Members of the National Guard patrol near the U.S. Capitol on Oct. 1 in Washington, D.C.
Al Drago/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Al Drago/Getty Images
President Trump’s deployments of National Guard troops to U.S. cities have outraged his political rivals, tested legal precedents and led to nationwide protests.
The courts are weighing in on their legality. But — if successful — they could also fulfill a long-running administration goal of employing America’s military to aid in the mass deportation of immigrants without legal status, according to an NPR review of past comments from Trump and his allies. It’s a move that would stray significantly from past federal use of the Guard, challenging laws that dictate how the U.S. military can be used domestically. And with the 2026 midterms looming, some experts worry Guard troops could even be used as a tool of systemic voter suppression and intimidation.
Trump has sent troops into four Democratic-led cities and threatened to send them to several more, claiming they are needed to crack down on crime and protect federal immigration facilities and officers. Those deployments, and the White House’s rhetoric around them, have regularly conflated violent crime and illegal immigration into a single crisis, blurring the lines around the role of the Guard and federal agents.
Taken one at a time, the deployments can seem random or fickle — Trump will often muse about sending troops into a city, only to back track his comments and focus on a different city days later.
But the president and several others in his inner circle — most notably Stephen Miller, a senior aide to Trump in his first term, and now Trump’s right hand man on immigration — have long talked about using the National Guard to help with mass deportations and immigration raids, despite U.S. laws broadly preventing the military from being used for domestic policing. To get around those laws, both Trump and Miller have talked about invoking the Insurrection Act, which allows the president to deploy the military within the U.S. in certain situations.
Legal experts, activists and watchdog groups worry the Trump administration could fundamentally change the way the military is used on U.S. soil, specifically raising concerns about the upcoming 2026 midterm elections and what armed troops on the streets could mean as voters cast ballots.
Laying the groundwork
Much of Trump’s campaign ahead of the 2024 election was focused on drumming up anti-immigrant sentiment and pushing his plan for mass deportations. He vowed several times on the campaign trail that he would launch the largest deportation operation in American history.
In his first term, Trump and his administration had similar ambitions, but struggled to scale up infrastructure and manpower needed to carry out the goal.
In a TIME Magazine interview in April of 2024, then-candidate Trump was asked specifically if his plan included the use of the U.S. military.
“I can see myself using the National Guard and, if necessary, I’d have to go a step further. We have to do whatever we have to do to stop the problem we have,” Trump responded.
Using the National Guard for immigration enforcement is an idea that Miller had talked about publicly in the years before.
White House Deputy Chief of Staff for policy and U.S. Homeland Security Adviser Stephen Miller speaks after President Trump signed an order sending National Guard to Memphis, in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on September 15, 2025.
Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images
In 2023, Miller appeared on the late right-wing activist Charlie Kirk’s podcast to talk about how mass deportations under Trump’s hopeful second term could work.
“In terms of personnel, you go to the red state governors, and you say, give us your National Guard. We will deputize them as immigration enforcement officers,” Miller explained. “The Alabama National Guard is going to arrest illegal aliens in Alabama, and the Virginia National Guard in Virginia.”
Miller doesn’t specify how that would be legal — under U.S. law, the military can’t be used for domestic policing unless authorized by the Constitution or Congress. For Democratic-run states that don’t comply, Miller said, the federal government would simply send the National Guard from a nearby Republican-run state.
The deployments
In recent months, the Trump administration has deployed Guard troops to states against the wishes of their Democratic governors — including sending troops from Texas into Illinois. The administration said their purpose was to protect federal immigration facilities and officers. Those deployments are tied up in court challenges.
Members of the Texas National Guard stand guard at an army reserve training facility on October 07, 2025 in Elwood, Illinois.
Scott Olson/Getty Images North America
hide caption
toggle caption
Scott Olson/Getty Images North America
Miles Taylor, former chief of staff in the Department of Homeland Security during Trump’s first term, worked closely with Miller. He’s since become a vocal critic of the president and his policies.
