Tag Archives: Posse Comitatus Act

Chicago Tribune: Gov. JB Pritzker says President Trump deploying troops to Chicago due to ‘dementia’ and obsessive fixations

Posted on by
Reply

In a scathing critique of President Donald Trump, Gov. JB Pritzker on Tuesday accused the Republican president of deploying National Guard troops to the Democratic cities of Chicago and Portland based on fixations that stem in part from his being mentally impaired.

“This is a man who’s suffering dementia,” Pritzker said in a telephone interview with the Tribune. “This is a man who has something stuck in his head. He can’t get it out of his head. He doesn’t read. He doesn’t know anything that’s up to date. It’s just something in the recesses of his brain that is effectuating to have him call out these cities.

“And then, unfortunately, he has the power of the military, the power of the federal government to do his bidding, and that’s what he’s doing.”

The governor’s comments came as National Guard troops from Texas were assembling at a U.S. Army Reserve training center in far southwest suburban Elwood and Trump’s administration was moving forward with deploying 300 members of the Illinois National Guard for at least 60 days over the vocal and legal objections of Pritzker and other local elected leaders.

The Trump administration has said the troops are needed to protect federal agents and facilities involved in its ongoing deportation surge and has sought to do much the same in Portland, Oregon, though those efforts have been stymied so far by temporary court rulings. A federal judge in Chicago is expected to hold a hearing this week over the legal effort by Illinois and Chicago to block the deployments, which Pritzker and other local officials say is not only unnecessary but a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act that prohibits the use of U.S. military assets from taking part in law enforcement actions on domestic soil.

During the interview, Pritzker — who has been one of Trump’s harshest critics and is a potential 2028 presidential Democratic candidate — said the courts will play an integral role in challenging Trump’s efforts in Illinois and across the nation.

“We’re not going to go to war between the state of Illinois and the federal government, not taking up arms against the federal government,” Pritzker said. “But we are monitoring everything they’re doing, and using that monitoring to win in court.”

Pritzker also said he has not had any conversations with his staff or other Democratic governors regarding a so-called soft secession, a political and legal theory that has grown during Trump’s second term in which Democratic states would gradually withdraw their cooperation with the federal government, including withholding financial support, without formally leaving the Union.

“Preparing for and going to court with the law on our side and winning in court is important,” he continued. “It is the most important thing that we can do legally. If there are people who are suggesting there are things that we should do that are illegal. I would suggest to you, we’re not going to do those things.”

But even as the governor said he was counting on winning in the courts, Trump was openly exploring options to circumvent them.

Speaking in the Oval Office on Tuesday, the president reiterated that he was considering employing the two-century-old Insurrection Act to get around legal court orders that would deny him the ability to deploy National Guard troops to cities such as Chicago and Portland over governors’ objections.

“It’s been invoked before,” Trump said of the law, which the Brennan Center for Justice said has been used 30 times, starting with President George Washington, to quell the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794.

Trump says he’d consider Ghislaine Maxwell pardon and mentions Diddy in same breath as Epstein pal: ‘Have to take a look’

The Insurrection Act is an exception to Posse Comitatus and allows a president to deploy the military to “suppress rebellion” or “insurrection” when enforcing federal law becomes “impracticable.”

Past Supreme Court rulings have given the president broad discretionary powers to decide if conditions have been met to invoke the Insurrection Act, but it has left the door open for judicial review to determine if a president invoked the law “in bad faith” or in going beyond “a permitted range of honest judgment.” And the actions of the military, once invoked, are also subject to judicial review.

The last time the Insurrection Act was invoked was by President George H.W. Bush during the Los Angeles riots of 1992, with the support of California Gov. Pete Wilson. It also was used in Chicago in 1968 by President Lyndon Johnson to curb rioting over the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. with the backing of Mayor Richard J. Daley and acting Gov. Samuel Shapiro.

But the last time it was invoked over the opposition of a sitting governor was in 1965 when Johnson used it to federalize troops to protect civil rights marchers in Montgomery, Alabama, over the objections of segregationist Gov. George Wallace.

President Dwight D. Eisenhower famously invoked the act in 1957 to order the Arkansas National Guard to stand down from its orders from Gov. Orval Faubus to prevent the segregation of Little Rock’s public schools following the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education ruling. Eisenhower also deployed the Army’s 101st Airborne Division to protect Black students attending classes.

As Pritzker has sought to counter Trump on nearly every front, he has joined California Gov. Gavin Newsom in threatening to leave the bipartisan National Governors Association because the organization hasn’t spoken out against Trump’s National Guard mobilizations.

