Latest news with #PosseComitatus
Politico
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Politico
What Trump can — and can't — do in his bid to take over law enforcement in DC
The Trump administration is currently on trial in Los Angeles over its deployment of the California guard in June to quell immigration-related protests in that city. That trial will test whether a federal judge believes Trump's deployment ran afoul of that 1878 law and must be rescinded. But the legality of using the guard in D.C. may be different. Presidential use of the D.C. guard has rarely faced legal resistance because it has typically happened in cooperation with D.C. leaders. And the Justice Department has long maintained that the D.C. guard, unlike the other guards, can be used for ordinary law enforcement without violating Posse Comitatus. A 1989 legal opinion from the department's Office of Legal Counsel found that President George H.W. Bush could use the D.C. guard to carry out law enforcement missions in D.C. as part of the so-called war on drugs. If Trump's deployment of the D.C. guard is challenged in court, a judge would almost certainly take note of the OLC opinion, but would not be bound to follow it. Does Trump have the power to 'federalize' D.C.? Trump cannot singlehandedly wrest control of the district's government. The Constitution grants Congress the power to 'exercise exclusive legislation' over the 'seat of government' of the United States. In 1973, with the passage of the Home Rule Act, Congress created the local D.C. government that still exists to this day. Under the act, D.C. has significant control of day-to-day local affairs. But the federal government — including federal law enforcement agencies such as the U.S. Capitol Police and the U.S. Park Police — retain control over federal land and property. And Congress has the final say on local D.C. policies: The Home Rule Act allows Congress to effectively veto any legislation passed by the D.C. Council. The president alone has no authority to 'federalize' the D.C. government; he would need Congress to amend the Home Rule Act. Has Trump sent federal authorities into D.C. before? Yes, Trump has tested the boundaries of his ability to use federal agents and the National Guard in Washington. Trump has clear control and authority over tens of thousands of federal law enforcement officers who work in the area for federal agencies, including the FBI, the Marshals Service, the Secret Service, the Park Police and others. Trump deployed many of those agencies in June 2020 to clear Black Lives Matter protesters from Lafayette Park, across from the White House.
The Intercept
31-07-2025
- Politics
- The Intercept
National Guard Ordered to Do ICE Paperwork at Immigration Facilities in 20 States
The Trump administration authorized the deployment of National Guard troops to immigration facilities in 20 states beginning early next month, further entwining the military in civil and law enforcement functions. The move undermines long-standing prohibitions on the use of the armed forces in domestic operations, sidestepping the Posse Comitatus Act and accelerating the U.S. transition into a police state, experts said. The National Guard will be deployed in Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Virginia, among other states, according to a defense official who was not authorized to disclose the information. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acknowledged it was now finalizing the parameters of its expanded collaboration with the Pentagon. 'We're engaged with the Department of Defense and we're figuring out the next steps,' Tanya Roman, an ICE spokesperson told The Intercept. Guard members will assist ICE officials in 'alien processing' – administrative work preceding detention — in 20 states while ICE leadership will 'direct' troops assigned to the mission, which will begin in early August, according to a memo first revealed on Wednesday by the New York Times. 'The National Guard serving as camp administrators for ICE's infamous detention centers is a dangerous and shameful step for everyone involved,' said Sam Ratner, policy director at Win Without War. The Pentagon told The Intercept that these troops will operate under so-called Title 32 status, meaning they will be under state, rather than federal, control, unlike deployments in Los Angeles and across the southern border. Experts say it hardly lessens the dangers to democracy. 'This move raises almost all the same concerns as using active-duty troops, and then some,' Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's liberty and national security program, told The Intercept. 'This is yet another attempt to circumvent the Posse Comitatus Act, which normally prohibits the military from engaging in civilian law enforcement activities.' In his first six months in office, President Donald Trump has overseen the deployment of nearly 20,000 federal troops on American soil, including personnel from the National Guard, the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, and the Marines, according to the Pentagon's public statements. The true number may be markedly higher, as U.S. Northern Command receives only snapshots of data about the number of troops deployed at any given time from various task forces and military service branches, according to spokesperson Becky Farmer. U.S. federal forces have already been operating in at least five states — Arizona, California, Florida, New Mexico, and Texas — all in service of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. Experts say that the increasing use of military forces in the interior of the United States represents an extraordinary violation of Posse Comitatus, a bedrock 19th-century law seen as fundamental to the democratic tradition in America. The administration's legal justification for its latest deployment hinges on the exploitation of a provision in the law, Goitein said. 