Unprecedented Move: Trump's Control Over California's National Guard
California power struggle: Defining Trump's authority
Los Angeles (dpa) - Breaking decades-long traditions, President Donald Trump has taken charge of California's National Guard without the consent of the state's governor. Protests against Trump's immigration policies have led him to this uncommon move, sparking legal disputes and controversy. Here's what you need to know:
Trump's Justification: A Rebellion?
Trump has assumed control of California's National Guard under Title 10 of the United States Code – a provision that allows the president to take command in the event of a "rebellion or threat of rebellion against the authority of the United States government." Trump insists that the protests against immigration officers are acts of rebellion against the federal government.
This action is unusual, as it's the first time since 1965 that a president has assumed control of a state's National Guard without the governor's permission. In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson also deployed regular soldiers in addition to the National Guard to protect demonstrators during the civil rights movement in Alabama.
Powers of National Guard and Marines
On Monday, Trump also sent 700 Marines from the regular military to Los Angeles, granting them support tasks in protecting federal personnel and property. Unlike the National Guard, the regular military is always under federal control, primarily responsible for warfare and national security.
Legal experts like Stephen Vladeck of Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. suggest that the National Guard's powers are currently limited, only allowing them to protect immigration officers or buildings but not engage in normal law enforcement activities such as arrests or raids.
Escalation Steps: The "Insurrection Act"
To broaden the authorities of the National Guard and likely the Marine Corps, Trump would need to declare martial law and invoke the "Insurrection Act," a law allowing the president to use military forces to restore public order. This law is not typically permitted in the U.S., as the Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits the use of federal troops for law enforcement. The "Insurrection Act" was last used in 1992, following the Los Angeles riots initiated by the Rodney King case. Notably, at that time, the governor of California and the mayor of Los Angeles requested federal assistance from President George H.W. Bush.
During his first term, Trump threatened to invoke the "Insurrection Act" during protests against racism and police brutality following the death of George Floyd. Repeatedly mentioning his intention to apply the law during his campaign and not ruling it out now, Trump branded the protesters in California as "insurrectionists."
Implications of Activating the "Insurrection Act"
Activating the "Insurrection Act" could lead to the deployment of U.S. military for law enforcement in California, potentially resulting in arrests or raids. This move would likely further divide the political and social landscape, escalating the situation and potentially sparking nationwide protests.“
If the president invokes the Insurrection Act, we will see significant legal battles in the coming hours, days, and weeks over whether these broad powers can be used under the current circumstances," Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said to the "Los Angeles Times." "Everyone should pause when the president uses emergency powers, and the governor and mayor should say, 'Please don't, we don't need it.'"
Sources: 1. "What the National Guard Can and Can't Do During Protests." Government Executive 2. "Insurrection Act." Congressional Research Service 3. "Presidential Authority to Use the Military in Domestic Violence Situations." FFRF 4. "The Insurrection Act Would Be a Dangerous Misuse of Power." The Hill 5. "Trump's New Power Grab Upsetting Californians, Legal Professionals." NBC News
Enrichment Data:
Overall:
The Insurrection Act provides the President with the authority to use military forces in domestic law enforcement situations when requested by a state legislature or governor, or when the President deems it necessary. However, this act is an extraordinary measure that raises questions of constitutionality, infringement of state sovereignty, and potential harm to civil rights.
- The legal experts are voicing concerns that if President Trump invokes the Insurrection Act, it could lead to significant legal battles, as the National Guard's powers might be extended to engage in law enforcement activities, which could potentially infringe on civil rights and escalate the political and social landscape.
- In an unprecedented move, President Trump has assumed control of California's National Guard under Title 10 of the United States Code, asserting that the protests against immigration polices are acts of rebellion against the federal government. This move, although unusual, is reminiscent of President Lyndon B. Johnson's deployment of regular soldiers and the National Guard during the civil rights movement in Alabama in 1965.
- The dispute over California's National Guard is not just a local issue, but a matter of national politics and policy-and-legislation, as it raises questions about the role of the National Guard, the powers of the president, and the relationship between federal and state governments in managing war-and-conflicts, crime-and-justice, and general-news.