In the Tribune interview, Pritzker noted how nearly all 50 state governors at the time signed on to an April 29, 2024, letter to then-President Joe Biden’s administration opposing the military’s push in Congress to forcibly transfer Air National Guard units performing space missions into the U.S. Space Force without the governors’ consent.

Among those who signed were then-GOP South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, who now heads the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, overseeing the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency and Border Patrol.

“Well, I’m somebody who likes to reach out and do things in a bipartisan fashion, and I’ve attended NGA events and had friendly relationships with some Republican governors in the past, and the NGA has an important role. But not if it’s unwilling to stand up in this moment and speak on behalf of states’ rights the way that it always has,” Pritzker said. “So I don’t know how I can trust that the NGA actually does stand up for the states with Republicans in charge, apparently they’re just going to do Donald Trump’s bidding.”

Pritzker also continued to defend the process and timing of the Illinois attorney general’s office in filing a lawsuit to halt the National Guard activations, which wasn’t filed until Monday, two days after U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a memo about the Illinois National Guard deployments. This is despite Pritzker and Attorney General Kwame Raoul knowing for weeks that Trump had threatened to send the military to the streets of the Chicago area.

“You have to understand legal proceedings. In order for you to bring a lawsuit of any sort, you have to have what’s called ripeness. It has to be ripe. That means there has to be some action that’s taken to demonstrate that the wrong is being effectuated,” said Pritzker, calling any questions about the timing of the suit “a false avenue to follow.” “Just because someone says they’re going to call out the National Guard to do this in Illinois, until they do, you can’t file suit.”

Gov. JB Pritzker says President Trump deploying troops to Chicago due to ‘dementia’ and obsessive fixations
In a scathing critique of President Donald Trump, Gov. JB Pritzker on Tuesday accused the Republican president of deploying National Guard troops to the Democratic cities of Chicago and Portland based on fixations that stem in part from his being mentally impaired. “This is a man who’s suffering dementia,” Pritzker said in a telephone interview with the Tribune. “This is a man who has…

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/gov-jb-pritzker-says-president-233400557.html

Daily Beast: Trump Goon Spills Bonkers Plan to Deploy 82nd Airborne to Blue City

Posted on by
Reply

A senior White House aide’s messages were shared with a newspaper after he used Signal in a crowded public place.

A senior White House official accidentally disclosed that the Trump administration was considering deploying an elite army strike force into Portland by using Signal in a public place.

The Minnesota Star Tribune reported Friday that Anthony Salisbury, one of Stephen Miller’s top deputies, was observed discussing the plans via Signal in view of members of the public while traveling in Minnesota. The newspaper was then contacted by one member of the public who was troubled to see sensitive military plans discussed so openly.

In the messages, senior White House officials discussed the potential deployment of the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division, an elite unit that specializes in parachuting into hostile territory. The division has been deployed in both world wars, including the Battle of the Bulge, as well as Vietnam and Afghanistan.

Across several conversations, the Star Tribune reports, Salisbury spoke about a range of matters with Pete Hegseth adviser Patrick Weaver as well as other officials.

In one of the messages, Weaver revealed that Hegseth wanted Trump to explicitly instruct him to send soldiers to Portland.

“Between you and I, I think Pete just wants the top cover from the boss if anything goes sideways with the troops there,” Weaver reportedly said.

Noting the potentially disastrous optics around sending an elite division into an American city, Weaver told Salisbury, “82nd is like our top tier [quick reaction force] for abroad. So it will cause a lot of headlines. Probably why he wants potus to tell him to do it.”

Ultimately, Trump opted to send 200 National Guard soldiers into Portland, following a similar playbook used in other Democrat-controlled cities like Los Angeles and Washington D.C. Both the state of Oregon and the city of Portland have sued to stop the deployment.

Abigail Jackson, a spokesperson for the White House, told the Daily Beast, “Tony recently traveled to Minnesota to serve as a pallbearer in his uncle’s funeral who passed away from cancer. Despite dealing with grief from the loss of a family member, Tony continued his important work on behalf of the American people.“

“Nothing in these private conversations, that are shamefully being reported on by morally bankrupt reporters, is new or classified information,” Jackson continued. “Frankly, this story just shows the entire Trump Administration is working around the clock—and even through funerals—to make America safe again.”

The incident marks the second time in six months that the Trump administration has experienced issues as a result of insecure lines of communication.

