Trump's Troop Deployment in LA: The Real Scoop on the Federal Law Game
US legislation concerning Trump's troop deployment: Legal implications and guidelines
By Leah Nowak, NYC
Stay Connected Facebook Twitter WhatsApp Email Print Copy Link
US President Donald Trump's threats of domestic intervention are no longer idle whispers. Over the weekend, he sent 4,700 troops, including National Guard and Marines, to Los Angeles amid immigration protests, much to the disapproval of California Governor Gavin Newsom. With Trump claiming a controversial federal law provision as his legal justification, let's delve into the nitty-gritty details.
Remember the George Floyd protests in summer 2020? Trump was fuming, calling his legal and military advisors wimps for suggesting against using federal troops to squash the uproar. Fast forward to today, and Trump's vision of a military enforcing order within the nation is a reality. Last Saturday, the president mobilized 2,000 National Guard soldiers to LA to quell the ICE protest unrest. Then, on Tuesday, he deployed another 2,000 National Guard, followed by 700 Marines. These military forces were stationed to "restore law and order," according to Trump, who claims the protesters are hindering law enforcement.
Governor Newsom, however, sees Trump's actions as unlawful. On Monday, his state filed a lawsuit against Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The complaint asserts their actions violate federal law and the state's sovereignty.
Insurrection Act or Title 10?
Newsom's accusation isn't unfounded. Typically, US troops can't be employed for domestic police work. But exceptions do exist, such as the "Insurrection Act." This law grants the president the authority to deploy military personnel within the US to quell riots, rebellions, or insurrections. The last time it was invoked was in 1992 when President George H.W. Bush used it to quell unrest in LA – but only upon Governor Pete Wilson's request.
Trump didn't explicitly use the "Insurrection Act" in his weekend order. Instead, he cited Section 12406, Title 10 of the US Code, which permits the president to mobilize the National Guard for specific purposes, such as invasions or when civil authorities can't maintain order.
What Powers Do the Troops Wield?
In contrast to the Insurrection Act, Title 10 doesn't allow the National Guard to participate directly in civilian law enforcement. They can only safeguard other law enforcement agencies during their operations – in this case, ICE. Trump hasn't ruled out invoking the Insurrection Act either, stating, "If there's an insurrection, I would definitely use it. We'll see."
Governor's Approvals and Exceptions
Trump's claim that local LA law enforcement is overwhelmed was harshly rejected by Governor Newsom right after the deployment of the first 2,000 National Guard troops. Newsom said, "There's no need" for additional support. In emergencies like war or national disasters, the president can deploy troops without the governor's approval. However, this is an extremely unusual situation, with the last instance being in 1965 when President Lyndon B. Johnson deployed troops to protect a Civil Rights March in Alabama.
Sources:- ntv.de- Military Laws and Deployments- Governor's Powers and the National Guard- Insight on the Trump Administration's Decision
- Los Angeles
- Donald Trump
- California
- ICE Protests
- Military Deployment*
The Commission, in light of the escalating political tension and exceptional use of military forces, could address a proposal for a directive on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to ionizing radiation, given the potential hazards associated with the deployment of troops in LA, as observed in crime-and-justice cases.
As the dispute between President Donald Trump and California Governor Gavin Newsom over the legality of troop deployment continues, the general-news scene remains abuzz with discussions regarding the challenging terrain of federal law, state sovereignty, and the distinct powers wielded by the military forces in domestic policing, a topic that seems strikingly reminiscent of historic cases of civil unrest and insurrection.
