The nearly 150-year old law that Trump is testing with domestic troop deployment
About 800 National Guard troops filed into Washington, D.C., on Tuesday after President Donald Trump said — without substantiation — that they were needed to reduce crime in the 'lawless' national capital. Thousands of miles away, a judge in California is hearing arguments about whether the president's recent decision to federalize Guard personnel in Los Angeles during protests against immigration raids violated federal law.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
10 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Was Trump right to send National Guard to Washington, D.C.?
David Bumcrot Belmont Heather Mac Donald cites several shooting incidents in Washington, D.C., including two heinous crimes involving the shooting deaths of innocent young children. Nowhere does she mention how Republicans block every effort at enacting gun-control legislation. Also left out is the number of convicted felons that President Trump has pardoned. Let's stop pretending this isn't just Trump's attempt to initiate martial law. Advertisement Robyn King Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Ipswich In Trump's political theater, Washington becomes a prop President Trump's National Guard deployment to Washington, D.C. is less about public safety and more about political theater. D.C.'s violent crime rates have fallen sharply since 2023. Cherry-picking a few brutal crimes to paint the city as in crisis ignores the data and serves a narrative, not the truth. If homicide rates alone justified military involvement, other US cities — some worse off than D.C. — would already be occupied by federal troops. The National Guard's limited 'command presence' won't fix longstanding issues of gun violence, juvenile crime, or car theft. Lasting reductions come from targeted policing, intelligence-driven enforcement, and community partnerships — not a 30-day show of force. Advertisement Worse, the move undermines D.C.'s elected leadership and sets a dangerous precedent for federal overreach. Washington's majority-minority residents have endured decades of over-policing. Imposing military oversight without an emergency inflames mistrust, chills cooperation with police, and treats citizens like subjects. Real safety is built, not staged. This deployment is a political stunt masquerading as crime control — and Washington deserves better than to be used as a prop in someone else's campaign. Paul Swindlehurst Londonderry, N.H. For this administration, an easy distraction It seems our president has found the secret for making the Jeffrey Epstein controversy go away: Invade Washington, D.C. It's amazing how short the media's attention span is. They are so easily distracted by the next outrageous thing President Trump and his representatives do or say. There is no follow-up, no accountability — essentially just narration and public relations. Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon was so right: 'Flood the zone,' and you can do anything. Patricia Fabbri Lynnfield
37 minutes ago
The Trump administration wants to end the UN peacekeeping in Lebanon. Europe is pushing back
WASHINGTON -- The future of U.N. peacekeepers in Lebanon has split the United States and its European allies, raising implications for security in the Middle East and becoming the latest snag to vex relations between the U.S. and key partners like France, Britain and Italy. At issue is the peacekeeping operation known as UNIFIL, whose mandate expires at the end of August and will need to be renewed by the U.N. Security Council to continue. It was created to oversee the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon after Israel's 1978 invasion, and its mission was expanded following the monthlong 2006 war between Israel and the militant group Hezbollah. The multinational force has played a significant role in monitoring the security situation in southern Lebanon for decades, including during the Israel-Hezbollah war last year, but has drawn criticism from both sides and numerous U.S. lawmakers, some of whom now hold prominent roles in President Donald Trump's administration or wield new influence with the White House. Trump administration political appointees came into office this year with the aim of shutting down UNIFIL as soon as possible. They regard the operation as an ineffectual waste of money that is merely delaying the goal of eliminating Hezbollah's influence and restoring full security control to the Lebanese Armed Forces that the government says it is not yet capable of doing. After securing major cuts in U.S. funding to the peacekeeping force, Secretary of State Marco Rubio signed off early last week on a plan that would wind down and end UNIFIL in the next six months, according to Trump administration officials and congressional aides familiar with the discussions. It's another step as the Trump administration drastically pares back its foreign affairs priorities and budget, including expressing skepticism of international alliances and cutting funding to U.N. agencies and missions. The transatlantic divide also has been apparent on issues ranging from Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza and the Russia-Ukraine conflict to trade, technology and free speech issues. Israel has for years sought an end to UNIFIL's mandate, and renewal votes have often come after weeks of political wrangling. Now, the stakes are particularly high after last year's war and more vigorous opposition in Washington. European nations, notably France and Italy, have objected to winding down UNIFIL. With the support of Tom Barrack, U.S. ambassador to Turkey and envoy to Lebanon, they successfully lobbied Rubio and others to support a one-year extension of the peacekeeping mandate followed by a time-certain wind-down period of six months, according to the administration officials and congressional aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private