Trump Orders 2000 National Guard Troops To California To Shut Down Anti-ICE Protests

from the unlawful-orders-from-ol'-Law-and-Order dept

As ICE continues to engage in a mass deportation program that more closely resembles a mass kidnapping program, communities have literally taken to the streets to chase ICE and their law enforcement enablers out of town. Rolling in looking like some sort of cartel death squad just isn’t intimidating enough anymore. And if you can’t do your job legally or honestly, people may stop you from doing your job at all.

This uprising against ICE is completely earned. The administration’s pretenses for stripping people of rights and dumping them in foreign gulags have been constantly undermined by facts, leaks, and occasionally, the government’s own legal filings in the multiple lawsuits these actions have provoked.

Since the Trump Administration can’t win on the merits, President Trump has decided to open up the Martial Law playset he last toyed with during the George Floyd demonstrations in 2020. Some assembly is required, of course. But the parts have been dumped on the table and are being arranged by Donald Trump.

With ICE agents being routinely forced to hightail out of neighborhoods they hoped to be raiding, Trump has declared war on California, in a matter of speaking. The memorandum issued by the White House on Saturday says Trump will be sending in the National Guard to ensure ICE can continue to violate rights on the regular with its indiscriminate migrant hunts.

[B]y the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard under 10 U.S.C. 12406 to temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations.  Further, I direct and delegate actions as necessary for the Secretary of Defense to coordinate with the Governors of the States and the National Guard Bureau in identifying and ordering into Federal service the appropriate members and units of the National Guard under this authority.  The members and units of the National Guard called into Federal service shall be at least 2,000 National Guard personnel and the duration of duty shall be for 60 days or at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense.

The opening invocation is pretty much meaningless. Claiming you’re using “authority vested in me” only means something if you actually have that authority. The law cited by Trump only allows the mobilization of the military if there’s a “rebellion or danger of a rebellion,” an “invasion or danger of invasion” by a foreign nation, and (more vaguely) the administration is “unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”

The first two prongs are non-starters. No invasion or rebellion is happening. The third might support this deployment if Trump feels ICE can’t perform its usual work of vanishing people (along with their rights) into the nearest vehicle headed towards a detention center or foreign prison.

And if that were all the law said about that particular issue, Trump might be in the clear. But that’s not all it says:

Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States or, in the case of the District of Columbia, through the commanding general of the National Guard of the District of Columbia.

Without more, Trump can’t do this. The states themselves would have to issue these orders. Without that key component, this flooding of the zone with National Guard troops is illegal — and that’s even before you consider the Posse Comitatus Act, which says military members can’t be used to engage in federal law enforcement activities. National Guard units are generally considered to be covered under state law, which means they could be used to help enforce state laws. But this memo directly instructs the National Guard to “temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law.”

Given that fact, it’s probably only a matter of time before Trump invokes the Insurrection Act to keep his martial law plans on track. If he does, he’ll be setting the sort of precedent one would hope would taint him and his administration forever.

The last time this was used was to protect civil rights and liberties.

In 1958, President Eisenhower invoked the Insurrection Act to deploy troops to Arkansas to enforce the Supreme Court’s decision ending racial segregation in schools, and to defend Black students against a violent mob.

If Trump decides to go this route, he’ll be doing it to insulate the administration from the consequences of its own actions, adding military muscle to a mass deportation program that has been carried out with a complete disregard for things like due process, the Fourth Amendment, and the entire judicial system.

On top of all of that, President Trump has given his hand-picked Defense Department head free rein to add whatever he wants to the mix:

In addition, the Secretary of Defense may employ any other members of the regular Armed Forces as necessary to augment and support the protection of Federal functions and property in any number determined appropriate in his discretion.

And, of course, Pete Hegseth has already responded to this open invitation by threatening to make everything even more illegal than it already is.

If you can’t read/see the embedded image, it’s a post by Pete Hegseth on XTwitter that says:

The violent mob assaults on ICE and Federal Law Enforcement are designed to prevent the removal of Criminal Illegal Aliens from our soil; a dangerous invasion facilitated by criminal cartels (aka Foreign Terrorist Organizations) and a huge NATIONAL SECURITY RISK.

Under President Trump, violence & destruction against federal agents & federal facilities will NOT be tolerated. It’s COMMON SENSE.

The @DeptofDefense is mobilizing the National Guard IMMEDIATELY to support federal law enforcement in Los Angeles. And, if violence continues, active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized — they are on high alert.

