FOR THE WEEK OF JUNE 16, 2025

Deportation protests: Soldiers on the streets of L.A. pose a test of presidential power

A week-old drama in Los Angeles pits the president against that city's mayor, the state's governor and a federal judge. President Trump sent 4,000 California National Guard members and 700 U.S. Marines in response to protests against deportation sweeps aimed at undocumented immigrants. The unusual mission is to protect federal buildings and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents as they arrest noncitizens at workplaces, courthouses and stores, the White House says. "Protests or acts of violence [that interfere with ICE] constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States," says the June 7 presidential order.

Some National Guard troops accompanied ICE agents on raids and Marines briefly detained a man outside a federal building. Near the end of last week, a federal judge ruled that Trump broke the law and must return National Guard troops to the control of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who criticizes the show of force as a "brazen abuse of power." He added in an address televised statewide: "We do not want our streets militarized by our own armed forces. . . . This isn't just about protests here in Los Angeles. When Donald Trump sought blanket authority to commandeer the National Guard, he made that order apply to every state in this nation." In L.A., Mayor Karen Bass describes the move as "an experiment to see what happens when the federal government intervenes and takes power away from a governor and mayor."

In ruling on a challenge filed by the state, Judge Charles Breyer said: "The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion.'" In his view, the president's commandeering of the guard was "illegal — both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution." That decision is on hold until a federal Appeals Court hearing Tuesday afternoon (June 17). In its legal response, the Trump administration defends sending troops: "The statute empowers the president to determine what forces 'he considers necessary' to 'suppress' a 'rebellion' or to 'execute' federal 'laws' — not the governor and not a federal court."

Separately last week, Texas announced plans to deploy 5,000 National Guard members and Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe, a Republican, activated his state's Guard "in the event that assistance is needed to support local law enforcement in protecting our citizens and communities." That prompted Boston College historian Heather Cox Richardson, to post: "It certainly appears as though militarization is no longer about deportations." The last time a president deployed troops against a governor's wishes was 60 years ago, when Lyndon Johnson mobilized the Alabama National Guard against the desire of George Wallace so that the federal government could protect civil rights marchers. The Constitution reserves police powers to the states. An 1878 law prohibits the federal government from using the military for domestic law enforcement, except in extreme situations such as invasion, riots or insurrection (anti-government rebellion). The Insurrection Act of 1792, which Trump has not used, lets the military be used for domestic law enforcement to restore order.

Trump says: "Violent insurrectionist mobs are swarming and attacking our federal agents to try and stop our deportation operations."

Governor says: "It clearly will not end here. Other states are next. Democracy is under assault right before our eyes. This moment we have feared has arrived." – Gavin Newsom of California in prime-time address June 10

Law professor says: "Military forces . . . on American streets should terrify all of us. . . . These troops are just pawns in Trump’s gambit to further consolidate his own power." – Joyce Vance, past federal prosecutor teaching at the University of Alabama