U.S. President Donald Trump has issued a warning about potentially using the Insurrection Act, a power that has not been employed by a U.S. president in over thirty years. The President has expressed interest in deploying the military to various U.S. cities, many of which are governed by officials affiliated with the Democratic Party, with the aim of controlling what he and his administration perceive as escalating crime levels.
Currently, legal disputes are unfolding between the Trump administration and authorities in Illinois, California, and Oregon, who have not requested or approved federal intervention. Nevertheless, there is a possibility that the President may pursue a more forceful approach in this matter. Trump stated on Monday that if circumstances warranted it, he would not hesitate to take action, emphasizing the importance of preventing loss of life and ensuring public safety.
The Insurrection Act, which gives the U.S. president the authority to deploy the military or federalize National Guard troops to suppress uprisings and rebellions, dates back to 1807. While commonly known as the Insurrection Act of 1807, legal experts point out that the military’s role in domestic law enforcement is governed by a series of statutes enacted between the late 18th century and 1871. This act can supersede the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which generally prohibits federal military involvement in law enforcement activities that fall under the jurisdiction of local authorities. In cases where the Insurrection Act is invoked, troops may conduct searches and arrests.
During the recent deployment of National Guard troops to cities like Los Angeles, Trump relied on a different legal basis, Section 12406 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code. This section restricts the National Guard from engaging in civilian law enforcement duties, allowing them to protect federal personnel and property but not make arrests. The use of military personnel for menial tasks has drawn criticism from Democrats and administration opponents.
The historical context and controversies surrounding the declaration of an insurrection stem from a deep-rooted American tradition of keeping the federal military separate from civilian matters. Concerns have been raised by constitutional scholars regarding the broad and vague language of some statutes related to the Insurrection Act, which could potentially lead to overreach in interpreting terms like ‘insurrection’ or ‘domestic violence.’
Past instances of invoking the Insurrection Act have typically involved mutual agreement between presidents and governors on the necessity of troop deployment. However, in the current scenario, local officials have expressed reservations about the federal military presence. Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker criticized the Trump administration’s tactics, alleging an attempt to portray peaceful protesters as a violent mob to justify invoking the Insurrection Act.
While the U.S. experiences higher violent crime rates compared to other Western countries, per-capita homicide rates have declined in recent years, with some cities reporting decreases in violent incidents. The Insurrection Act has been activated around 30 times since its inception, with the most recent invocation occurring in 1992 under President George H.W. Bush following the unrest in Los Angeles after the Rodney King verdict.
Legal experts point out that the President holds exclusive authority to decide on military deployment, but court intervention is possible if actions are deemed in bad faith or unauthorized by law. The current composition of the U.S. Supreme Court, with a majority of conservative justices, has shown deference to Trump’s exercise of authority in various matters throughout the year.