Chaos in LA: Trump's Unprecedented Takeover
California power clash: What authorities does Trump hold?
Los Angeles has turned into a battleground, with protesters rallying against Trump's immigration policies, and the President responding with an unconventional move - seizing control of California's National Guard, a first in decades, without the governor's consent. To top it off, he's also sent 700 Marines to LA. Let's delve into the legality of this power grab and the potential escalation.
What gives Trump the right to take over?
Trump's justification for commandeering California's National Guard is grounded in Title 10 of the U.S. Code. In the U.S., states usually keep control over their National Guard, but Trump's argument hinges on a provision that allows the president to usurp control in cases of "rebellion or threat of rebellion." He claims the protests against immigration officers are an insurrection against the federal government.
This move is highly unusual, as no president has taken such command without a governor's consent since 1965. Back then, Johnson did it to protect demonstrators during the civil rights movement in Alabama - a stark comparison to Trump's actions.
National Guard vs. Marines: Powers and Limitations
While the National Guard is typically under state control, it falls under federal jurisdiction in times of crisis. The Marines, in contrast, are constantly under federal control and are mainly responsible for warfare and national security. Trump sent the Marines to LA as part of his response, but it's unclear on what legal grounds.
Experts on the National Guard say their powers are limited, focusing on protecting federal employees and assets. But they should not carry out regular law enforcement duties such as arrests or raids. However, they can protect immigration officers or buildings.
The Next Step: Invoking Martial Law
To boost the National Guard's powers and potentially deploy the Marines more extensively, Trump would need to declare martial law and utilize the Insurrection Act. This law, in existence since 1807, allows the president to deploy the military for domestic law enforcement and intervene to restore order. Using this law, Johnson acted in 1965, but under normal circumstances, it's banned in the U.S.
The Insurrection Act was last employed in 1992 during the Rodney King riots in LA, with both the governor of California and the mayor of LA requesting federal aid. Trump has threatened to invoke the Act multiple times in the past, even mentioning it in relation to the George Floyd protests.
What does invoking Martial Law mean?
Invoking the Insurrection Act could see the U.S. military take part in law enforcement in California, enabling soldiers to arrest protesters and conduct raids. This move would likely intensify political and social discord, potentially causing widespread protests and further destabilizing the situation.
Lawyer Jessica Levinson from Loyola Law School in Los Angeles warned, "If the president invokes the Insurrection Act, we will witness major legal battles in the coming hours, days, and weeks." The experts agree that the deployment under the Insurrection Act raises numerous legal questions and could lead to court battles and further division.
"Trump's unprecedented decision to seize control of California's National Guard, without the governor's consent, is grounded in Title 10 of the U.S. Code, which allows the President to usurp control in cases of 'rebellion or threat of rebellion,' such as the protests against immigration policies.
Experts on the National Guard state that while they have limited powers, their focus should not be on carrying out regular law enforcement duties like arrests or raids, but rather on protecting federal employees and assets."
