California's National Guard lawsuit against Trump has a big problem
Trump's decision to send in the National Guard may be morally (and politically) problematic. The difficulty facing California's lawsuit is that federal law appears to give not just President Trump, but any president, broad authority to federalize the National Guard, whether or not a governor wants him to do so.
The primary legal question is whether the Trump administration had the power to federalize the National Guard against the wishes of the state's governor. The presidential memorandum Trump issued Saturday deploying the National Guard invoked a little-used federal law, 10 U.S.C. § 12406. The power that Section 12406 confers on presidents is broad but not unlimited. It gives the president the power to federalize the National Guard when there is 'a rebellion or danger of rebellion' against federal authority, or when the president cannot, using the usual mechanisms, execute federal laws.
Once the National Guard arrives, however, it can only support other law enforcement officers. They can help to protect federal law enforcement officers and federal property, but they cannot, for instance, perform searches and seizures. Why such limits? Because the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the military from acting as a domestic law enforcement agency, except in extraordinary circumstances. And Section 12406 does not suspend the protections of the Posse Comitatus Act.
To invoke his authority under Section 12406, Trump concluded that, '[t]o the extent that protests or acts of violence directly inhibit the execution of the laws, they constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.'
California has argued that there is no such rebellion. One problem for the state's lawsuit is that there is of course no settled definition of what a rebellion is. In addition, federal judges tend to defer to presidents when it comes to questions of national security. Federal judges, who are not chosen by voters, are generally wary of second-guessing the judgment of an elected president when it comes to questions of whether or not we are in danger of a rebellion.
California also argues that because Section 12406 requires that orders to federalize the National Guard be issued 'through the governors,' that means that a president cannot take this action against the wishes of the state's governor. However, the plain language of the statute does not include an explicit requirement of a governor's consent. In addition, reading such a requirement into the statute would provide any state governor with veto power over a president's decision under this federal law. That hardly seems consistent with congressional intent.
Finally, California argues that Trump's actions violate the 10th Amendment, which says that all powers not given to the federal government are reserved for the states and the people. But the plain terms of Section 12406 do appear to give the president the power to federalize the National Guard.
The legal landscape would change significantly if the president tries to invoke his power under the Insurrection Act. If he does, the protections in the Posse Comitatus Act are suspended, and the National Guard, and other branches of the military, can act to directly enforce domestic law. We are not there yet, but if Trump takes that step, it would be a dramatic escalation of an already historic standoff between the federal government and the state.
This article was originally published on MSNBC.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
26 minutes ago
- Fox News
Trump's announcement tonight will be ‘awesome': Brooke Rollins
All times eastern Kelsey Grammer's Historic Battles for America Kelsey Grammer's Historic Battles for America Kelsey Grammer's Historic Battles for America Kelsey Grammer's Historic Battles for America FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: Trump kicks off July 4th weekend with remarks at the Iowa State Fairground
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The 2 House Republicans who voted no on Trump's sweeping domestic policy bill
President Donald Trump's major tax cut and spending bill passed the House on Thursday, but not without some Republican opposition. Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania voted against the legislation alongside the entire House Democratic Caucus. While Massie and Fitzpatrick were the only GOP members to vote no, several House GOP hardliners were angered by the changes made to the bill by the Senate and there was an overnight scramble by Speaker Mike Johnson to secure the necessary support to proceed. Some of the hardliners who ultimately voted yes say President Trump made promises to get their votes, including that he'd make the bill "better" in the future. On Thursday, Massie said he did not vote for the bill because of its projected impact on the national debt. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill could add $3.4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. "Although there were some conservative wins in the budget reconciliation bill (OBBBA), I voted No on final passage because it will significantly increase U.S. budget deficits in the near term, negatively impacting all Americans through sustained inflation and high interest rates," Massie wrote on X. Massie also opposed the House version of the megabill that passed back in May. MORE: Trump admin live updates: House narrowly passes megabill, sending it to president's desk Trump's been a vocal critic of Massie, lambasting him last month in a lengthy social media post as not being "MAGA." "Actually, MAGA doesn't want him, doesn't know him, and doesn't respect him," Trump wrote at the time. The president accused Massie of being a "grandstander" who routinely votes no on key Republican-led legislation. Trump suggested Massie should be challenged in the upcoming Republican primary, even before this latest vote. "The good news is that we will have a wonderful American Patriot running against him in the Republican Primary, and I'll be out in Kentucky campaigning really hard," Trump wrote. Rep. Fitzpatrick did vote for the House bill in May, but said on Thursday that the Senate changes to the bill (which resulted in deeper cuts to Medicaid) as the reason for his change in position. As I've stated throughout these negotiations, with each iteration of legislative text that was placed on the House Floor, I've maintained a close and watchful eye on the specific details of these provisions, and determined the specific district impact, positive or negative, on our PA-1 community," Fitzpatrick said in a statement. "I voted to strengthen Medicaid protections, to permanently extend middle class tax cuts, for enhanced small business tax relief, and for historic investments in our border security and our military," he added/ "However, it was the Senate's amendments to Medicaid, in addition to several other Senate provisions, that altered the analysis for our PA-1 community. The original House language was written in a way that protected our community; the Senate amendments fell short of our standard." MORE: How Trump's megabill could affect Medicaid and who could lose coverage "I believe in, and will always fight for, policies that are thoughtful, compassionate, and good for our community. It is this standard that will always guide my legislative decisions," Fitzpatrick said. The Pennsylvania congressman, who also faces reelection in 2026, represents a swing district that went blue in 2024 for Kamala Harris.
