Trump Orders 2,000 National Guard Troops to Los Angeles Amid Immigration Protests, Defying Governor Newsom. The President's deployment, bypassing California Governor Gavin Newsom's objections, raises questions about federal authority and the use of the National Guard to quell civilian unrest. This action follows a similar, albeit less contentious, deployment in 2020. Legal experts weigh in on the Insurrection Act and the President's power to federalize National Guard troops
Trump's deployment of 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles sparks controversy, echoing his 2020 request for National Guard support in Washington D.C. following the George Floyd protests. While many governors complied, some refused, highlighting the complex legal framework governing presidential deployment of National Guard troops on US soil. This action, opposed by California Governor Newsom, raises questions about presidential authority and the use of the National Guard to quell civilian unrest
President Trump's deployment of 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles, against Governor Newsom's wishes, sparks controversy. Trump cites the need to address lawlessness, while Newsom calls the move inflammatory and escalatory. This action challenges the usual state control over the National Guard, raising questions about presidential authority and the use of federal troops for domestic purposes
President's Power to Deploy Troops on US Soil: Understanding the Insurrection Act and Federal Authority. Learn about the legal limits and circumstances under which a president can deploy the National Guard or military forces within the United States, including the use of the Insurrection Act and other relevant federal laws
Federal troops typically cannot perform domestic law enforcement against U.S. citizens, except during emergencies. The Insurrection Act and other federal laws govern presidential deployment of the National Guard and military forces for civil unrest, but their application remains complex and often debated
President Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles sparks controversy. While he didn't invoke the Insurrection Act, an 18th-century law allowing military deployment during rebellion, he utilized a separate federal law to federalize the California National Guard. This action, opposed by Governor Newsom, raises questions about presidential authority and the use of the National Guard in domestic situations
President Trump bypassed the Insurrection Act, instead utilizing a separate federal law enabling presidential deployment of National Guard troops under specific conditions. This legal authority allows the federal government to assume control of state National Guard units in certain circumstances
Understanding the National Guard's Dual Role: State and Federal Deployment. The National Guard operates under state control, funded by the state, but can be federalized for national missions. Even when deployed federally, troops may remain under state command but receive federal funding. This dual authority allows for flexible responses to emergencies and national security needs, but also creates complexities in command and control
President Trump's deployment of 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles sparks controversy. This action, based on a federal law, allows the president to federalize National Guard units under specific conditions: U.S. invasion or imminent threat; rebellion or threat of rebellion against the federal government; or presidential inability to enforce federal laws with regular forces. This legal authority, distinct from the Insurrection Act, clarifies the president's power to deploy National Guard troops on U.S. soil in times of unrest
President Trump's authority to deploy National Guard troops without a governor's consent is legally ambiguous. While federal law allows presidential deployment under certain circumstances, it mandates that such orders typically go through state governors. This raises questions about the legality of deploying National Guard troops against a governor's wishes, particularly concerning the Insurrection Act and the president's power to federalize National Guard units
Trump's deployment of 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles to support ICE enforcement sparks controversy. The troops will provide protection for ICE officers, not directly engage in law enforcement activities, despite Governor Newsom's objections. This action highlights the president's authority to federalize National Guard troops and underscores ongoing tensions surrounding immigration enforcement
Georgetown Law professor Steve Vladeck, a leading expert in military justice and national security law, explains that President Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles for immigration protests is legally questionable. Unless the Insurrection Act is invoked, National Guard troops lack the authority to engage in standard law enforcement activities
National Guard Deployment to Los Angeles: Increased Risk of Force Use? Military expert Vladeck warns that President Trump's deployment of 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles, against Governor Newsom's wishes, raises concerns. This action could escalate tensions and potentially lead to the use of force by troops in a "protection" role, and may foreshadow more aggressive military deployments. The move bypasses typical state control and highlights the complex legal framework governing the use of National Guard troops on US soil
Legal expert Vladeck highlights the ambiguity surrounding President Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles, noting that the troops' authorized actions mirror those permissible for ICE officers, the target of the protests
President Eisenhower's use of the Insurrection Act during the Civil Rights era highlights the complex history of deploying federal troops domestically. In Little Rock, Arkansas, the 101st Airborne protected Black students integrating Central High School, a direct response to the state governor's obstruction. This pivotal moment demonstrates the power of the Insurrection Act and related laws to safeguard civil rights and maintain order amidst social unrest
George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King.
National Guard troops have been deployed for a variety of emergencies, including the COVID pandemic, hurricanes and other natural disasters. But generally, those deployments are carried out with the agreements of the governors of the responding states.
In 2020, Trump asked governors of several states to deploy their National Guard troops to Washington, D.C. to quell protests that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors agreed, sending troops to the federal district.
At the time, Trump also threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act for protests following Floyd’s death in Minneapolis – an intervention rarely seen in modern American history. But then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back, saying the law should be invoked “only in the most urgent and dire of situations.”
Trump never did invoke the Insurrection Act during his first term.
But while campaigning for his second term, he suggested that would change. Trump told an audience in Iowa in 2023 that he was prevented from using the military to suppress violence in cities and states during his first term, and said if the issue came up again in his next term, “I’m not waiting.”
Trump also promised to deploy the National Guard to help carry out his immigration enforcement goals, and his top adviser Stephen Miller explained how that would be carried out: Troops under sympathetic Republican governors would send troops to nearby states that refuse to participate, Miller said on “The Charlie Kirk Show,” in 2023.
After Trump announced he was federalizing the National Guard troops on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said other measures could follow.
For two decades, HuffPost has been fearless, unflinching, and relentless in pursuit of the truth. Support our mission to keep us around for the next 20 — we can’t do this without you.
We remain committed to providing you with the unflinching, fact-based journalism everyone deserves.
Thank you again for your support along the way. We’re truly grateful for readers like you! Your initial support helped get us here and bolstered our newsroom, which kept us strong during uncertain times. Now as we continue, we need your help more than ever. We hope you will join us once again.
We remain committed to providing you with the unflinching, fact-based journalism everyone deserves.
Thank you again for your support along the way. We’re truly grateful for readers like you! Your initial support helped get us here and bolstered our newsroom, which kept us strong during uncertain times. Now as we continue, we need your help more than ever. We hope you will join us once again.
Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages.
For two decades, HuffPost has been fearless, unflinching, and relentless in pursuit of the truth. Support our mission to keep us around for the next 20 — we can’t do this without you.
Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages.
Hegseth wrote on the social media platform X that active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton were on high alert and would also be mobilized “if violence continues.”
Source: Original Article