Taylor says he’s not surprised to see Miller’s plan coming to fruition.
“Trump was deeply deferential to Stephen and I think you’ve seen that with a vastly more empowered Stephen Miller in a second term,” says Taylor, an author and commentator.
Taylor says that during Trump’s first term, the president wasn’t talking publicly about using the U.S. military for immigration enforcement, but it was something that was discussed behind closed doors.
Miles Taylor, former chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security during President Trump’s first term, holds up his phone outside of the U.S. courthouse in Alexandria, Va., ahead of the arraignment hearing for former FBI director James Comey on Oct. 8
Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images
“I can remember in meetings with him in the Oval Office, or on Air Force One, or at the border, him starting to bring up this idea of using the United States military to solve the problem,” he says.
It wasn’t something that Trump just talked about. In 2017, The Associated Press reported on a memo it obtained from DHS, outlining a draft proposal to use the National Guard to round up unauthorized immigrants throughout the U.S. At the time, the White House denied it, saying there was no such plan.
Taylor says there very much was — but it was also more than that.
“It was the invocation of the Insurrection Act to deputize the military to enforce domestic law to basically become a domestic police force,” he says, noting that this particular idea was something that troubled him and several other staffers.
“It rocked us to our core,” he says.
Trump invoking the Insurrection Act would legally allow for the military to act as police on U.S. soil — to carry out immigration enforcement, but possibly other enforcement too, according to legal experts.
NPR asked the White House about potential plans to deputize the Guard for law enforcement and to use the Insurrection Act, but it did not directly respond to those questions, instead criticizing Taylor and NPR. Spokeswoman Abigail Jackson also referenced Trump’s “highly successful operations to drive down violent crime in American cities.”
Project 2025
The broader themes of these National Guard deployments are also embedded in Project 2025, a conservative action plan written by the Heritage Foundation after Trump’s first term that’s more than 900 pages long.
Trump has incorporated many of its policies, and authors into his second administration. So much so that the report’s architect, Russell Vought, is the head of the White House’s Office of Management and Budget.
Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget, in September.
Dominic Gwinn/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty
hide caption
toggle caption
Dominic Gwinn/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty
Matt Dallek, a professor at The George Washington University who studies the American conservative movement, says that Project 2025 essentially opens the door for Trump’s National Guard deployments — particularly to Democratic-led cities — without explicitly calling for them.
“The subtext of Project 2025 is to take any and all steps at the executive level to go into cities and states to enact the priority — which is to root out illegal immigration,” Dallek says.
The idea of bullying states and cities into following orders from the president is a key part of the text, says David Graham, a journalist for The Atlantic who also wrote a book on the project. So is the use of the military.
“There is this idea in Project 2025, and among the authors, that the military is just an underused resource for policing immigration,” Graham says, noting that often illegal immigration is presented as a national security problem. He says the report’s authors believe that the U.S. has “this huge, huge resource of armed people, and we’re not doing anything with it, and we need to use it to secure the border.”
Beyond mass deportation
In recent weeks, Trump has talked about invoking the Insurrection Act often, especially in regard to deploying the National Guard. Earlier this month, he said that he was “allowed” to invoke it if the courts deny his deployments in places like Portland, Ore., or Chicago, where prosecutors and federal judges have questioned the need for troops on the ground.
Trump invoking the Insurrection Act to allow troops to help with immigration enforcement is also something that Stephen Miller has talked about.
He told the New York Times back in 2023: “President Trump will do whatever it takes.”
That possibility has both legal experts and immigration advocates worried, especially about the implications it could have for Americans at large.
Kica Matos, president of the National Immigration Law Center, an immigration rights advocacy group, says it has her worried about the upcoming 2026 midterm elections and what the presence of troops might mean for voters as they cast ballots.
“What I have said repeatedly is that the path to authoritarianism in this country is being built on the backs of immigrants. They will begin with immigrants. They will not end with immigrants,” she says.
