LA's Heated Battle: The Unprecedented Protests and Trump's Actions
Political tension in California: What constitutional authorities does Trump hold?
The City of Angels is burning - not from passion, but from strife. For the first time in decades, the United States has witnessed a president seize control of a state's National Guard without the governor's blessing. President Trump has also mobilized the regular military in Los Angeles, amidst ongoing protests against his contentious immigration policy. Let's dive into the unexpected and legally sticky situation unfolding in the heart of California.
The Law Behind Trump's Actions: Title 10 and a Dangerous Precedent
Trump has decided to commandeer California's National Guard under Title 10 of the United States Code. In the U.S., states typically have jurisdiction over their National Guard, a reserve military force that can be activated in times of natural disasters, internal unrest, or emergencies.
Trump is appealing to a Titles 10 provision enabling the president to assume control of the National Guard in cases of "rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the U.S. government." He insists that the protests against immigration officers amount to a rebellion against the federal administration.
Trump's actions are far from standard. Since 1965, this move marks the first time a president has seized a state's National Guard without the governor's consent. In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson deployed both National Guard troops and regular soldiers in Alabama to safeguard nearly all-black demonstrators during the civil rights movement.
The Powers at Play: National Guard vs. the Marine Corps
On top of dispatching National Guard forces, Trump sent 700 Marines from the regular military to Los Angeles on Monday. Unlike the National Guard, regular military units always fall under federal control. They are primarily geared towards warfare and national security.
The motives behind this move are yet to be made clear, but it seems the Marines will support National Guard forces in protecting federal employees and property. The National Guard's powers are currently limited, with legal experts like Georgetown University's Stephen Vladeck advising that they should refrain from taking on regular law enforcement duties like arrests or raids.
The Next Frontier: Martial Law and the Insurrection Act
To grant National Guard members and potentially Marines broader authority, Trump would need to declare martial law and invoke the Insurrection Act, a law dating back to 1807. This law allows the president to deploy military forces domestically and participate in law enforcement to restore public order, but under normal circumstances, such action is disallowed in the U.S. President Johnson invoked this law in 1965, for example.
The Insurrection Act was last enacted in 1992, following the Los Angeles riots after the acquittal of police officers involved in the Rodney King beating. Unlike today, then-President George H.W. Bush had been requested for federal assistance from California's governor and Los Angeles' mayor.
Trump has flirted with activating the Insurrection Act during his tenure, threatening to do so during protests against racism and police brutality following George Floyd's death. He continues to consider invoking the law and has not ruled it out now. He deems the protesters in California as "insurrectionists" - roughly speaking, rebels or rioters. On Monday, the Republican claimed that the National Guard's presence had thwarted an uprising.
The Impact of the Insurrection Act: Force, Division, and Questionable Legality
If Trump ultimately decides to invoke the Insurrection Act, the military would subsequently assume active roles in law enforcement within California. Soldiers could potentially arrest protesters or conduct raids. The activation of the Insurrection Act would likely fan the flames of political and social division across the nation and leave the door open for escalation - nationwide protests could be expected.
Legal experts caution that even the mere threat of the Insurrection Act's invocation could spark significant legal battles in the coming days, weeks, and months over whether such far-reaching powers can be justified under the current circumstances. The governor and mayor of Los Angeles have urged caution, emphasising they do not need such heavy-handed intervention.
The escalation of war-and-conflicts in Los Angeles has led to a policy-and-legislation dilemma, with President Trump's actions challenging traditional norms. Trump's decision to commandeer California's National Guard under Title 10 sets a dangerous precedent, as it marks the first time a president has seized a state's National Guard without the governor's consent since 1965.
The unfolding political situation in Los Angeles, characterized by general-news events like ongoing protests against immigration policy, also involves the deployment of Marines from the regular military. Unlike the National Guard, the Marines always fall under federal control and are primarily geared towards warfare and national security; their role in the current situation remains unclear.