Earlier this year, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic Jeffrey Goldberg was accidentally added to a Signal chat where several high-ranking government officials discussed the logistics of a strike on Yemen’s Houthis.

The fiasco was quickly dubbed “Signalgate” and ultimately led to national security adviser Mike Waltz, who was responsible for adding Goldberg to the chat, leaving his role at the National Security Council. President Trump later appointed him Ambassador to the United Nations.

Trump has consistently asserted that sending soldiers into cities is the only way to address rampant crime. Meanwhile, the White House has admitted to “reconfiguring” crime statistics to suit Trump’s agenda after claiming that other official statistics are “phony.”

The president’s crime crackdown, which has been concentrated entirely on blue cities, is proving more and more unpopular with the American public. After looking at recent polling on Monday, CNN data guru Harry Enten told viewers, “If Donald Trump thinks that potentially sending in the National Guard into cities like Portland is a winning political issue, the polling says you’re wrong, Mr. President!”

Trump also faced a significant blow after a federal judge ruled that his deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles was illegal, with Judge Charles Breyer finding that the president had violated the Posse Comitatus Act by requiring armed soldiers to carry out domestic law enforcement activities.

Trump Goon Spills Bonkers Plan to Deploy 82nd Airborne to Blue City
A senior White House aide’s messages were shared with a newspaper after he used Signal in a crowded public place.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trump-goon-spills-bonkers-plan-to-deploy-82nd-airborne-to-blue-city

Kansas City Star: Trump Withdraws National Guard Threat Amid Defiance

Posted on by
Reply

President Donald Trump has threatened to deploy the National Guard to Chicago amid Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s objections, pointing to Washington and Memphis as examples of federal intervention. Critics argue the move would mark an effort of federal overreach into state authority, while Republicans have argued it could help curb violent crime. Trump has withdrawn his plans to deploy the National Guard to Chicago, at least for the immediate future.

…

Trump said, “So I’m going to go to Chicago early against Pritzker. Pritzker is nothing. If Pritzker was smart, he’d say, ‘Please come in.’ … If they lose less than six or seven people a week with murder, they’re doing a great job in their opinion.”

Pritzker called Trump’s remarks inconsistent and not credible, warning that a deployment without state consent would face immediate legal challenges. Pritzker said, “That you can’t take anything that he says seriously from one day to the next.”

Pritzker added, “He’s attacking verbally, sometimes he attacks, sending his agents in, sometimes he forgets. I think he might be suffering from some dementia. The next day, he’ll wake up on the other side of the bed and stop talking about Chicago.”

Pritzker argued “Operation Midwest Blitz” could justify broader federal action and said the enforcement posture is likely to provoke confrontations. Legal limits may restrict deployment, as a federal judge in San Francisco ruled a June Los Angeles deployment violated the Posse Comitatus Act.

Trump said, “Chicago is a death trap and I’m going to make it just like I did with D.C., just like I’ll do with Memphis.”

Civil liberties groups criticized the Memphis operation as overreach and regressive policing. The White House has touted the move as a measure to reduce violent crime.

American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee said, “This latest step makes clear that the Trump administration is claiming a sweeping mandate to patrol, arrest and detain people in Memphis, and will bring back the same failed policing tactics that caused widespread constitutional violations for decades.”

Pritzker said, “The harder the ICE agents come in, the more people want to intervene and step in the way of them. And when that happens, and when there’s any kind of, well, touching or engagement with those ICE agents that involves actual potential battery, well, that’ll be the excuse.”

Trump Withdraws National Guard Threat Amid Defiance

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-withdraws-national-guard-threat-amid-defiance/ss-AA1N5efl

CNN: Trump claims he can do anything he wants with the military. Here’s what the law says

Posted on by
Reply

Having rebranded the Department of Defense as the Department of War, the president is going on offense with the US military.

Donald Trump has foisted National Guard troops on Washington, DC, and Los Angeles. Other cities are on edge, particularly after he posted an apparently artificially generated image of himself dressed up like Robert Duvall’s surfing cavalry commander in “Apocalypse Now,” a meme that seemed to suggest he was threatening war on the city of Chicago.

Trump later clarified that the US would not go to war on Chicago, but he’s clearly comfortable joking about it. And he’s of the opinion his authority over the military is absolute.

“Not that I don’t have the right to do anything I want to do. I’m the president of the United States,” he said at a Cabinet meeting in August, when he was asked about the prospect of Chicagoans engaging in nonviolent resistance against the US military.

He’s reorienting the US military to focus on drug traffickers as terrorists and told Congress to expect more military strikes after the US destroyed a boat in the Caribbean last week.