'This time, Trump is relying on a legal loophole embedded within Title 32 known as 502(f) that allows National Guard forces to perform law enforcement functions when they're not in federal status, even if they're performing a federal mission. But the way Trump is using 502(f) is unprecedented and goes far beyond Congress's intent in passing the law,' she told The Intercept. 'Most National Guard forces are not trained as law enforcement officers, they're trained as soldiers.' Last week, the Pentagon announced plans to replace Marine Corps and Naval Reserve units already assisting ICE under Title 10 status — federal control — with National Guard troops under Title 32 status, allowing members to have a more direct role in anti-immigrant operations. 'Through active planning and collaboration with our ICE partners, the Department determined that specific operational needs may require direct interaction with individuals in ICE custody,' according to chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell. Goitein said no matter what authority they were operating under, the use of Guard members is dangerous. 'Most National Guard forces are not trained as law enforcement officers, they're trained as soldiers,' she said. 'That creates real risks, for both the civilians with whom Guard members will interact and the Guard members themselves.' 'The Department of Homeland Security is engaged with the Department of Defense and working out final details on a partnership that will enable the National Guard to supplement a wide range of immigration enforcement activity in the U.S. interior,' Roman, the ICE spokesperson, said. More than 10,000 troops are deploying or have deployed to the southern border, according to Northern Command. Under the direction of NORTHCOM, military personnel have deployed under the moniker Joint Task Force-Southern Border, or JTF-SB, since March, bolstering approximately 2,500 service members who were already supporting U.S. Customs and Border Protection's border security mission. One-third of the U.S. border is now completely militarized due to the creation of four new national defense areas, or NDAs: sprawling extensions of U.S. military bases patrolled by troops who can detain immigrants until they can be handed over to Border Patrol agents. Around 5,500 troops — Marines and California National Guard members — have also been deployed to Los Angeles since early June, according to Farmer. The forces were sent to LA over the objections of local officials and California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Dispatched by Trump to quell protests against ICE immigration raids and to 'protect the safety and security of federal functions, personnel, and property,' they were also drafted into support of ICE raids. This included a punitive raid on MacArthur Park, an LA open space that rousted a summer day camp for children, as well as military-style assaults on state-licensed marijuana nurseries that left one man working on the farms, Jaime Alanís Garcia, dead. The directive signed by Trump calling up the California National Guard cited '10 U.S.C. 12406,' a provision within Title 10 of the U.S. Code on Armed Services that allows the federal deployment of National Guard forces if 'there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.' After The Intercept began reporting that the troops had done almost nothing in LA beyond one temporary detention, the Trump administration began withdrawing the forces at an increasing rate. Parnell announced on Wednesday another significant release of California National Guard members, noting that only about 25 troops 'remain in Los Angeles to protect federal personnel and property.' The federalization of California National Guard troops hampered firefighting efforts, cutting a key Guard task force to just 40 percent capacity while wildfires flared up across the state, according to Newsom. The governor's office also noted that Trump had allowed drugs to 'flow freely across the border' after the deployment diverted about a third of the 450 Guard members from their work on a state counterdrug task force. Earlier this month approximately 200 Marines were mobilized to support ICE's 'interior immigration enforcement mission' in Florida, according to NORTHCOM. The command noted that they were only the 'first wave' of ICE assistance. They are still operating under Title 10 authorities, according to Farmer. The Pentagon has continued to insist that it is critical that troops do ICE's scutwork. 'This ongoing support, provided in response to a May 9, 2025 request for assistance from the Department of Homeland Security includes case management, transportation and logistical support, and clerical support for the in- and out-processing of illegal aliens at ICE detention facilities,' Parnell announced last Friday. 'By providing these crucial services, DoD military personnel directly enable ICE to dedicate more trained agents to core law enforcement activities, significantly enhancing overall effectiveness.' Goitein noted that other states were at risk of the same blowback experienced by Trump's deployment of the California National Guard. 'Guard forces are often the front line in states' disaster response efforts,' she told The Intercept. 'As we enter into hurricane season, pulling hundreds or thousands of Guard members off their disaster response duties will place communities in real danger and could lead to tragedy.'
