A federal decide dominated on Sept. 2, 2025, that the Trump administration broke federal legislation by sending Nationwide Guard troops to Los Angeles in June in response to protests over immigration raids.
In his ruling, U.S. District Choose Charles Breyer stated that Nationwide Guard troops in Los Angeles had obtained improper coaching on the authorized scope of their authority underneath federal legislation. He dominated that the president’s order for the troops to have interaction in “domestic military law enforcement” violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which – with restricted exceptions – bars using the navy in civilian legislation enforcement.
Whereas he didn’t require the remaining troopers to depart Los Angeles, Breyer referred to as on the administration to chorus from utilizing them “to execute laws.”
The Los Angeles case, President Donald Trump’s deployment of Nationwide Guard troops to struggle crime in Washington, D.C., and his latest vow to ship the Guard to Chicago and Baltimore to struggle crime blur sensible and philosophical strains erected in each legislation and longtime customized between the navy and the police.
As a policing scholar and former FBI particular agent, I imagine the plan to proceed utilizing Nationwide Guard troops to cut back crime in cities reminiscent of Chicago and Baltimore violates the authorized prohibition towards home navy legislation enforcement.
Restricted legislation enforcement operate
State and native police coaching give attention to legislation enforcement and sustaining order. Neighborhood policing, which is a collaboration between police and
the group to unravel issues, and the use-of-force continuum – the escalating collection of applicable actions an officer might take to resolve a scenario – additionally kind a part of coaching.
In distinction, the purpose of Nationwide Guard fundamental fight coaching is to “learn the skills it takes to become a Soldier.”
The preliminary 10-week coaching program for Nationwide Guard recruits contains studying abilities reminiscent of using M16 navy assault rifles and grenade launchers. It additionally contains studying guerrilla warfare techniques, in addition to techniques for neutralizing improvised explosive units whereas participating in navy operations. Whereas useful in a navy setting, such actions aren’t a part of home policing and legislation enforcement.
Whereas the Nationwide Guard has, by legislation, a restricted legislation enforcement operate in occasions of home emergencies, it’s a novel a part of the U.S. navy that sometimes responds – on the request of a state’s governor – to pure disasters and excessive violence.
Though uncommon, presidents also can name up the Guard, with or with out the assent of a state governor. In 1992, for instance, President George H.W. Bush despatched Guard troops to Los Angeles – with the California governor’s approval – to quell widespread riots following the acquittal of white cops who had been charged with assaulting Rodney King, a Black man.
However sending troopers who usually are not effectively versed in policing will increase the probability of errors. One of the vital well-known examples is the Kent State shootings on Could 4, 1970, when Nationwide Guardsmen despatched to the college by Ohio’s governor opened hearth and killed 4 unarmed college students throughout an anti-war protest on campus.
Nationwide Guard troopers maintain a line in South Central Los Angeles after a number of days of rioting in April 1992.
Ted Soqui/Corbis by way of Getty Photos
The erosion of restraint
U.S. presidents have traditionally exercised restraint in deploying navy personnel to suppress home unrest. Presidents sometimes work with state governors who request federal help throughout occasions of disaster.
Hundreds of Nationwide Guard troops have been despatched to a number of states on the request of state governors following Hurricane Sandy in 2012. Amongst different duties, President Barack Obama’s administration directed the Division of Protection to assist FEMA’s efforts to revive energy to 1000’s of houses.
The final time a president bypassed a state’s governor in sending the Nationwide Guard to quell civil unrest was in Selma, Alabama, in 1965. President Lyndon B. Johnson deployed the Nationwide Guard to guard civil rights protesters with out the cooperation of Alabama Gov. George Wallace, a distinguished segregationist.
The choice to ship federal troops to a political protest in Los Angeles has raised core authorized questions. The First Modification’s safety of the appropriate to political protest is a pillar of U.S. jurisprudence.
‘Federalizing’ the Guard
The ruled have a proper to carry the federal government accountable and be certain that the federal government’s energy displays the consent of the ruled.
The precise to protest, after all, doesn’t prolong to prison conduct. However using navy personnel raises a urgent query: Is the president justified in sending navy personnel to handle pockets of criminality, as a substitute of counting on state or native police?
One in every of a president’s authorized avenues is to make use of a federal statute to do what’s referred to as “federalizing” the Nationwide Guard. This implies troops are quickly transitioned from state to federal navy management.
On Sept. 4, 2025, Washington, D.C., sued the Trump administration on related grounds. The lawsuit follows Trump’s determination in August to deploy tons of of Nationwide Guard troops to police the capital.
Members of the South Carolina Nationwide Guard patrol the Nationwide Mall in Washington on Aug. 31, 2025.
AP Picture/Jose Luis Magana
For the president to legally take management of and deploy the California Nationwide Guard underneath federal statutes, it was obligatory for the criminality in Los Angeles to rise to a “rebellion” towards the U.S.
Extra usually, the president is prohibited from utilizing navy pressure – together with the Marines – towards civilians in pursuit of regular law-enforcement targets. This bedrock precept is predicated on the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and permits solely uncommon exceptions, as stipulated by the Revolt Act of 1807. This act empowers the president to deploy the U.S. navy to states in circumstances regarding the suppression of an riot.
The Sept. 2 ruling by the federal decide in California decided that the administration deviated from these ideas as a result of using troops in Los Angeles didn’t meet the factors established by federal legislation. Though the political protests in Los Angeles included some violence, the decide reasoned that the violence didn’t rise to a insurrection and didn’t forestall a conventional police response.
Federalism and the boundaries of govt energy
Along with the sensible variations between the navy and the police, there are philosophical variations derived from core ideas of federalism, which refers back to the division of energy between the nationwide and state governments.
In the USA, police energy is derived from the tenth Modification, which provides states the rights and powers “not delegated to the United States.” It’s the states which have the facility to determine and implement legal guidelines defending the welfare, security and well being of the general public.
Using navy personnel in home affairs is restricted by deeply entrenched coverage and authorized frameworks.
The deployment of Nationwide Guard troops for routine crime preventing in cities reminiscent of Los Angeles and Washington, and the proposed deployment of these troops to Chicago and Baltimore, highlights the erosion of each sensible and philosophical constraints on the president and the huge federal energy the president wields.