All of this projects the kind of strongman decisiveness Trump admires.

A lot of it might also be illegal.

A ‘violation of the Posse Comitatus Act’

US District Judge Charles Breyer ruled this month that Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth committed a “a serious violation of the Posse Comitatus Act” when they deployed federalized troops to Los Angeles over the objections of the state’s governor and mayor.

The Posse Comitatus Act was passed by Congress in 1878 as Southern states worked to oust federal troops and end Reconstruction. Questions over how and whether troops can be used to enforce laws goes back to the pre-Civil War period, when federal marshals sought help from citizens and militiamen in recovering fugitive slaves and putting down the protests of abolitionists, according to the Congressional Research Service.

It is not clear why Trump has not yet, as he has promised, called up the National Guard to patrol in Chicago, but he may be waiting for the Supreme Court, which has been extremely deferential to his claims of authority, to weigh in on a preliminary basis.

Trump has more authority to deploy the military inside Washington, DC, which the Constitution says Congress controls. But Congress has ceded some authority to locally elected officials in recent decades. DC’s Attorney General Brian Schwalb has sued the Trump administration over the deployment.

Testing the War Powers Act

Trump’s strike on a boat in the Caribbean is also on murky legal ground.

After Vietnam, Congress overrode Richard Nixon’s veto to pass another law, the War Powers Act of 1973, which requires presidents to notify Congress within 48 hours of a military strike. And Trump did do that, at least his third such notification since taking office in January. Trump also sent notifications to Congress about his strike against an Iranian nuclear facility and Houthi rebels who were attacking shipping routes.

The Reiss Center at New York University maintains a database of War Powers Act notifications going back to the 1970s.

Cartels as terrorist organizations

In the notification about the Caribbean strike, Trump’s administration argued that it has declared drug cartels are terrorist organizations and that he operated within his constitutional authority to protect the country when he ordered the strike.

Strikes against terrorists have been authorized under the catchall vote that authorized the use of military force against Islamic terrorists after the 9/11 terror attacks.

But Congress, which the Constitution puts in charge of declaring war, has not authorized the use of military force against Venezuelan drug cartels.

Lack of explanation from the White House

Over the weekend, CNN’s Katie Bo Lillis, Natasha Bertrand and Zachary Cohen reported that the Pentagon abruptly canceled classified briefings to key House and Senate committees with oversight of the military, which means lawmaker have been unable to get the legal justification for the strike.

Many Americans might celebrate the idea of a military strike to take out drug dealers, and the administration is clearly primed to lean on the idea that the cartels are terrorists.

Here’s a key quote from CNN’s report:

“The strike was the obvious result of designating them a terrorist organization,” said one person familiar with the Pentagon’s thinking. “If there was a boat full of al Qaeda fighters smuggling explosives towards the US, would anyone even ask this question?”

Few details

It’s not yet clear which military unit was responsible for the strike, what intelligence suggested there were drugs onboard, who was on the boat or what the boat was carrying.

“The attack on the smuggling vessel in the Caribbean was so extraordinary because there was no reported attempt to stop the boat or detain its crew,” wrote Brian Finucane, a former State Department legal advisor now at International Crisis Group for the website Just Security. “Instead, the use of lethal force was used in the first resort.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the US could have interdicted the boat and made a legal case against those onboard, but it decided instead to blow up the boat. The notice to Congress makes clear the administration will continue with other strikes.

War crime? Vance doesn’t ‘give a sh*t’

“The decision to blow up the boat and kill everyone onboard when interdiction and detention was a clearly available option is manifestly illegal and immoral,” Oona Hathaway, a law professor and director of the Center for Global Legal Challenges at Yale Law School, told me in an email.

The view of the administration could be best summarized by Vice President JD Vance stating that using the military to go after cartels is “the highest and best use of our military.”

When a user on X replied that the extrajudicial killing of civilians without presenting evidence is, by definition, a war crime, Vance, himself a Yale-educated lawyer, said this:

“I don’t give a sh*t what you call it.”

That’s not an acceptable response even for some Republicans.

“Did he ever read To Kill a Mockingbird?” wrote Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky in his own post on X. “Did he ever wonder what might happen if the accused were immediately executed without trial or representation?? What a despicable and thoughtless sentiment it is to glorify killing someone without a trial.”

Congress has power it likely won’t use

Congress has the power to stop Trump’s campaign against boats in the Caribbean. The War Powers Act allows lawmakers in the House and Senate to demand the president seek approval before continuing a campaign longer than 60 days. But that seems unlikely to occur at the moment.

