Under ordinary circumstances, federal troops would be deployed to aid or assist in state efforts, says Jeremy R. Paul, a professor of law and former dean of the Northeastern University School of Law.
Following a series of protests in response to an immigration crackdown in Los Angeles, Donald Trump deployed National Guardsmen to the state. (Photo by Caylo Seals/Sipa USA)(Sipa via AP Images)
President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal National Guard troops to California without a request from the governor sets up a legal clash over the president’s authority for such a maneuver, says Jeremy R. Paul, a professor of law and former dean of the Northeastern University School of Law.
“It’s a very complicated topic,” he says. “Most of the time, when the National Guard is nationalized — unless it’s a situation in which a state is refusing to enforce the federal laws — the president typically waits and gets a request from the governor before going in and doing something like this.”
Following a series of protests in response to an ongoing immigration crackdown in Los Angeles, Trump ordered at least 2,000 National Guardsmen to be sent to California to protect immigration enforcement agents. The White House cited recent protests of Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids as a reason for the move.
“In recent days, violent mobs have attacked ICE officers and federal law enforcement agents carrying out basic deportation operations in Los Angeles, California,” the White House said in a statement. “These operations are essential to halting and reversing the invasion of illegal criminals into the United States.”
Jeremy Paul, a Northeastern University professor of law and former dean, says “If that if Trump believes that California is not executing federal law, then he has the authority to deploy troops. Photo by Alyssa Stone/Northeastern University
Some of the protests turned violent over the weekend, pitting demonstrators against law enforcement agents in clashes that left streets littered with debris, vehicles burned and buildings vandalized. Some 150 individuals were arrested Friday, with more arrests taking place over the weekend in places like San Francisco.
The scene is somewhat reminiscent of the last time a president ordered the federalization of National Guardsmen to quell protests, which took place in 1992 following the police killing of Rodney King — also in Los Angeles.
Then President George H. W. Bush used the Insurrection Act of 1807 as justification to send in the national troops. So far, Trump has not invoked the 19th-century law, which Paul says encompasses “a series of statutes” designed to “call forth militia” for the purposes of suppressing an insurrection, or to see that laws are “duly executed.” It’s one mechanism by which a president can deploy federal troops on U.S. soil.
Trump did invoke a federal statute — Section 12406 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code — granting authority to “repel [a] invasion, suppress [a] rebellion” or execute federal law.
Under ordinary circumstances, Paul says the federal troops would be deployed to aid or assist in state efforts. California Gov. Gavin Newsoom called Trump’s deployment of the National Guard “illegal, immoral and unconstitutional.”
On Monday, the state of California filed a lawsuit against the administration in response.
“These troops, so the president says, are supposed to just help Immigration and Customs Enforcement enforce the federal law that allows them to deport people who aren’t here legally,” Paul says.
So, is Trump’s move legal?
“If the president believes that the state is not executing federal law, then he has the authority to do this,” Paul continues. “But just because the president has the authority, doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do.”
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said the move felt like it was designed to wreak havoc in the city, and Newsom called the situation “a manufactured crisis” and “a breach of state sovereignty.”
While the National Guard, a military reserve force composed of service members from all U.S. states and territories, serves a range of functions in the domestic sphere, civilian law enforcement is typically not one of them, according to the Posse Comitatus Act.
Paul says that the move “shifts the balance of state control over law enforcement to federal enforcement” — though it’s unclear, should Trump authorize use of force against Californians, how that would play out.
“Just because the National Guard is there doesn’t mean that they are authorized to do anything that regular law enforcement could not do,” Paul says. “This isn’t martial law, as some might suggest. They can’t all of a sudden arrest people without warrants, or disregard the Constitution.”
Tanner Stening is a Northeastern Global News reporter. Email him at t.stening@northeastern.edu. Follow him on X/Twitter @tstening90.
*{margin-block-start:0;margin-block-end:0;}.wp-container-core-group-is-layout-0f4c6871 > * + *{margin-block-start:var(–wp–preset–spacing–40);margin-block-end:0;}.wp-container-core-group-is-layout-aaffb961 > :where(:not(.alignleft):not(.alignright):not(.alignfull)){max-width:832px;margin-left:auto !important;margin-right:auto !important;}.wp-container-core-group-is-layout-aaffb961 > .alignwide{max-width:832px;}.wp-container-core-group-is-layout-aaffb961 .alignfull{max-width:none;}.wp-container-core-post-content-is-layout-575ec271 > :where(:not(.alignleft):not(.alignright):not(.alignfull)){margin-left:auto !important;margin-right:auto !important;}.wp-container-core-post-content-is-layout-575ec271 .alignfull{max-width:none;}
]]>