The Hill
29 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump will kick off a yearlong celebration of America's 250th anniversary with event in Iowa
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — President Donald Trump campaigned on a promise to deliver a 'spectacular' yearlong birthday party to mark 250 years of American independence. On Thursday, he will be in the U.S. heartland to kick off the patriotic festivities — and to celebrate the final passage of his sweeping tax cuts and spending package. Trump is expected to tout the major piece of his agenda when he takes the stage Thursday at the Iowa State Fairgrounds in Des Moines, according to the White House. This comes just hours after the House pushed it through in a tight roll call of 218-214. Organizers see the coming year of festivities as a way to help unite a polarized nation and bridge partisanship. But it's a monumental task given the country's divides and the staunch Democratic opposition to the 800-plus page package full of the GOP's main policy priorities. More U.S. adults also disapprove than approve of how the Republican president is doing his job. The event at the Iowa State Fairgrounds in Des Moines drew a few thousand spectators waiting for the president for hours in the 90-plus degree Fahrenheit (32 degree Celsius) heat. Iowa was a 'logical choice' for the kickoff, said U.S. Ambassador Monica Crowley, Trump's liaison to the organizing group, America250. Crowley said that's because of its central location and Trump's affinity for the state, which supported him in each of the last three general elections. She also said Iowa's middle-of-the-country geography is symbolic of the desire to use the coming celebrations to help bring people together. 'We've had so much division and so much polarization over the last many decades, but certainly over the last few years, that to be able to bring the country together to celebrate America's 250th birthday through patriotism, shared values and a renewed sense of civic pride, to be able to do that in the center of the country, is incredibly important,' she said. A recent Gallup poll showed the widest partisan split in patriotism in over two decades, with only about a third of Democrats saying they are proud to be American, compared with about 9 in 10 Republicans. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults approve of Trump's performance as president, according to a June AP-NORC poll, while about 6 in 10 disapprove. That poll also showed a majority of Americans said the June military parade that Trump green-lit in Washington for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army — an event that fell on his 79th birthday — was 'not a good use' of government money. Crowley spoke to the political and ideological schisms that left the country 'torn apart' ahead of its last big birthday celebration, noting that 1976 closely followed the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal that led Richard Nixon to resign from the presidency. 'That moment was critical to uniting the country and moving forward, and I am very optimistic and hopeful that the yearlong celebration that we're about to launch will do the same thing in this present moment,' she said in an interview. America's 250th birthday 'is something that I think that all Americans can come together to celebrate and honor our history as well as our present and our future,' Crowley said. The Trump administration's own cost-cutting moves this year threaten to complicate the celebrations. Reduced funding led the National Endowment for the Humanities to send letters to state humanities councils across the country saying their federal grants had been terminated. Many of those councils had been working on programming to commemorate the 250th anniversary and had already dedicated some of their federal grants for events at libraries, schools and museums. Gabrielle Lyon, executive director of Illinois Humanities and chair of the Illinois America 250 Commission, said the cuts already have curtailed some of the planned programs, including community readings of the Declaration of Independence. 'It is very hard to understand how we can protect and preserve people's ability locally to make this mean something for them, and to celebrate what they want to celebrate, if you're not funding the humanities councils,' Lyon said. On July 4, 1776, the Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence, officially marking the 13 colonies' split from Great Britain. 'We're gonna have a big, big celebration, as you know, 250 years,' Trump said about the birthday during his Memorial Day address to a solemn audience at Arlington National Cemetery. 'In some ways, I'm glad I missed that second term where it was because I wouldn't be your president for that.' Video of then-candidate Trump proposing a 'Great American State Fair' in Iowa in May 2023 began to recirculate after his reelection last November, but the culminating fair instead will be held next year on the National Mall in Washington, according to a White House official who was not authorized to share details publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. The lineup Thursday night will include Lee Greenwood, according to social media posts advertising the event, whose song, 'God Bless the USA,' is a regular feature at Trump rallies and official events. Also attending will be Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins. ___ AP Polling Editor Amelia Thomson DeVeaux in Washington contributed to this report. AP writers Gary Fields and Chris Megerian also contributed.