After the strike against Iran earlier this year, Paul was the only Republican senator to side with Democrats and demand Trump seek approval for any future Iran strikes.

During his first term, seven Republicans voted with Senate Democrats to hem in Trump’s ability to strike against Iran after he ordered the killing of Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani. But there were not enough votes to overcome Trump’s veto that year.

Trump’s authority to use military force without congressional approval of the Caribbean operation technically expires after 60 days after he reports on the use of force, although he can extend it by an additional 30 days, although he could also declare a new operation is underway.

The use of these kinds of tactics has likely been in the works for some time.

In February, Trump designated drug cartels, including Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua, as foreign terror organizations. In April, CNN reported the CIA was reviewing whether it had authority to use lethal force against drug cartels.

But the military strike against the alleged cartel boat happened as part of a broader campaign against Venezuela, including positioning US ships, aircraft and a submarine in the Caribbean, according to a CNN report.

Trump may have campaigned as a president who would end wars, but he’s governing like a president who is very comfortable using his military.

Analysis: Trump claims he can do anything he wants with the military. Here’s what the law says | CNN Politics
Having rebranded the Department of Defense as the Department of War, the president is going on offense with the US military.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/10/politics/venezuela-trump-military-strike-war-powers-explainer

Alternet: Legal expert warns Trump saving this ‘big heavy gun’ for ‘when all hell has broken loose’

Posted on by
Reply

In an article for Democracy Docket published Thursday, journalist Jim Saksa argued that President Donald Trump is systematically expanding his authority to deploy military force within U.S. cities, and that the lack of sufficient legal or legislative pushback risks making such aggressive domestic deployments routine.

Saksa noted that over the past two weeks Trump has repeatedly threatened to send the National Guard not only to Chicago, but also to New York, Baltimore, Seattle, New Orleans and other major American cities. These threats follow earlier deployments of thousands of troops to Los Angeles in June and Washington D.C. in August.

Most recently, Trump signed an executive order establishing a National Guard “quick reaction force” prepared for rapid nationwide mobilization.

While these troop deployments are of questionable legality, Saksa pointed out that previous actions, particularly the deployments to LA and D.C., have largely gone unchecked by either the courts or Congress.

This, he warned, could embolden the president to continue deploying military force in Democratic-led cities

Trump’s rhetoric has reinforced this trajectory. He described Chicago as “a killing field right now,” despite evidence of its safest summer in decades.

He further asserted, “I have the right to do anything I want to do. I’m the President of the United States of America,” and added, “If I think our country is in danger, and it is in danger in these cities, I can do it.”

Saksa examined the legal response: a district court in California ruled that Trump’s administration violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which broadly prohibits the use of the military for domestic law enforcement, but the court did not deem the deployment itself illegal.

The Ninth Circuit, moreover, upheld the administration’s actions, concluding the deployment to LA was lawful. As a result, around 300 National Guard personnel remain on federal active duty in Southern California nearly three months later.

The article noted the slow governmental response: nearly a month passed before Washington filed a legal challenge, a delay compounded by the District’s unique legal status.

Meanwhile, the White House continues to rely on obscure statutes and novel legal theories, while avoiding reliance on the Insurrection Act of 1807, a more traditional yet controversial legal pathway to deploy troops domestically.

David Janovsky, acting director of the Project on Government Oversight’s Constitution Project, told the outlet that courts and Congress have been “mostly feeble” in response to what he termed a “power grab.”

He voiced concern that there may be no clear limits left on such presidential authority: “I don’t know what the next meaningful limit is,” he said.

The article also included comments from William Banks, professor emeritus at Syracuse University College of Law, who said: “The insurrection act is the big heavy gun.”

He added: “It was intended to be utilized, if at all, when all hell is broken loose. It’s for extreme circumstances.”

Legal expert warns Trump saving this ‘big heavy gun’ for ‘when all hell has broken loose’

https://www.alternet.org/trump-military-deployment

CNBC: Trump can’t use National Guard in California to enforce laws, make arrests, judge rules

Posted on by
Reply

Major smackdown for our Grifter-in-Chief!

  • A federal judge Tuesday barred President Donald Trump from deploying National Guard troops in California to execute law-enforcement actions there, including making arrests, searching locations, and crowd control.
  • The ruling came in connection with a lawsuit by the state of California challenging Trump’s deployment of the Guard to deal with protests in Los Angeles over the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies.
  • Judge Charles Breyer said that Trump’s deployment of the troops violated the federal Posse Comitatus Act.

