Trump's deployment of the California National Guard in Los Angeles stands on shaky legal ground
According to Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code, the president may call the National Guard into federal service under certain limited circumstances, such as when the United States "is invaded" or when "there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government." The law further states that the president may federalize National Guard members "of any State in such numbers as he considers necessary to repel the invasion, suppress the rebellion, or execute" the laws of the United States. However, the law adds: "Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States."
Notice the unambiguous statutory command: "shall be issued through the governors of the States." If a governor has not issued the order—perhaps because the governor disagreed with the president's position and declined to support it—then the terms of the law have not been met.
Which brings us to the case of Newsom v. Trump.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has not only refused to issue such an order, but Newsom, acting in his official capacity as governor, has also now filed suit against Trump, charging that the president's unilateral actions are illegal under federal law.
Newsom's statutory argument seems correct to me. As the complaint in Newsom v. Trump notes, "President Trump's Memo purporting to call into federal service members of the California National Guard under 10 U.S.C. § 12406 without issuing this order through Governor Newsom is contrary to law and outside of the authority granted to the President under that statute."
To my surprise, however, Newsom's complaint failed to cite Printz v. United States (1997), the Supreme Court precedent which says that the federal government may not commandeer state officials into enforcing federal law.
Printz centered on the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, which required state and local police to help enforce federal gun control laws. The Supreme Court ruled that requirement unconstitutional. "The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems," the late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority, "nor command the States' officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program."
So, not only does 10 U.S.C. § 12406 say that the California National Guard cannot be federalized unless the order "shall be issued" by California's governor, but Printz further says that California's governor cannot be directed "to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program." Under Printz, in other words, Newsom cannot be compelled to issue the order that Trump needs Newsom to issue in order for the California National Guard to be lawfully federalized. Printz seems like the sort of precedent that Newsom ought to be citing.
To be sure, there are other potential scenarios under which Trump may lawfully deploy National Guard forces to L.A. without first obtaining Newsom's support. For example, if Trump asked the governor of a "red" state to issue such an order, and if that Republican governor complied, then Trump could conceivably deploy the National Guard forces from that red state to Los Angeles. (Note: This scenario does not address the separate legal question about whether an "invasion" or "rebellion" is actually occurring in L.A.)
There is also the specter of the Insurrection Act lurking in the background. If properly invoked by the president, that sweeping law would permit Trump to federalize National Guard forces without the consent of any governor. There are reports that Trump may be contemplating this drastic step.
The case of Newsom v. Trump has landed on the docket of a federal district court judge named Charles Breyer. If that name sounds familiar, it might be because you've heard of his brother, retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer.
Breyer has scheduled the first hearing in Newsom v. Trump for later today. We'll see what happens next.
If you watched the first season of the brilliant Star Wars spinoff show Andor, you no doubt remember the three-episode arc set on the planet Aldhani, in which a small band of scruffy-looking rebels pulled off a daring robbery at an imperial military base. According to Andor creator Tony Gilroy, that fictional heist was partially inspired by historian Simon Sebag Montefiore's tremendous book Young Stalin, which detailed how the future tyrant got his revolutionary start by carrying out "bank robberies, protection-rackets, extortion, arson, piracy, murder." It was this "political gangsterism," Montefiore explained, "that impressed [Vladimir] Lenin and trained [Joseph] Stalin in the very skills that would prove invaluable in the political jungle of the Soviet Union."
Partially inspired by Andor, I recently started rereading Young Stalin for the first time in over a decade, and the book is even better than I remembered. If you're in the market for a gripping and illuminating work of history, I highly recommend it.