I’m sure both of these men are just dying for an excuse to mobilize the military against US citizens and residents that refuse to treat ICE operations with anything else but complete deference. During Trump’s first term as president, there were still a few people capable (or willing) to pull him back from the edge of the brink. In this administration, there’s no one willing to perform that function. They’re only willing to push him closer to the edge and, when the time comes, join him in his leap into the void.

Filed Under: , , , , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Trump Orders 2000 National Guard Troops To California To Shut Down Anti-ICE Protests”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
48 Comments
This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Pseudonymous Coward says:

Because the LAPD just didn’t have ENOUGH tanks and rocket launchers, clearly.

But anyone who looks at history can tell you, when the public displays dissent in response to paramilitary government crackdowns, nothing eases tensions like sending in the actual military.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

The protests wouldn’t have happened in the first place if ICE⁠—now acting as a form of secret police for the Trump administration⁠—hadn’t performed those raids. The protests wouldn’t have turned violent if not for the intervention of military-like police who’ve been trained to view the American people as enemy combatants in a war zone. The protests might’ve ended after one night if Trump hadn’t decided to send in troops armed with live ammunition out of a desire to take control over the state of California/“own the libs”.

Time and again, the government has made protests violent by answering peaceful protests with violence. This instance was no different. None of this is to say I condone destruction of property. That said: I’d prefer some property getting a little wrecked over people being harmed by cops choosing to fire weapons designed to kill at lesser rates than actual live gunfire.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Bloof (profile) says:

Re:

Yes, it’s an insurrection to not want people who have been kidnapping legal migrants, students who voiced their free speech and anyone who looks Latin american to come into your community and start rounding people up to ship them off without trial to countries they either have no ties to, if they’re lucky, countries they will face peraecution in, or just declaring them gang members and tossing them in concentration camps in el Salvador.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
MrWilson (profile) says:

Re:

Responses like this prove that you never actually understood what was being expressed, which makes any response from you completely useless.

January 6th disrupted the peaceful transition of power after a democratic election. It was a direct action against the functioning of our government and a threat to democracy itself.

Trump is illegally using the national guard to suppress opposition to his illegal violations of due process and human and civil rights. Trump’s actions aren’t a necessary or legal function of government. The protesters also aren’t threatening to overturn an election or murder democratically elected officials for the sin of doing their jobs.

That you can’t see the difference is a function of your sycophantry for fascism.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
BernardoVerda (profile) says:

Re:

And here I always thought that Democrats were opposed to an Insurrection.

Oddly enough, that is exactly what these protestors are doing — opposing an insurrection.

You seem to be a rather confused about which side is the side that is openly ignoring the nation’s constitution, flagrantly breaking plain law left and right, and resorting to armed, organized mass violence to support its conduct of blatantly illegal actions to suppress free speech, civil rights, and to repress demands to comply with those laws and that constitution.

It’s all happening in plain view, so there’s no excuse for “misunderstanding” all this.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re:

You seem to be a rather confused about which side is the side that is openly ignoring the nation’s constitution, flagrantly breaking plain law left and right, and resorting to armed, organized mass violence to support its conduct of blatantly illegal actions to suppress free speech, civil rights, and to repress demands to comply with those laws and that constitution.

I’ll make it a bit more simpler for him to understand: It’s the side he’s on that’s hurting people.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

If your tactics disrupt the order of things under capitalism, you may well be accused of violence, because “violence” is an elastic term often deployed to vilify people who threaten the status quo. Conditions that the state characterizes as “peaceful” are, in reality, quite violent. Even as people experience the violence of poverty, the torture of imprisonment, the brutality of policing, the denial of health care, and many other violent functions of this system, we are told we are experiencing peace, so long as everyone is cooperating. When state actors refer to “peace,” they are really talking about order. And when they refer to “peaceful protest,” they are talking about cooperative protest that obediently stays within the lines drawn by the state. The more uncooperative you are, the more you will be accused of aggression and violence. It is therefore imperative that the state not be the arbiter of what violence means among people seeking justice.

— from Let This Radicalize You: Organizing and the Revolution of Reciprocal Care by Kelly Hayes

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
huskcummerbund (profile) says:

Hey, remember when Kristi Neom tweeted “If Joe Biden federalizes the National Guard, that would be a direct attack on states’ rights. Over the last several years, we’ve seen Democrats try to take away our Freedoms of religion, assembly, and speech. We can’t let them take away our right to defend ourselves, too.”?

I wonder what she thinks about this? Will she choose Cognitive Dissonence or outright Hypocracy?