A federal judge on Tuesday barred President Donald Trump from deploying National Guard troops in California to execute law-enforcement actions there, including making arrests, searching locations, and crowd control.

The ruling came in connection with a lawsuit by the state of California challenging Trump’s and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s deployment of the Guard to deal with protests in Los Angeles over the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies.

Judge Charles Breyer said that Trump’s deployment of the troops violated the federal Posse Comitatus Act, which bars U.S. Military forces from enforcing the law domestically.

Breyer’s ruling in U.S. District Court in San Francisco is limited to California.

But it comes as Trump has considered deploying National Guard troops to other U.S. cities to deal with crime.

“Congress spoke clearly in 1878 when it passed the Posse Comitatus Act, prohibiting the use of the U.S. military to execute domestic law,” Breyer wrote.

“Nearly 140 years later, Defendants — President Trump, Secretary of Defense Hegseth, and the Department of Defense — deployed the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles, ostensibly to quell a rebellion and ensure that federal immigration law was enforced,” the judge wrote.

“There were indeed protests in Los Angeles, and some individuals engaged in violence,” Breyer wrote.

“Yet there was no rebellion, nor was civilian law enforcement unable to respond to the protests and enforce the law.”

Trump can’t use National Guard in California to enforce laws, make arrests, judge rules
The ruling in San Francisco federal court comes as Trump has considered deploying National Guard troops to cities outside California to deal with crime.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/02/trump-national-guard-california-newsom.html

KTLA: Teen with disabilities reportedly detained by ICE outside L.A. school

Posted on by
Reply

Los Angeles Unified School District leaders are calling for limits on immigration enforcement near campuses after a 15-year-old boy with disabilities was pulled from a car, handcuffed, and briefly detained outside Arleta High School on Monday in what officials describe as a case of mistaken identity.

The incident happened around 9:30 a.m. on Monday, just days before more than half a million LAUSD students return to classrooms. According to Superintendent Alberto Carvalho, the student — who attends San Fernando High School — had gone to Arleta High with his grandmother to accompany a relative registering for classes.

While the family member was inside, several officers approached their vehicle, telling them they were not with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). However, Carvalho said district-reviewed video appeared to show both police and Border Patrol personnel.

The boy was removed from the car and placed in handcuffs.

“As our students return to school, we are calling on every community partner to help ensure that classrooms remain places of learning and belonging,” Carvalho said. “Children have been through enough — from the pandemic to natural disasters. They should not have to carry the added weight of fear when walking through their school gates.”

The teen was eventually released after school staff and Los Angeles police Intervened. 

“The release will not release him from what he experienced,” Carvalho said during a news conference. “The trauma will linger. It will not cease. It is unacceptable, not only in our community, but anywhere in America.”

Parents like Yvonne, whose child attends school in the district, said the incident has left them shaken. “I was upset because our kids shouldn’t have to be going through this and being scared of coming to school, parents dropping them off. We shouldn’t be going through this,” she told KTLA. 

Soon after the incident, parents received a recorded voice message from the principal, saying: “We are aware of reports of immigration enforcement activity in the area, near our campus. Our school has not been contacted by any federal agency.” 

Many parents KTLA spoke with called the presence of federal agents near public school campuses shameful. “Our government, the administration had stated they were going to go after criminals. At a school, what criminals are you going to find? Kids trying to enroll — today’s orientation day,” parent Dorian Martinez said.

Board of Education President Kelly Gonez condemned the actions on social media, calling them “absolutely reprehensible” and part of the “continued unconstitutional targeting of our Latino community.”

The district says the detention underscores the need for strong protections as students return to school. In a statement Monday, LAUSD reaffirmed that “schools are safe spaces” and said immigration enforcement near campuses “disrupts learning and creates anxiety that can last far beyond the school day.”

Some parents fear that their children will be targeted simply because of the color of their skin, regardless of immigration status. “He fits that category,” Yvonne said of her child. “Where he’s on the darker side, and I feel like that’s who they’re attacking… that’s the main reason I tell him you better be careful and you don’t go with anybody.”

Ahead of the start of the school year, the district said it has contacted 10,000 families potentially impacted by immigration enforcement efforts, rerouted bus stops, deployed 1,000 central office staff to assist in school zones, and expanded virtual options for those too afraid to leave their homes.

