Trump's deployment of troops to L.A. is clearly illegal. Does that still matter? We're about to see

San Francisco Chronicle​

17-06-2025

On Tuesday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco will weigh an appeal of a lower court ruling that found President Donald Trump acted illegally when he ordered thousands of California National Guard troops onto the streets of Los Angeles earlier this month.
Legally speaking, the result of that appeal shouldn't be in question; Trump's move to send troops to Los Angeles was an antidemocratic act of tyranny done with highly suspect legal justification.
In his presidential memorandum justifying the deployment, Trump argued that the 4,000 National Guard members were needed 'to temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel.'
He cited a federal law that allows a president to 'federalize' National Guard members if the country 'is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation; there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; or the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.'
But there is no foreign invasion. And what's going on in L.A. is nowhere close to a rebellion.
When previous presidents have used this law, they have almost always done so when requested by the state's governor. That makes sense, because that law also states that the federalizing order 'shall be issued through the governors of the States.'
Since World War II, a president has federalized the National Guard without a request from the state's governor on only five occasions. Four were to enforce the Supreme Court's landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision, when governors of southern states directly obstructed school integration. The fifth was to protect nonviolent Selma-to-Montgomery marchers from further violent assaults.
As for calling in 700 Marines, Trump has offered no justification. Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy invoked the Insurrection Act of 1807 to send federal troops to enforce school integration. But while Trump has said the protests in Los Angeles amount to an 'insurrection,' they clearly do not. There is no rebellion or revolt against the United States. No governor is blocking the schoolhouse door.
And Trump is aware that he refused to order troops on Jan. 6, 2021, when there was an insurrection happening.
Of course, the reality is that Trump needs an arguably legal justification only as a smokescreen for doing whatever he wants. His pattern since Jan. 20 is clear. Among other things, he has:
Ordered the end of birthright citizenship
Allowed deportation without due process of Venezuelans alleged — but not at all proven — to be gang members working for the government of Venezuela
Used the Department of Government Efficiency and Elon Musk to completely gut selected federal agencies
Encouraged the firing or forced resignations of over 100,000 federal employees
Intimidated law firms into providing thousands of pro bono hours by denying their lawyers access to federal buildings and threatening their hiring practices
Revoked hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for universities
Created a lucrative family business in cryptocurrency that conflicts with his role as president.
Then there are the other smaller items, such as accepting a plane from Qatar and firing a senior staffer at the Smithsonian Institution. And the tariffs, the changes to climate restrictions and much more.
Most of these actions have resulted in lawsuits, and many courts have issued restraining orders preventing their implementation. Some courts have even threatened to hold the government in contempt. But in the case of federalizing the National Guard or using the Insurrection Act, the president has discretion to use these powers, provided he does so legally.
It's well established that when it comes to the legal system, Trump is a master of delay. He knows that every adverse ruling is just one more case to appeal. And his appeals won't stop until they reach the Supreme Court.
Thus far, the Supreme Court has, for the most part, agreed to delays rather than immediate restraint. And with the sole exception of telling the Trump administration to 'facilitate' the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was mistakenly deported, the court has not required any affirmative governmental action.
In the interim, lives are affected. Federal employees fear they will not regain lost jobs. The deported sent to a brutal El Salvadorian prison fear they will remain there. Immigrants with legal status — or what was legal status until Jan. 20 — fear deportation. Universities fear losing funding for scientific research. And cities like Los Angeles — there will be other cities, Trump tells us — fear a widespread invasion of government troops.
Fear and the consolidation of power are two of the hallmarks of a despot. Right now, the only arbiter that can rein in Trump is the Supreme Court, which to date does not appear to have the stomach for it.
That court that improvidently granted the president wide immunity is now faced with the prospect of pulling the Trump train back into the station — a daunting task.
Trump is, of course, acutely aware that if push comes to shove, the court has no troops of its own if he simply refuses to obey. This puts Trump dangerously close to despotism. Unless enough people wise up to this danger and make their feelings known, and loudly, the prognosis for our country is not good.