America has a law-and-order problem. It鈥檚 the president of the United States.
Damian Murphy
Throughout U.S. history, the best presidents sparingly sought to use federal forces not to exacerbate tensions but as a last resort to deescalate violence, protect constitutional rights and restore order. Whether Democrat or Republican, these presidents recognized that inflaming violence could lead to loss of life or destruction of property.聽
Yet in recent days, President Donald Trump induced chaos by overreaching in activating the National Guard and Marines. He did so聽 on questionable legal grounds in a state, California, that didn鈥檛 need or request them.聽Moreover, the open-ended nature of the administration鈥檚 order can be applied beyond Los Angeles.聽This clear power grab represents the long-held goal of a president who wants to use the military as his personal police force.聽聽
People are also reading…
U.S. history offers few cases where an American president activated National Guard troops over the objection of state authorities. We have to look abroad to find examples where a government unilaterally deployed the military against demonstrators.聽And those examples aren鈥檛 great.聽
Protests are erupting in Los Angeles and other cities, with streets filled with demonstrators clashing with police. The president deployed National Guard troops and Marines.
In 1989, China deployed its military to suppress demonstrations in Tiananmen Square.聽 In 2017, Venezuela鈥檚 government implemented Plan Zamora to mobilize its military in response to social and political protests.聽In 2021, the Burmese government used its military to crack down on protesters 鈥 a move that led to widespread violence. All three of these nations used the pretext of civil unrest to expand central government authority, resulting in civilian casualties.
To date, local authorities in Los Angeles have proven their ability to manage the situation on the ground. The Pentagon estimates the current deployment of military forces there will cost at least . Those resources would be better spent reimbursing local law enforcement for overtime costs related to protest response.
The administration鈥檚 claim that an insurrection and foreign invasion are happening is false, and California鈥檚 attorney general has asserted in a lawsuit that the president鈥檚 order is unlawful.聽All of this comes less than six months after Trump pardoned convicted seditionists for their violent attack on the 2020 vote count at the U.S. Capitol.聽So much for the law-and-order president.
Where are the champions of states鈥 rights as the authorities of the California governor and Los Angeles mayor are being trampled on? Before she was Trump's Homeland Security secretary, Kristi Noem聽聽last year that 鈥渇ederalizing the National Guard would be a direct attack on states鈥 rights.鈥 That was when Joe Biden was president and she was South Dakota's governor.聽
Republican Congressman Randy Weber of Texas also last year that usurping or federalizing the National Guard 鈥渘ot only constitutes an overstep but also flagrantly violates constitutional bounds.鈥 At the time, more than 20 House Republicans agreed with him.
While Noem and Weber鈥檚 amnesia may not be a surprise, their silence now exposes a critical point. The Trump administration is eager to exercise raw power to target immigrants in a Democratic-leaning state while doing far less to target businesses in conservative states such as South Dakota, which has meat-packing plants with migrant workers.聽
This is because the maelstrom Trump created is about much more than immigration.聽This is a president who sees an opportunity to reorder the use of power and potentially use it against U.S. citizens he dislikes.聽
As we鈥檝e seen elsewhere in history, these are the early, chilling moves of an authoritarian government. Unless the American public and its leaders are willing to call out Trump鈥檚 authoritarian actions on a bipartisan basis, we should expect to see continued expansion of these abuses of power. The American people must stand up before it鈥檚 too late.