Teen with disabilities reportedly detained by ICE outside L.A. school
Los Angeles Unified School District leaders are calling for limits on immigration enforcement near campuses after a 15-year-old boy with disabilities was pulled from a car, handcuffed, and briefly …

https://ktla.com/news/local-news/disabled-teen-detained-ice-outside-school

Tampa Free Press: California vs. Washington Lawsuit On Federal Power And Protests Heads To Bench Trial

Posted on by
Reply

Governor Newsom’s Lawsuit Against President Trump Over National Guard Deployment Heads to Bench Trial

A constitutional battle is set to begin Monday, as a bench trial opens in a federal court case pitting California Governor Gavin Newsom against President Donald Trump. At issue is a question about the balance of power between the states and the federal government: When can a president deploy military forces to a state without the governor’s consent?

The lawsuit stems from a contentious summer in which President Trump ordered the deployment of federalized National Guard troops to Los Angeles to quell protests sparked by Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. The demonstrations, which the President characterized as a “breakdown of order,” were deemed by Governor Newsom to be under the control of state forces.

The trial, presided over by Judge Charles R. Breyer, will examine the legality of President Trump’s actions. The administration justified the deployment under Title 10 of the U.S. Code, which allows the President to federalize the National Guard in cases of “rebellion” or “invasion.” However, California’s lawsuit argues that no such conditions existed and that the President’s actions constituted an illegal overreach of authority.

This is the first time since the Civil Rights Movement that a president has deployed federal troops without a governor’s request, a point that is central to California’s legal challenge. The state’s case, which previously saw Judge Breyer order the return of the troops to state control, hinges on the argument that President Trump violated both federal code and the Tenth Amendment, which reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states.

The outcome of this trial is expected to have far-reaching implications, setting a precedent for the extent of presidential authority to intervene in state-level unrest. As the nation watches, the court will weigh the Insurrection Act, which the Trump administration cites as justification, against the Posse Comitatus Act and the principle of state sovereignty.

California Vs. Washington Lawsuit On Federal Power And Protests Heads To Bench Trial
A constitutional battle is set to begin Monday, as a bench trial opens in a federal court case pitting California Governor Gavin Newsom against President

https://www.tampafp.com/california-vs-washington-lawsuit-on-federal-power-and-protests-heads-to-bench-trial

Popular Information: Trump manufactures a crisis in LA

Posted on by
Reply

For years, President Trump has dreamed of mobilizing the military against protesters in the United States. On Saturday night, Trump made it a reality, ordering the deployment of 2,000 members of the California National Guard — against the wishes of state and local officials — in response to protests against federal immigration raids on workplaces in and around Los Angeles. By the time Trump issued the order, the protests consisted of a few dozen people at a Home Depot.

The move violated longstanding democratic norms that prohibit military deployment on American soil absent extraordinary circumstances. The last time the National Guard was mobilized absent a request from local officials was in 1965 — to protect civil rights protesters in Alabama marching from Selma to Montgomery.

Trump strongly advocated for using the military to quell racial justice protests in the summer of 2020. He encouraged governors to deploy the National Guard to “dominate” the streets. “If a city or state refuses to take the actions necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them,” Trump said.

Behind the scenes, Trump was even more ruthless. According to a 2022 memoir by former Defense Secretary Mark Esper, Trump asked Esper if the military could shoot at people protesting George Floyd’s murder. “Can’t you just shoot them?” Trump allegedly asked. “Just shoot them in the legs or something?”

On another occasion that summer, according to a book by journalist Michael Bender, Trump announced that he was putting Army General Mark Milley, the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in charge of quelling the protests. This reportedly led to a shouting match:

“I said you’re in f—ing charge!” Trump shouted at him.

“Well, I’m not in charge!” Milley yelled back.

“You can’t f—ing talk to me like that!” Trump said. …

“Goddamnit,” Milley said to others. “There’s a room full of lawyers here. Will someone inform him of my legal responsibilities?”

The lawyers, including Attorney General Bill Barr, sided with Milley, and Trump’s demand was tabled. (Trump called Bender’s book “fake news.”)

During a March 2023 campaign rally in Iowa, Trump pledged to deploy the National Guard in states and cities run by Democrats, specifically mentioning Los Angeles:

You look at these great cities, Los Angeles, San Francisco, you look at what’s happening to our country, we cannot let it happen any longer… you’re supposed to not be involved in that, you just have to be asked by the governor or the mayor to come in, the next time, I’m not waiting. One of the things I did was let them run it, and we’re going to show how bad a job they do. Well, we did that. We don’t have to wait any longer.