The post Trump's L.A. National Guard Deployment Stands on Shaky Legal Ground appeared first on Reason.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Asian markets drop as Trump's tariff deadline looms
Most Asian markets fell Monday as countries fought to hammer out trade deals days before Donald Trump's tariff deadline, though investors took heart after he said the levies would not kick in until the start of next month. While the White House has said several deals were in the pipeline, only two have been finalised ahead of the July 9 cut-off set by the US president. Governments from major trading partners including Japan, India, the European Union and South Korea have fought for the past three months to get agreements. But Trump said he will send his first tariff letters at 1600 GMT Monday, setting out what Washington will charge for doing business with the United States. He said an extra 10 percent would be added to any country "aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of BRICS", an 11-member alliance including Brazil, Russia, India and China. The announcement came after leaders of the group warned Trump's "indiscriminate" import tariffs risked hurting the global economy. The deadline for a deal is Wednesday, but Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed on Sunday that the measures would not be applied until August 1. "It's not a new deadline. We are saying, this is when it's happening. If you want to speed things up, have at it. If you want to go back to the old rate, that's your choice," Bessent told CNN. He said the rates will then "boomerang back" to the sometimes very high levels Trump announced on April 2, before the president suspended the levies to allow for trade talks. "I would expect to see several big announcements over the next couple of days," Bessent said. The president told reporters Sunday on Air Force One that "I think we'll have most countries done by July 9, either a letter or a deal", adding that some deals have already been made. Tariff uncertainty weighed on equity markets, with Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sydney, Wellington and Taipei all down, though there were small gains in Singapore, Seoul, Manila and Jakarta. Wall Street was closed Friday for a holiday. "Whether deadlines get extended remains uncertain given Trump's unpredictable style," said IG market analyst Fabien Yip. "Our base case expects several important trade partners to agree on a high-level basis before the deadline. "This would provide more time for detailed discussions over the following two months. The other risk factor is sector-specific tariffs covering semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, and materials may also be announced in due course." Oil prices sank after Saudi Arabia, Russia and other major producers in the OPEC+ alliance said they would boost output far more than expected in August, fuelling demand worries just as Trump's tariffs are about to begin. The group said "a steady global economic outlook and current healthy market fundamentals, as reflected in the low oil inventories" led to the decision to further hike output. - Key figures at around 0230 GMT - Tokyo - Nikkei 225: DOWN 0.5 percent at 39,628.41 (break) Hong Kong - Hang Seng Index: DOWN 0.3 percent at 23,842.39 Shanghai - Composite: DOWN 0.1 percent at 3,467.81 West Texas Intermediate: DOWN 1.8 percent at $65.81 per barrel Brent North Sea Crude: DOWN 1.0 percent at $67.61 per barrel Euro/dollar: DOWN at $1.1773 from $1.1783 on Friday Pound/dollar: DOWN at $1.3634 from $1.3641 Dollar/yen: DOWN at 144.51 yen from 144.53 yen Euro/pound: DOWN at 86.34 pence from 86.37 pence New York: Closed for a public holiday London - FTSE 100: FLAT at 8,822.91 (close) dan/rsc Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Black America Web
38 minutes ago
- Black America Web
Trump Threatens CNN Over Segment Sharing ICE Block App, Suggests Prosecution For Creator
Source: ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Getty Donald Trump and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem are threatening legal action against CNN over its recent report on a mobile app that alerts users to the presence of ICE agents. On Tuesday, during a press appearance while touring a newly constructed detention center in the Florida Everglades, horrifically nicknamed 'Alligator Alcatraz', Trump and Noem suggested that both the network and the app's developer could face prosecution. 'We're working with the Department of Justice to see if we can prosecute them for that,' Noem told reporters. 'Because what they're doing is actively encouraging people to avoid law enforcement operations.' ICEBlock, which was developed by California-based coder Joshua Aaron, functions as a crowd-sourced early warning system for immigrants; notifying users when ICE activity is reported nearby. The innovative app currently has more than 20,000 users, many of whom are in Los Angeles, where controversial, large-scale deportation efforts have taken place. 