logo
'State of rebellion': Expert weighs in on Newsom challenge to Trump deploying National Guard

'State of rebellion': Expert weighs in on Newsom challenge to Trump deploying National Guard

Fox News4 hours ago

President Donald Trump's decision to activate the National Guard to quell protests and riots in California over the weekend was met with objections from the state's Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who called the move illegal and vowed to sue the president over it.
Trump said in a proclamation that mobilizing the National Guard troops was necessary to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, who he said were being hindered from arresting illegal immigrants.
Attorney Brad Moss, who specializes in national security, told Fox News Digital the law Trump relied on to deploy the National Guard, found under Title 10, is designed to address rebellions.
"The President invoked 10 U.S.C. 12406, which affords him the authority to federalize the National Guard in response to a state of rebellion within the United States," Moss said.
The National Guard is a military force based in each state and under the dual control of governors and presidents. Governors typically have authority over their respective National Guard units, but presidents can call them into federal service in certain situations.
Moss noted that Trump left his National Guard proclamation "sufficiently vague and nondescript," including by not mentioning California or Los Angeles County in it.
Trump said he was moving 2,000 National Guard soldiers under his purview and delegating the remaining logistics to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.
From there, U.S. Northern Command issued a statement saying 300 soldiers from the California Army National Guard were deployed to parts of Los Angeles County "to support the protection of federal personnel and federal property."
While presidents have looked to the National Guard as a reinforcement to protect federal personnel and property before, Trump's move was unusual because it lacked the support of the governor.
Moss said presidents can "technically" tap the National Guard without the governor's consent but that there are limitations on what the National Guard can be used for. "It is unclear how the court would resolve legal challenges here," he said.
All Democratic governors opposed Trump's move, calling it an "alarming abuse of power" in a joint statement.
Newsom took matters a step further, blaming Trump for exacerbating riots. The Democratic governor said local and state police had conditions under control but that they worsened because Trump called in the military.
"He flamed the fires and illegally acted to federalize the National Guard. The order he signed doesn't just apply to CA. It will allow him to go into ANY STATE and do the same thing," Newsom wrote on social media.
Over the weekend, Los Angeles police reported incidents of unlawful assembly outside an immigrant detention center and incidents of protesters throwing concrete bottles and other objects. Later, rioters set fire to and vandalized several self-driving cars and video showed shops being looted.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Donald Trump Weighs In on 'Civil War' Concerns
Donald Trump Weighs In on 'Civil War' Concerns

Newsweek

time20 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Donald Trump Weighs In on 'Civil War' Concerns

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. On Monday, President Donald Trump was asked about Democratic California Governor Gavin Newsom's remarks that his Republican administration wants "civil war on the streets" amid ongoing protests against raids by Los Angeles Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The president was asked by a reporter, "What do you make of the fact that [Newsom] says you want a civil war?" Trump responded, "No, it's the opposite. I don't want a civil war. Civil war would happen if you left it to people like him." REPORTER: Gavin Newsom says you want a Civil War. TRUMP: "It's just the opposite, I don't want a Civil War. Civil War would happen if you left it to people like him." — Breaking911 (@Breaking911) June 9, 2025 This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow.

Trump isn't done with Musk yet, Michael Cohen says
Trump isn't done with Musk yet, Michael Cohen says

The Hill

time20 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Trump isn't done with Musk yet, Michael Cohen says

President Trump's ex-personal attorney Michael Cohen on Saturday said that Trump isn't done with tech billionaire Elon Musk yet, after tensions between the two men became incredibly heated in a public social media spat last week. 'They're going to really go after Elon Musk like nobody has seen, ever, in this country, because they can,' Cohen told MSNBC's Ali Velshi. 'And one thing Elon doesn't understand is this political guerilla warfare that they're going to conduct against him,' he added. On Thursday, a fight between Musk and Trump over the president's 'big, beautiful bill' earlier in the week escalated rapidly on Musk's X platform and Trump's Truth Social platform. The president said the tech billionaire 'just went CRAZY!' and threatened Musk's government contracts. Musk alleged that Trump had ties to convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein on X. The public spat followed the end of Musk's recent service in the Trump administration and an alliance with the president that appeared to start off strong. Musk endorsed Trump in July 2024 in the wake of Trump surviving an assassination attempt in Pennsylvania. Musk's administration service was marked by intense backlash from those on the left and Democrats over actions taken by Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) on the federal government. 'He doesn't care about Elon Musk,' Cohen said in his MSNBC appearance, talking about Trump. 'He used Elon Musk for what he needed. Initially it was the money, so that he didn't have to lay out any of his own, and also, more importantly, for his access with X.' The Hill has reached out to the White House and X for comment.

BlackRock Is Accused of a Plot Against Coal. The Firm Says That's ‘Absurd.'
BlackRock Is Accused of a Plot Against Coal. The Firm Says That's ‘Absurd.'

New York Times

time20 minutes ago

  • New York Times

BlackRock Is Accused of a Plot Against Coal. The Firm Says That's ‘Absurd.'

Did some of the biggest investors in the world buy up shares in coal companies to force them to produce less coal? An unusual lawsuit in Texas claims that investment firms including BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street did just that, illegally colluding with one another to reduce coal production as part of a conspiracy to fight climate change. In a federal court in Texas on Monday, a lawyer for BlackRock told a judge that the claims 'defy economic reality' and that the lawsuit should be dismissed. 'The complaint ignores that the coal market has been declining for decades for a host of reasons well before this alleged conspiracy,' said Gregg Costa, a lawyer with the firm Gibson Dunn, speaking on behalf of all three defendants. A lawyer for Texas, which filed the suit late last year along with 10 other states, said BlackRock's chief executive, Laurence D. Fink, has written in the past that corporations should set targets for greenhouse-gas reductions. For coal companies, that means 'reducing output,' said the lawyer, Brian Barnes of the firm Cooper & Kirk. Texas, a major oil- and gas-producing state, has taken aggressive action against financial companies over climate issues, including enacting a law that bars state entities from doing business with investment firms that the comptroller says are boycotting energy companies. In January, the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, and 10 other state attorneys general sent a letter to financial institutions warning that their policies on climate and environment, as well as diversity, 'could lead to enforcement actions.' As power has changed in Washington, financial firms have walked back their messaging and participation in climate action groups. The complaint in the Texas case noted that BlackRock and State Street had already withdrawn from a trade association known as Climate Action 100+. (Vanguard had not been a member.) The firms have also exited the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, which had been a target of criticism from the right. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store