Fox News
21-06-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
Federal judge asks if National Guard deployment in Los Angeles violates Posse Comitatus Act
A federal judge on Friday asked if the Trump administration's military deployment in Los Angeles violates the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits troops from conducting civilian law enforcement on U.S. soil. This comes as California's challenge to President Donald Trump's deployment of troops to respond to anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles returned to a federal courtroom in San Francisco on Friday for a brief hearing. That followed an appeals court handing the Trump administration a victory in the case, with the 9th Circuit appellate panel allowing the president to keep control of National Guard troops he sent to quell riots. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer did not issue any additional rulings but asked for briefings from both sides by noon Monday on whether the federal department violated the Posse Comitatus Act. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said in his complaint that "violation of the Posse Comitatus Act is imminent, if not already underway" but last week, Breyer delayed considering that allegation. Vice President JD Vance, who traveled to Los Angeles on Friday to meet with deployed troops, argued that the court said Trump's reason for sending in federal troops "was legitimate" and that he would do it again if needed. "The president has a very simple proposal to everybody in every city, every community, every town whether big or small, if you enforce your own laws and if you protect federal law enforcement, we're not going to send in the National Guard because it's unnecessary," Vance told reporters. National Guard troops have been accompanying federal agents on some immigration raids over the anti-ICE demonstrations, and Marines briefly detained a man on the first day they deployed to protect a federal building, marking the first time federal troops have detained a civilian since deploying to Los Angeles. Breyer found Trump acted illegally when Trump deployed troops despite opposition from Newsom. But the appellate ruling halted the judge's temporary restraining order. On Friday, Breyer asked the lawyers to address whether he or the appellate court retains primary jurisdiction to grant an injunction under the Posse Comitatus Act. California has requested a preliminary injunction returning the control of troops in Los Angeles, where protests have calmed down in recent days, back to Newsom. Trump argued that the troops are needed to restore order, while Newsom said their presence on the streets escalated tensions and wasted resources. Breyer said Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which he noted allows presidents to control state National Guard troops only during times of "rebellion or danger of a rebellion." "The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'" Breyer said. The administration argued that courts cannot second-guess the president's decisions. The appellate panel ruled that presidents do not have unchecked power to seize control of a state's National Guard, but also said that by pointing to violent acts by protesters in this case, the administration had presented enough evidence to show it had reason for federalizing the troops. The California National Guard will stay under federal control, at least for now, as the lawsuit proceeds. This is the first federal deployment of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since troops were sent to protect Civil Rights Movement marchers in 1965.
Globe and Mail
20-06-2025
- Politics
- Globe and Mail
U.S. judge delays additional rulings in case against Trump's military deployment in LA
California's challenge of the Trump administration's military deployment on the streets of Los Angeles returned to a federal courtroom in San Francisco on Friday for a brief hearing after an appeals court handed President Donald Trump a key procedural win in the case. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer put off issuing any additional rulings and instead asked for briefings from both sides on whether the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits troops from conducting civilian law enforcement on U.S. soil, is being violated in Los Angeles. Newsom said in his complaint that 'violation of the Posse Comitatus Act is imminent, if not already under way' but Breyer last week postponed considering that allegation. The hearing comes a day after the 9th Circuit appellate panel allowed the president to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed in response to protests over immigration raids. The appellate decision halted a temporary restraining order from Breyer, who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Despite the appellate setback, California's attorneys are expected to ask Breyer on Friday for a preliminary injunction returning control of the troops in Los Angeles, where protests have calmed down in recent days, to Newsom. Trump, a Republican, argued that the troops have been necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said their presence on the streets of a U.S. city inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The demonstrations have appeared to be winding down, although dozens of protesters showed up Thursday at Dodger Stadium, where a group of federal agents in SUVs and cargo vans had gathered with their faces covered a parking lot. The Los Angeles Dodgers organization asked them to leave, and they did. Los Angeles Dodgers deny ICE agents access to stadium grounds On Tuesday, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass lifted a curfew in downtown Los Angeles that was first imposed in response to vandalism and clashes with police after crowds gathered in opposition to agents taking migrants into detention. Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which he said allows presidents to control state National Guard troops only during times of 'rebellion or danger of a rebellion.' 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'' wrote Breyer, a Watergate prosecutor who was appointed by President Bill Clinton and is the brother of retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The Trump administration argued that courts can't second-guess the president's decisions. The appellate panel ruled otherwise, saying presidents don't have unfettered power to seize control of a state's guard, but said that by citing violent acts by protesters in this case, the Trump administration had presented enough evidence to show it had a defensible rationale for federalizing the troops. For now, the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit proceeds. It's the first deployment by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since troops were sent to protect Civil Rights Movement marchers in 1965. Trump celebrated the appellate ruling in a social media post, calling it a 'BIG WIN' and hinting at more potential deployments. 'All over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done,' Trump wrote. Newsom, for his part, has also warned that California won't be the last state to see troops in the streets if Trump gets his way. 'The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens,' Newsom said. Meanwhile, Vice President JD Vance was travelling to Los Angeles on Friday to meet with U.S. Marines who also have been deployed to protect federal buildings, his office announced.
The Independent
20-06-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Judge asks if troops in Los Angeles are violating Posse Comitatus Act
California 's challenge of the Trump administration's military deployment in Los Angeles returned to a federal courtroom in San Francisco on Friday for a brief hearing after an appeals court handed President Donald Trump a key procedural win. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer put off issuing any additional rulings and instead asked for briefings from both sides by noon Monday on whether the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits troops from conducting civilian law enforcement on U.S. soil, is being violated in Los Angeles. Newsom said in his complaint that 'violation of the Posse Comitatus Act is imminent, if not already underway' but Breyer last week postponed considering that allegation. The hearing comes a day after the 9th Circuit appellate panel allowed the president to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed in response to protests over immigration raids. The appellate decision halted a temporary restraining order from Breyer, who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Breyer also asked the lawyers on Friday to address whether he or the appellate court retains primary jurisdiction to grant an injunction under the Posse Comitatus Act. California has sought a preliminary injunction returning control to Newsom of the troops in Los Angeles, where protests have calmed down in recent days. Trump, a Republican, argued that the troops have been necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said their presence on the streets of a U.S. city inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The demonstrations have appeared to be winding down, although dozens of protesters showed up Thursday at Dodger Stadium, where a group of federal agents with their faces covered, traveling in SUVs and cargo vans, had gathered at a parking lot. The Los Angeles Dodgers organization asked them to leave, and they did. On Tuesday, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass lifted a curfew in downtown Los Angeles that was first imposed in response to vandalism and clashes with police after crowds gathered in opposition to agents taking migrants into detention. Trump federalized members of the California National Guard under an authority known as Title 10. Title 10 allows the president to call the National Guard into federal service when the country 'is invaded,' when 'there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government,' or when the president is otherwise unable 'to execute the laws of the United States.' Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which he said allows presidents to control state National Guard troops only during times of 'rebellion or danger of a rebellion.' 'The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'' wrote Breyer, a Watergate prosecutor who was appointed by President Bill Clinton and is the brother of retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. The Trump administration argued that courts can't second-guess the president's decisions. The appellate panel ruled otherwise, saying presidents don't have unfettered power to seize control of a state's guard, but said that by citing violent acts by protesters in this case, the Trump administration had presented enough evidence to show it had a defensible rationale for federalizing the troops. For now, the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit proceeds. It's the first deployment by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since troops were sent to protect Civil Rights Movement marchers in 1965. Trump celebrated the appellate ruling in a social media post, calling it a 'BIG WIN' and hinting at more potential deployments. 'All over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done,' Trump wrote. Newsom, for his part, has also warned that California won't be the last state to see troops in the streets if Trump gets his way. 'The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens,' Newsom said. Meanwhile, Vice President JD Vance was traveling to Los Angeles on Friday to meet with U.S. Marines who also have been deployed to protect federal buildings, his office announced.
