Yes and no. As I understand it, (someone please correct me) Governor control state national guardsmen but the moment they request aid for more National Guardsmen then ultimate control goes to the Commander in Chief.
Long story short, with the pandemic, wildfires etc. National Guard has been answering to the executive branch who then has been deferring to Newsom for direction. But now, it seems the Executive branch is stepping in. Thus the Marines.
Again, I question how accurate this is. The person that explained it to me is a bit questionable of a source.
I appreciate you being upfront about your source, lol. Here’s some info from AP News to help clarify a bit.
Typically the authority to call up the National Guard lies with governors, but there are limited circumstances under which the president can deploy those troops. Trump federalized members of the California National Guard under an authority known as Title 10.
Which basically says that the federal government can deploy the National Guard when
the United States […] is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation
So Trump is (falsely) claiming that the protesters are helping Mexico/Venezuela/Wherever to “invade” California. Which is obviously complete horseshit, but unfortunately that same excuse has been working for his other fascist orders such as the deportations to CECOT.
Trump’s claim isn’t quite that tenuous. Check section (2):
there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States
That’s the basis for this. They’re characterising Angelinos resisting ICE as “a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States”, since ICE is an extension of that same authority. It’s a weak claim, but not as completely buckwild as claiming a foreign invasion.
That’s a fair point. I was under the assumption that they were still using the “invasion” thing since that was what they leaned into for the deportations. I can definitely see them going with “rebellion” instead.
Seems like there is some (temporary) good news on the topic at least:
A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order Thursday directing President Donald Trump to return control of the National Guard to California.
The order, which takes effect at noon Friday, said the deployment of the Guard was illegal and both violated the Tenth Amendment and exceeded Trump’s statutory authority.
When taking to the press they purposefully used words like “invasion” and “rebellion” to help with justification of invoking this obscure law but it is clear it is not.
Like all judgments against Trump, ir’s only as powerful as the enforcement. If the Guard leadership chooses to follow Trump over Newsom, the courts mean nothing.
Yes and no. As I understand it, (someone please correct me) Governor control state national guardsmen but the moment they request aid for more National Guardsmen then ultimate control goes to the Commander in Chief.
Long story short, with the pandemic, wildfires etc. National Guard has been answering to the executive branch who then has been deferring to Newsom for direction. But now, it seems the Executive branch is stepping in. Thus the Marines.
Again, I question how accurate this is. The person that explained it to me is a bit questionable of a source.
I appreciate you being upfront about your source, lol. Here’s some info from AP News to help clarify a bit.
- https://apnews.com/article/california-immigration-national-guard-newsom-trump-lawsuit-aedf8cdd95ee899c9559d5e54a2e4833
The relevant part of Title 10 is explained here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/12406
Which basically says that the federal government can deploy the National Guard when
So Trump is (falsely) claiming that the protesters are helping Mexico/Venezuela/Wherever to “invade” California. Which is obviously complete horseshit, but unfortunately that same excuse has been working for his other fascist orders such as the deportations to CECOT.
Trump’s claim isn’t quite that tenuous. Check section (2):
That’s the basis for this. They’re characterising Angelinos resisting ICE as “a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States”, since ICE is an extension of that same authority. It’s a weak claim, but not as completely buckwild as claiming a foreign invasion.
That’s a fair point. I was under the assumption that they were still using the “invasion” thing since that was what they leaned into for the deportations. I can definitely see them going with “rebellion” instead.
Seems like there is some (temporary) good news on the topic at least:
- https://apnews.com/article/california-immigration-national-guard-newsom-trump-lawsuit-aedf8cdd95ee899c9559d5e54a2e4833
When taking to the press they purposefully used words like “invasion” and “rebellion” to help with justification of invoking this obscure law but it is clear it is not.
Like all judgments against Trump, ir’s only as powerful as the enforcement. If the Guard leadership chooses to follow Trump over Newsom, the courts mean nothing.