President Donald Trump’s approach to utilizing the National Guard has been a frequent source of controversy. Unlike their traditional roles in natural disasters or major events, Trump has sought to deploy these state-based troops in a different capacity: to cities where citizens are protesting his policies, particularly concerning immigration.
Trump’s stated rationale for these deployments is to restore order in cities led by Democrats, support his immigration enforcement efforts, and combat crime. However, this stance has drawn criticism from former military officials, several Democratic governors, and federal judges, who worry about the politicization of the military and potential overreach.
A recent instance of this friction occurred in early October when Trump attempted to deploy National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon. The deployment was intended to counter protests outside a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) building, protesting its immigration practices. A judge has since issued a temporary injunction, and the legal battle continues.
Understanding the National Guard
The National Guard is a component of the U.S. military that exists in all 50 states, plus Washington D.C., Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. These troops can be deployed domestically for emergencies or internationally, with some units specializing in areas like wildfire fighting or border security.
While the National Guard ultimately falls under the Department of Defense, and the President has the authority to federalize troops under certain conditions, the process for requesting their support typically begins at the state level. Governors are usually the ones who call upon the National Guard during emergencies, and they can then request presidential assistance or aid from other states.
It’s important to note that National Guard troops have specific limitations. They are not authorized to enforce laws, make arrests, conduct seizures, or perform searches. The Posse Comitatus Act further restricts the federal government’s ability to use military forces for domestic law enforcement purposes.
Trump’s Legal Arguments for Deployment
A less-known provision within U.S. military law grants the President the authority to deploy the National Guard independently, a power that has been used sparingly by previous administrations.
Specifically, 10 U.S. Code § 12406 allows the President to call National Guard troops into federal service if the nation faces an invasion or the threat of one, or if there is an ongoing or potential rebellion against the U.S. government.
Trump has invoked this statute to federalize National Guard troops, such as the 2,000 deployed in June to support ICE operations. Similarly, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth cited this law in a memo to deploy 200 Oregon National Guard members into federal service on September 28th.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated on October 6th, “We’re very confident in the president’s legal authority to do this… And we’re very confident we will win on the merits of the law.”
Recent Deployments and Controversies
President Trump has attempted to bypass the conventional procedures for deploying the National Guard on multiple occasions.
In June, he asserted control over the California National Guard to manage protests against immigration raids in Los Angeles, despite objections from Governor Gavin Newsom. California responded by filing two lawsuits against the administration. While one lawsuit challenged the President’s seizure of the National Guard, an appeals court ultimately ruled in his favor. In the second lawsuit, a federal judge determined that Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles contravened the Posse Comitatus Act.
Earlier this summer, hundreds of National Guard troops were sent to Washington D.C. in response to what Trump described as “complete and total lawlessness,” citing homelessness and crime rates as justification.
More recently, Trump authorized the deployment of 300 National Guard troops to Chicago amid protests, particularly those occurring outside detention facilities. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, a Democrat, accused Trump of attempting to “manufacture a crisis” and has initiated legal action.
This past weekend, Trump sought to deploy the National Guard to Portland, Oregon, but a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order late Sunday night, halting the action.
The Portland Situation
Trump’s desire to deploy the National Guard in Portland stems from recent demonstrations near an ICE building, where protesters opposed his mass deportation initiatives. Federal officers from the Department of Homeland Security and the Customs and Border Patrol agency reportedly clashed with these demonstrators.
The Portland Police Bureau reported arresting two individuals on October 4th for aggressive behavior and failure to comply with orders. One of the arrested individuals was found to be carrying bear spray and a collapsible baton.
Oregon Public Broadcasting reported that federal law enforcement used tear gas and smoke canisters to disperse the protest, leading to several arrests.
While Trump has claimed the city is “burning down,” Oregon Governor Tina Kotek, a Democrat, countered that “there is no insurrection in Portland, no threat to national security.”
The Trump administration’s plan to send 200 California National Guard troops to Oregon to manage these protests has been met with a legal challenge. U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, appointed by Trump, has temporarily blocked the deployment through a series of rulings.
On Saturday, Judge Immergut prohibited Trump from federalizing the Oregon National Guard, stating, “This is a nation of constitutional law, not martial law.” The following day, she issued a temporary restraining order preventing the deployment of California’s National Guard troops to Portland.
The Trump administration is expected to appeal these decisions.