President Donald Trump deployed the National Guard units into California after two days of protests of hundreds of demonstrators against immigration findings and said that the protests interfered with federal enforcement and framed them as a possible “form of rebellion” against the authority of the US government.
California Governor Gavin Newsom said on Sunday that he formally asked Trump’s administration “his unlawful deployment of soldiers in Los Angeles County” and returned them to his command.
What laws did Trump quote to justify this step?
Trump quoted the head of 10 US Code, a federal law that outlines the role of US armed forces, in his order 7 June to call members of the Californian National Guard to Federal Service.
Head 10 – Section 12406 – Allows the President to deploy the National Guard units into the Federal service, if the US is attacked, there is a “rebellion or hazard of rebellion” or the president is not “unable to perform the laws of the United States”.
Also read | Apple heads for annual demonstrations from Missists AI, technical shocks and trumps of trade wars
What are the National Guard soldiers to do according to the law quoted in the order of Trump?
The law of 1878, the law of Posse Comitatus, generally forbids the US Army, including the National Guard, from participation in civil enforcement of law.
Section 12406 does not overflow this ban, but allows soldiers to protect federal agents who carry out the activities of law enforcement and protect federal assets.
For example, the National Guard units cannot arrest the protesters, but they could protect us with immigration and enforcement of customs schools.
Also read | The ban on traveling Donald Trump takes effect for 12 countries – all you need to know
What are the consequences for freedom of the word?
The first amendment to the US Constitution guarantees the right to assembly, freedom of expression and printing.
Experts said that Trump’s decision to respond to protests to protests is a sinister sign of how far the president is willing to go to suppress political speech and an activity that he disagrees, or criticizes the policy of his administration.
Is Trump’s move prone to legal challenges?
Four legal experts from the defense organizations on the left and on the left and right handling of Trump’s use of head 10 in response to protests with immigration called inflammatory and ruthless, especially without the support of California Governor Gavin Newsom, which said Trump would only escalate tensions.
Protests in California will not increase to the level of “rebellion” and do not prevent the federal government to implement the laws of the United States, experts said.
Head 10 also states “orders for these purposes are issued through state governors”, but legal experts stated that the language may not be an obstacle. Legislative history suggests that these words were likely to reflect the standards of how the National Guard soldiers are usually deployed, rather than to give the governor the opportunity to not comply with the President’s decision to deploy units.
Also read | What happens when Trump cancels SpaceX with NASA | He explained
Could California sued to challenge Trump’s move?
California could have filed a lawsuit and claim that the deployment of the National Guard soldiers was not justified according to Title 10, because there was no “rebellion” or threat to the enforcement of law. The solution may take months and the result would be uncertain. Since protests may end before the resolution of the court proceedings, the decision on the action may be a political issue rather than legal, experts said.
What other laws could Trump involve to direct the National Guard or other US military units?
Trump could take a far -reaching step by calling for an uprising of 1792, which would enable soldiers to directly participate in civil enforcement of law for which it is not a recent precedent.
Casting protests as a “rebellion” that requires the deployment of soldiers against US citizens to be a more risky legal territory, said one legal expert, partly because mostly peace protests and minor incidents are not the species to which the rebellion law was proposed.
The Uprising Act was used by previous presidents to deploy soldiers in the US in response to crisis, such as the 1794 whiskey uprising and the rise of the Ku Klux clan in the immediate consequence of the American Civil War. The law was last triggered by President George HW Bush in 1992, when Governor California asked military assistance to suppress riots in Los Angeles after the trial of Rodney King.
Most recently, however, the President deployed the National Guard in the State without requesting from the Governor of the State in 1965, when President Lyndon Johnson sent the soldiers to protect civil rights demonstrators in Montgomery, Alabama.
(Tagstotranslate) California California lawsuit