'When I saw what was happening in this country, I wanted to do something to fight back,' Aaron told CNN, adding that the deportation efforts feel, to him, reminiscent of Nazi Germany. 'We're literally watching history repeat itself.' Within the app, users can add a pin on a map showing where they spotted agents — along with optional notes, like what officers were wearing or what kind of car they were driving. Other users within a five-mile radius will then receive a push alert notifying them of the sighting. Trump reportedly co-signed the statement, then pivoted to air his frustration over recent CNN reporting, where he called both CNN and The New York Times 'fake news' for their stories about the strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. 'And they may very well be prosecuted also for having given false reports on the attack in Iran,' Trump said. 'They were given totally false reports. It was totally obliterated. And our people have to be celebrated, not come home and say, 'What do you mean we didn't hit the target?' We hit the target quickly. You know, the pilots came home, they said we hit the target quickly. So they may very well be prosecuted for that. What they did there, we think, is totally illegal.' The White House doubled down on the accusation, claiming that CNN's report amounts to the promotion of an app that 'encourages violence' against law enforcement. However, the administration has yet to cite any specific statute that the network may have violated. Source: ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Getty 'We're going to actually go after them and prosecute with the partnership of [Attorney General] Pam [Bondi] if we can,' Noem said. 'Because what they are doing, we believe, is illegal.' Legal experts note that regardless of the threat, any attempt to prosecute a media organization for reporting on a publicly available application would face significant First Amendment challenges. The press is protected under the Constitution for reporting on matters of public interest, even when the subject matter is politically sensitive or controversial and law professor David Levine from UC School of Law San Francisco said it is unlikely prosecutors would prevail against the developer, users, or the media for reporting on ICEBlock, as it boils down to a First Amendment issue. 'These cases should be easily defeated in court if and when they're brought,' Levine said. 'You know, this might just be the threat of the day, the bluff of the day.' CNN quickly responded to the administration's statements in a brief but pointed comment, saying, 'This is an app that is publicly available to any iPhone user who wants to download it,' the network said. 'There is nothing illegal about reporting the existence of this or any other app, nor does any reporting constitute promotion or other endorsement of the app by CNN.' Trump's long history of targeting media outlets through litigation is well-documented, though his legal threats have rarely resulted in successful court action; the possibility of federal prosecutors pursuing charges against a news organization for reporting on a legal app has alarmed First Amendment advocates and raised concerns over the administration's continued hostility toward the press. With the president now floating the possibility of prosecuting not only the media outlet but also ICEBlock's creator, the line between law enforcement and political retaliation continues to become increasingly blurred. SEE ALSO: Donald Trump, Executive Overreach, And Project 2025's Blueprint Thanks To Donald Trump, The American Dream Is Dead SEE ALSO Trump Threatens CNN Over Segment Sharing ICE Block App, Suggests Prosecution For Creator was originally published on
Black America Web
38 minutes ago
- Black America Web
Big Beautiful BS: Trump Proposes UFC Fights On White House Lawn As Republicans Pass Worst Bill In History
Source: Eric Lee / Getty While Donald Trump prepared to sign what he's calling his 'Big, Beautiful Bill' on July 4th—complete with fireworks, fawning MAGA acolytes, and a potential UFC fight on the White House lawn —the rest of us are trying to figure out how we're going to survive the devastating consequences of it. Behind all the confetti and chaos lies one of the most destructive legislative moves in modern history. One that guts healthcare, slashes food assistance, erodes education funding, and further widens the racial and economic divide in America. And yes, you read that correctly. Donald J. Trump is hosting a UFC match on the White House lawn in 2026. Because nothing screams 'MAGA presidential' like uncouth troglodytes complete with octagon cages and flying elbows on the South Lawn. The UFC confirmed plans to host a fight card on the White House grounds, with Trump noting that he would like the unprecedented event to be part of a celebration honoring America's 250th birthday on July 4, 2026. 'We're going to have a UFC fight on the grounds of the White House,' Trump said in Des Moines, Iowa, on Thursday. 