* Washington Post…
President Trump has the legal authority to deploy active-duty military personnel to states to help quell violent protests across the country over the death of a black man in police custody — though the dramatic move he threatened Monday would probably generate strong pushback from some state and local officials, analysts said.
In a televised speech, Trump said he had recommended Monday “to every governor to deploy the National Guard in sufficient numbers that we dominate the streets.”
“Mayors and governors must establish an overwhelming law enforcement presence until the violence has been quelled,” Trump said. “If a city or a state refuses to take the actions that are 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.” […]
The deployment of active-duty military personnel, though — particularly to states that may not want them — would represent a further escalation of Trump wielding his considerable presidential powers.
“I am mobilizing all available federal resources, civilian and military, to stop the rioting and looting, to end the destruction and arson, and to protect the rights of law-abiding Americans,” Trump said.
Pritzker appeared on MSNBC and CNN shortly after Trump, said he was not going to ask for active military troops to be deployed to Illinois. “We will not be doing that and I can’t imagine any state will do that,” he told MSNBC.
On CNN, Pritzker said, “Well, it’s illegal. He can’t do it. We won’t request military assistance here in the state of Illinois. I can’t imagine why any governor is going to do that. This is, it’s ridiculous.
* But the law has been invoked numerous times over the years…
Before invoking it, the president “must first issue a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse within a limited time, 10 U.S.C. § 334.4. If the situation does not resolve itself, the President may issue an executive order to send in troops,” according to a 2006 report by the Congressional Research Service.
That is the same year the act was amended to expand the instances in which the president may invoke the law, after the federal government’s response to Hurricane Katrina a year earlier was criticized.
It authorizes “the President to employ the armed forces during a natural disaster or terrorist attack.”
As to whether a state must request the presence of those military forces in the state, that’s “not necessarily” the case, according to experts.
* There is some disagreement among legal experts…
Stephen Vladeck, a national security and constitutional law expert at the University of Texas at Austin, said on Twitter that the federal government does not necessarily need a state request before using troops for domestic law enforcement, and that the Insurrection Act is open-ended in letting the president decide when circumstances merited its use.
He said the Insurrection Act had not been used since 1992, partly because of the unpopularity of using troops for domestic purposes.
“And it’s hard to imagine courts second-guessing factual determinations by the President that circumstances warrant use of the military to restore order,” Vladeck wrote. “Instead, the real constraint today might be responsibility; if Trump invokes these statutes, he’d own all that follows.”
Not all experts are certain that the circumstances merit it.
Eugene Fidell, who teaches military justice at Yale Law School, said Monday that he does not believe Trump has the authority to send in troops without the governors’ permission in these circumstances.
“Absent a request from the legislature or the governor of a state, I think the only way the power can be lawfully exercised is if there were an impeding of federal authority,” he said, pointing to the example of Little Rock, Arkansas, when troops were sent in because the state was not abiding by a federal court order.
* Mayor Lightfoot today…
That’s not going to happen. I will see him in court. It’s not going to happen. Not in my city. And I’m not confident that the President has the power to do that, but we have our lawyers hard at work. And if he tries to do that, and you certainly have power of our governor, and myself as a mayor, we will see you in court.
And then she added…
Now, keep in mind, keep in mind, this is a man who likes to bluster. Even before I was mayor, this man indicated he was going to ’send in the feds,’ whatever that means. So, let’s not overreact. […]
We are not going to give over our city to the military so the President can play to his re election. That’s not going to happen. Period.
Deep, deep breaths before commenting, please. Thanks.