In October 2023, the Washington Post reported that Trump allies were mapping out executive actions “to allow him to deploy the military against civil demonstrations.”

In an October 2024 interview on Fox News, Trump again pushed for the National Guard and military to be deployed against “the enemy within,” which he described as “radical left lunatics.”

“We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics,” Trump said. “And I think they’re the big — and it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.”

Were there “violent mobs”?

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump’s mobilization of the National Guard was necessary because “violent mobs have attacked ICE Officers and Federal Law Enforcement Agents carrying out basic deportation operations in Los Angeles, California.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the National Guard would “support federal law enforcement in Los Angeles” in response to “violent mob assaults on ICE and Federal Law Enforcement.”

These claims were directly contradicted by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), which described Saturday’s protests as “peaceful.”

The LAPD statement said it “appreciates the cooperation of organizers, participants, and community partners who helped ensure public safety throughout the day.”

There were some reports of violence and property damage in Paramount and Compton, two cities located about 20 miles south of Los Angeles. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department said it “arrested one person over the protest in Paramount” and “two officers had been treated at a local hospital for injuries and released.” As for property damage, “one car had been burned and a fire at a local strip mall had been extinguished.”

Trump’s order, however, says the unrest in California is so severe it constitutes “a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States” that necessitates the mobilization of military personnel. Although any violence and property destruction is a serious matter, local law enforcement appears fully capable of responding to the situation.

Trump’s Unusual Legal Theory

The Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits using the military for domestic law enforcement without specific statutory (or Constitutional) authority. The most famous exception to the Posse Comitatus Act is the Insurrection Act, which permits the President to deploy the military for domestic law enforcement under specific circumstances. But, historically, the Insurrection Act has “been reserved for extreme circumstances in which there are no other alternatives to maintain the peace.” It also requires the president to issue a proclamation ordering “the insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably to their abodes within a limited time.”

Trump, however, invoked a different federal law, 10 U.S.C. 12406. That provision lacks some of the legal and historical baggage of the Insurrection Act, but it also confers a more limited authority. That is why Trump’s proclamation authorizes the National Guard to “temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur.” In other words, the National Guard is not authorized to engage in law enforcement activities, but to protect others doing that work. It remains to be seen whether the administration will respect these limitations in practice.

Trump is Confused

At 2:41 a.m. on Sunday morning, Trump posted: “Great job by the National Guard in Los Angeles after two days of violence, clashes and unrest.” At the time, the National Guard had not yet arrived in Los Angeles. Trump had spent the evening watching three hours of UFC fighting in New Jersey.

Trump also asserted, without evidence, that those protesting the immigration raids were “paid troublemakers.”

The National Guard arrived in Los Angeles much later on Sunday morning, when the streets were already quiet.

Trump told reporters on Sunday that he did not consider the protests an “insurrection” yet. About an hour later, Trump claimed on Truth Social that “violent, insurrectionist mobs are swarming and attacking our Federal Agents to try to stop our deportation operations.”

Trump’s order mobilizing the National Guard, however, likely inflamed tensions — and that may have been the point. Federal and state authorities clashed with protesters in downtown LA on Sunday afternoon. Law enforcement “used smoke and pepper spray to disperse protesters outside a federal detention center in downtown Los Angeles,” according to the Los Angeles Times.

Trump manufactures a crisis in LA
For years, President Trump has dreamed of mobilizing the military against protesters in the United States.

https://popular.info/p/trump-manufactures-a-crisis-in-la

Raw Story: ‘Slippery slope’: Experts sound alarm on Trump’s new National Guard tactic

Posted on by
Reply

A new report suggests that President Donald Trump’s administration sent National Guard troops in Los Angeles to assist the Drug Enforcement Administration in a law enforcement operation about 130 miles outside the city, in a move that experts say seems unlawful.

According to the report, around 315 National Guard troops were sent to the eastern Coachella Valley region to help the DEA search a local marijuana growing operation. The DEA asked the National Guard for assistance due to the “magnitude and topography” of the operation.

Legal experts expressed alarm at the move.

“This is the slippery slope,” Ryan Goodman, law professor at New York University, wrote on Bluesky.

Federal law prohibits the National Guard from replacing local law enforcement agencies under the Posse Comitatus Act. There are limited instances where the National Guard can be used in law enforcement operations, such as to quell a rebellion. But the guardsmen have to be invited by a state’s governor under the law.

‘Slippery slope’: Experts sound alarm on Trump’s new National Guard tactic

https://www.rawstory.com/national-guard-2672436557