Trump Withdraws National Guard from Cities, Legal Battle Ensues
President Trump announced the withdrawal of National Guard troops from Los Angeles, Portland, and Chicago, following a Supreme Court ruling that questioned his authority to deploy them for domestic law enforcement.
He stated that the decision was based on decreased crime rates in these cities. However, California Governor Gavin Newsom attributed the troop removal to recent court victories that affirmed state control over the National Guard, labeling Trump’s earlier deployment as illegal.
“We’ve always maintained that using the National Guard in this way was against the law,” Newsom said, urging for the quick return of the troops to their families.
This legal clash intensified when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the president can only deploy troops domestically in “exceptional” circumstances. This ruling marked a significant shift in a long-standing debate over presidential powers during times of unrest, especially concerning immigration enforcement.
In June, Governor Newsom filed a lawsuit after Trump sent nearly 2,000 troops to Los Angeles against his wishes. Most troops returned home in August, but about 300 remained under federal control. Newsom criticized the deployment as unnecessary, costing taxpayers nearly $120 million.
In December, a federal judge ruled that Trump had overstepped his authority. He noted that allowing indefinite federal control of Guard units would disrupt the balance between state and federal power. Similar cases in Oregon and Illinois are also making their way through the courts.
Public opinion surrounding the deployment has been mixed. Some citizens felt that the National Guard was necessary to maintain peace. Yet, many expressed concerns about using military forces in civilian areas and the impact on civil liberties. Recent statistics showed that while tensions rose during protests, violent crime and property crime in Los Angeles dropped by about 8% this year.
Congress has begun to examine military deployments more closely, acknowledging the potential for overreach. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem claimed that without the National Guard, Los Angeles could have been in chaos.
Trump echoed this sentiment on his social media platform, insinuating that crime could surge again. However, data indicates that the troops mostly protected federal buildings rather than engaging with the public.
Attorney General Rob Bonta criticized the military’s use in Los Angeles, arguing it undermined constitutional rights. He emphasized the separation of military and civilian roles, a principle vital to maintaining democracy.
This legal struggle reflects broader concerns over the executive branch’s power, highlighting the need for checks and balances in a democracy. As these discussions continue, communities across America are watching closely.