diplomatic negotiations. Israel also reluctantly agreed to an extension, they said. The European argument was that prematurely ending UNIFIL before the Lebanese army is able to fully secure the border area would create a vacuum that Hezbollah could easily exploit. The French noted that when a U.N. peacekeeping mission in Mali was terminated before government troops were ready to deal with security threats, Islamic extremists moved in. With the U.S. easing off, the issue ahead of the U.N. vote expected at the end of August now appears to be resistance by France and others to setting a firm deadline for the operation to end after the one-year extension, according to the officials and congressional aides. French officials did not respond to requests for comment. The final French draft resolution, obtained by The Associated Press, does not include a date for UNIFIL's withdrawal, which U.S. officials say is required for their support. Instead, it would extend the peacekeeping mission for one year and indicates the U.N. Security Council's 'intention to work on a withdrawal.' But even if the mandate is renewed, the peacekeeping mission might be scaled down for financial reasons, with the U.N. system likely facing drastic budget cuts, said a U.N. official, who was not authorized to comment to the media and spoke on condition of anonymity. One of the U.S. officials said an option being considered was reducing UNIFIL's numbers while boosting its technological means to monitor the situation on the ground. There are about 10,000 peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, while the Lebanese army has around 6,000 soldiers, a number that is supposed to increase to 10,000. Hezbollah supporters in Lebanon have frequently accused the U.N. mission of collusion with Israel and sometimes attacked peacekeepers on patrol. Israel, meanwhile, has accused the peacekeepers of turning a blind eye to Hezbollah's military activities in southern Lebanon and lobbied for its mandate to end. Sarit Zehavi, a former Israeli military intelligence analyst and founder of the Israeli think tank Alma Research and Education Center, said UNIFIL has played a 'damaging role with regard to the mission of disarming Hezbollah in south Lebanon.' She pointed to the discovery of Hezbollah tunnels and weapons caches close to UNIFIL facilities during and after last year's Israel-Hezbollah war, when much of the militant group's senior leadership was killed and much of its arsenal destroyed. Hezbollah is now under increasing pressure to give up the rest of its weapons. U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said UNIFIL continues to discover unauthorized weapons, including rocket launchers, mortar rounds and bomb fuses, this week, which it reported to the Lebanese army. Under the U.S.- and France-brokered ceasefire, Israel and Hezbollah were to withdraw from southern Lebanon, with the Lebanese army taking control in conjunction with UNIFIL. Israel has continued to occupy five strategic points on the Lebanese side and carry out near-daily airstrikes that it says aim to stop Hezbollah from regrouping. Lebanese officials have called for UNIFIL to remain, saying the country's cash-strapped and overstretched army is not yet able to patrol the full area on its own until it. Retired Lebanese Army Gen. Khalil Helou said that if UNIFIL's mandate were to abruptly end, soldiers would need to be pulled away from the porous border with Syria, where smuggling is rife, or from other areas inside of Lebanon — 'and this could have consequences for the stability' of the country. UNIFIL 'is maybe not fulfilling 100% what the Western powers or Israel desire. But for Lebanon, their presence is important,' he said. The United Nations also calls the peacekeepers critical to regional stability, Dujarric said. UNIFIL spokesperson Andrea Tenenti said deciding on the renewal of the mandate is the prerogative of the U.N. Security Council. 'We are here to assist the parties in implementation of the mission's mandate and we're waiting for the final decision,' he said.
CNN
41 minutes ago
- CNN
Execution date set for Florida man who killed estranged wife's sister and parents, set fire to house
A Florida man who fatally stabbed his estranged wife's sister and parents and then set fire to their house is scheduled for execution in Florida under a death warrant signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis. David Pittman, 63, is set to die Sept. 17 in the record-extending 12th execution scheduled for this year. DeSantis signed the warrant Friday, as two other men, Kayle Bates and Curtis Windom, await execution later this month. The highest previous annual total of recent Florida executions is eight in 2014, since the death penalty was restored in 1976 by the US Supreme Court. Florida has already executed nine people this year, more than any other state, while Texas and South Carolina are tied for second place with four each. A total of 28 people have been executed so far this year in the US, exceeding the 25 executions carried out last year. It ties 2015, when 28 people were also put to death. Pittman was convicted and sentenced to death in 1991 on three counts of first-degree murder, according to court records. Jurors also found him guilty of arson and grand theft. Pittman and his wife, Marie, were going through a divorce in May 1990, when Pittman went to the Polk County home of her parents, Clarence and Barbara Knowles, officials said. Pittman fatally stabbed the couple, as well as their younger daughter, Bonnie. He then set fire to the house and stole Bonnie Knowles' car, which he also set on fire, investigators said. A witnessed identified Pittman as the person running away from the burning car. A jailhouse informant also testified that Pittman had admitted to the killings. The Florida Supreme Court is already scheduled to hear an appeal. An appeal will also likely be filed with the US Supreme Court.
