.