'We have a lot of land there.' While he's turning 1600 Pennsylvania Ave into a pay-per-view billboard for corporate sponsors, Black, Brown, and poor folks—are being left to fend for themselves under a bill that should've been shredded on sight. This 'historic win,' as Trump and GOP leaders are calling it, is truly a legislative massacre. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spoke for hours, breaking the record for the longest House floor speech in modern history, to stall the bill and call out its cruelty to no avail. Unfortunately, the GOP garnered just enough votes to pass it. So what's inside this Trojan horse of tax breaks and flag-waving rhetoric? Let's break down how our communities will be impacted. A Gift to the Wealthy, a Gut Punch to the Poor The bill permanently extends the 2017 Trump tax cuts, pouring more money into the pockets of corporations and the wealthiest Americans. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the richest households will enjoy an average tax break of $12,000, while the poorest Americans could lose up to $1,600 annually. For Black communities, who are overrepresented in lower-income brackets due to centuries of systemic discrimination and economic inequality, this is more than just a tax issue. It's economic warfare. It's a direct assault on any attempt at building generational wealth. Trump calls this a 'birthday present to America,' but for many in the Black and Brown community, it serves as an eviction notice from the American Dream. Healthcare Cuts That Kill The bill also takes a hacksaw to Medicaid, implementing the strictest work requirements we've ever seen and introducing new bureaucratic red tape that will likely push nearly 12 million Americans off of healthcare by 2034. For the Black community, where chronic conditions are more prevalent and access to care is already limited, this is a death sentence packaged as fiscal responsibility. Food Insecurity on the Rise As if taking healthcare away wasn't enough, the bill also slashes SNAP benefits by forcing states to pick up more of the tab and imposing stricter work requirements. Older adults, parents, veterans, people experiencing homelessness, and young people who have aged out of foster care would lose the assistance they need to afford groceries, with no improvement in their job prospects or income. More than 40 million low-income Americans rely on SNAP to feed their families, with many of them being Black and Brown, leading to food deserts becoming food famines. Attacking Education and Opportunity Education also took a hit after the eligibility for Pell Grants was raised along with the termination of subsidized loans. The bill would enforce a lifetime cap of borrowing $100,000 for graduate students as well as a $200,000 cap for medical and law school students. The legislation also reduces opportunities for deferments or forbearance and new limits on lending for part-time students; making higher education even more inaccessible and unaffordable for students of color. Mass Deportation & Militarization While gutting programs and services of importance under the guise of saving Americans money, Trump simultaneously threw a whopping $150 billion at ICE, making it the largest federal law enforcement agency. The earmarked funds will support mass deportations, finance the doubling of migrant detention capacity, and increase border enforcement; providing Customs and Border Patrol with $46.5 billion to build the border wall and associated infrastructure, like access roads, cameras, lights, and sensors. The package also includes $2 billion for the Department of Homeland Security and $29.9 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. A 'Golden Dome' and a Hollow Democracy Tucked inside the bill is $150 billion in military funding for projects like Trump's 'Golden Dome' missile defense system, a vanity project disguised as national security that stole headlines as clean energy incentives were slashed, safety nets were ripped apart, and the national debt is projected to rise by $3.3 trillion over the next decade. And yet, Trump's priorities remain painfully clear: throw a spectacle, sell the presidency to the highest bidder, and make governing look more like WrestleMania than responsible leadership. Hosting cage matches on the White House lawn? Bragging about 'hating' Democrats while signing a bill that harms millions? This clearly isn't leadership, it's performance politics at its most dangerous level; where cruelty is policy and spectacle is strategy. The damage is happening in plain sight and if we don't call it out, fight it, and vote like our lives depend on it—they will continue to treat our democracy like it's just another reality show. SEE ALSO: Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Will Destroy Medicare, Food Stamps Social Security Projected To 'Go-Broke' Earlier Than Expected SEE ALSO Big Beautiful BS: Trump Proposes UFC Fights On White House Lawn As Republicans Pass Worst Bill In History was originally published on
