The use of the National Guard seems to be for Trump ‘a toe in the water’ to see how far he can go

The intention of US President Trump to use the National Guard in the demonstrations in California is very worrying. This is what America expert Kenneth Manusama, who will be one later this week book publishes on the American legal system: « It seems like a kind of finger exercise, a toe in the water to feel how everyone responds to the use of the armed forces in a democratic stronghold. »

Trump wants 2,000 soldiers from the Californian guard protection to the employees of Immigration Service ICE during the demonstrations in Los Angeles against the deportation of immigrants. To this end, he brought the guard under federal authority – despite objections from Governor Gavin Newsom. Trump relies on an old law that gives the president the right to do this in the case of exceptional circumstances.

First this: what exactly is the National Guard?

« Every state has its own National Guard, which comes from the militias that all states used to have. For example, the Guard helps with natural disasters, but also in maintaining order in a state-under the authority of the governor. At the same time, the National Guard also plays a national role. The reservists (part-time soldiers, KB) of the Guard, for example, also go with regular Afghanistan.

What is that law that now happens in California?

« This law Says that the president can get authority over the National Guard, in the event of an invasion or Rebellie, or when the president cannot maintain the laws with the regular troops. In this case it is all about rebellion, of which you would first have to determine whether there is actually the case. In addition, the law states that all orders must also be given to the Guard at Federalization Vía de Gouverneur. It is unclear what that means in practice now that the governor himself has said he does not want the commitment of the guard at all. ”

What can the National Guard do in concrete terms with the demonstrations?

« According to this law, the soldiers are only allowed to offer protection, not enforce order. But imagine that those national guard soldiers are there at demonstrations. They might be allowed to break up the demonstration by order of the governor-but what happens now if the president or the Minister of Defense says that it is to break the demonstrations?

When can Washington dedicate the guard to do something like that?

“With, for example, an appeal to the Insurrection Acta much heavier law against rebellion. This law was used, among other things, to intervene in the riots surrounding the death of Rodney King in 1992. But also much earlier, when states refused to comply with the Supreme Court on the segregation of schools. With the Insurrection Act, the National Guard could be used to protect black students. My problem with this law is that it is so vague: it is not clear how exactly the testing should be done by a judge. The law seems a kind of license to do anything with the armed forces. « 

Do you therefore speak of the ‘dreaded Insurrection Act’?

« That is mainly because Trump has threatened to use the law. It has been talking about » is he going to do it or is he not going to do it?  » There is a good thing that he will do it because we are going to see it as a litigation, not as a framework in which they have to move. step on the slope direction even more autocratic behavior. « 

To share

Mail the editors