Leah Abram (profile) says:

Re:

Hey, remember when Kristi Neom tweeted “If Joe Biden federalizes the National Guard, that would be a direct attack on states’ rights. Over the last several years, we’ve seen Democrats try to take away our Freedoms of religion, assembly, and speech. We can’t let them take away our right to defend ourselves, too.”?

Kristi Noem meant to add “That’s our job!” at the end.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Thad (profile) says:

During Trump’s first term as president, there were still a few people capable (or willing) to pull him back from the edge of the brink. In this administration, there’s no one willing to perform that function. They’re only willing to push him closer to the edge and, when the time comes, join him in his leap into the void.

Yeah, it does seem a little odd that you never say the name “Miller” anywhere in this story.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Goering: “Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.”

Gilbert: “There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.”

Goering “Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

— In an interview with Gilbert in Goering’s jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946)

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

“…voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

All too fucking true and the way things have gone for the past couple of centuries.

That One Guy (profile) says:

'According to my MAGAt-approved history books it worked for them!'

It’s funny, I can’t count the number of comments I’ve seen by self-labeled current and former members of the US military about how military servicemembers take their oath to the country and constitution seriously and would never side with a fascist regime or follow illegal orders… but between the military parade to praise the Dear Leader in DC and now mobilizing to crush protests it would seem that by and large the US military has decided that ‘I was just following orders’ is in fact a valid excuse.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re:

The thing is, if it’s an illegal order, technically you don’t have to follow it.

What should frighten you is the idea that some Marines would follow those orders because they consider themselves loyal to Trump himself rather than the office of the presidency/their commanding officers.

ECA (profile) says:

Ruling with laws

Fundamental,
If you are going to Rule in any form, there are only a few to do it.
The First idea is you have Enough military to kill everyone, quickly BUT that means there is no one to Rule over and the Military will take your position away.
Do it with the Rights of the People. And you have to deal with the people. The problem here is representation OF the people, insted of having 1 million people to deal with.
But in the recent passed, things have been abit Strange in our gov. Not enforcing the Corporate laws and regulations, Firing and limiting the Agencies we have(even before trumo), The gov. was taking the Corp side of things, and NOT paying attention to the Law of the land. Or even the Law of how Capitalism Should be run. They tool Favor from the Bill collector rather then assisting the Creators.

Then we look at ICE, created for anti-terrorism, From certain Persons and nations, that Arnt to bad anymore. Things that started in 2001(star card) took forever to get out, and NOW isnt really needed. The Star card is 1 Step in tracking everyone in the nation.

The USA was created by the People, and Should be Controlled By the People, and When Congress(state and Fed) Makes a law or regulation, the LAST to vote on it, SHOULD be the Citizens that Have to Live by them.
We have the internet, and It Should be Fairly easy to get a copy of Every bill being Passed around.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

Okay, and how widespread was this destruction? Was it limited to a small part of LA, or⁠—as Trump would like you to believe⁠—was the entire giant-ass city of Los Angeles burning down until Trump sent in the troops to restore his idea of order with actual physical violence?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

I see my regular comparisons....

…. to the ongoing progress of seasons 2 and 3 of Babylon 5 is right on track with episode 3×09 – Point of No Return

Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States or, in the case of the District of Columbia, through the commanding general of the National Guard of the District of Columbia.

>
Gen. Smits: “Captain, I’m sure you’ve been following the news.”

Cpt. Sheridan: “Yes, sir. If I may ask, what’s your opinion?”

Gen. Smits: “My opinion has nothing to do with this, captain. And neither does yours. Our job is to follow orders from the commander in chief… …and respect the chain of command. […] The Political Office has assigned responsibility for offworld security to Nightwatch personnel exclusively.”

Cpt. Sheridan: “What?”

Gen. Smits: “According to the mandate issued by the Security Office, your security teams should consist of those already in Nightwatch and those who wish to join after certain background checks have been concluded.”

Cpt. Sheridan: “General, I object to this in the strongest-”

Gen. Smits: “Captain, didn’t you hear me a moment ago? I told you where this comes from. Now, if you’ve got a problem, I suggest you look upon this as an opportunity, not a burden.”
>

Leave a Reply to MrWilson Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a BestNetTech Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

BestNetTech community members with BestNetTech Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the BestNetTech Insider Shop »

Follow BestNetTech

BestNetTech Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the BestNetTech Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
BestNetTech Deals
BestNetTech Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the BestNetTech Insider Discord channel...
Loading...