Connect with us

News

How and Where the National Guard Has Deployed to U.S. Cities

Published

on

How and Where the National Guard Has Deployed to U.S. Cities

Note: National Guard deployments to Chicago and Portland were temporarily blocked by a court order. Elements of the District of Columbia National Guard were activated and deployed to Washington, D.C.

Advertisement

The New York Times

Since taking office, President Trump has relied on the National Guard to help implement a sweeping agenda on crime and immigration, kicking off a blitz of deployments that have rattled cities, tested the limits of his legal authority, and drawn in the Supreme Court.

Advertisement

So far, Mr. Trump has called upon the military force to help stop illegal crossings at the southern border and staff immigration facilities; to guard federal property and personnel amid protests in Chicago, Los Angeles and Portland, Ore.; and to back crime-fighting efforts in Washington, D.C., and Memphis. He has done all this while publicly mulling similar actions in cities like Baltimore, New Orleans and San Francisco.

National Guard deployments to U.S. cities

Advertisement
  • Legal status
    Active

    Type of deployment
    Federal

    Date of deployment
    June 7
    Advertisement

    Max. number of troops
    4,100
  • Legal status
    Active

    Type of deployment
    Hybrid

    Date of deployment
    Aug. 11

    Max. number of troops
    2,500
  • Legal status
    Pending

    Type of deployment
    Federal
    Advertisement

    Date of deployment
    Sept. 28

    Max. number of troops
    400
  • Legal status
    Pending

    Type of deployment
    Federal

    Date of deployment
    Oct. 4

    Max. number of troops
    500
    Advertisement
  • Legal status
    Active

    Type of deployment
    Hybrid

    Date of deployment
    Oct. 10

    Max. number of troops
    150

Advertisement

Notes: The date of deployment corresponds to the date of the executive order or memorandum ordering the deployment of the National Guard. The number of troops deployed to each city is the maximum number of troops listed in the announcement or mentioned by public officials. The number of National Guard troops on the ground at any given time can fluctuate.

Who is in charge of National Guard deployments?

Advertisement

The deployments, which have provoked fierce lawsuits from state and local leaders, are not all on the same legal footing. The main difference, according to experts in armed forces law, comes down to who commands the Guard: the president, or the governor of an individual state.

Advertisement

Who approves the deployment? Governor Both president and governor President
Who commands the Guard? Governor Governor President
How is the Guard paid? State funds Federal funds Federal funds
Can the Guard perform law enforcement duties? Yes, unless prohibited by state law Yes, unless prohibited by state law No, with narrow exceptions

When called into action by a governor responding to a state-level emergency, the Guard serves under a status known as state active duty, under which there is no general prohibition against troops conducting law enforcement. In recent years, Guard members under that status have policed the southern border, patrolled New York City’s subway platforms and helped support crime-fighting efforts in Albuquerque.

Advertisement

But when deployed under the president’s command — typically, when called to train or fight overseas — National Guard troops become federalized and are subject to a section of the U.S. Code known as Title 10, the same laws governing other active-duty military branches.

Advertisement

Where National Guard troops have deployed under Title 10

Note: National Guard deployments to Chicago and Portland were temporarily blocked by a court order.

Advertisement

The New York Times

Crucially, troops under that status are forbidden, with narrow exceptions, from performing law enforcement under the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which came about after the federal government withdrew troops from the Southern states defeated in the Civil War.

Advertisement

In Chicago, Los Angeles and Portland, where Mr. Trump has deployed the Guard over governors’ objections, he has done so by placing the troops directly under federal control — itself a legally contentious move. As a result, troops’ activities there are largely restricted to guarding federal property.

A third status, known as Title 32, combines aspects of state and federal duty. In that hybrid designation, Guard troops remain under their governor’s command, but the deployment receives federal funding and comes at the request of the president or secretary of defense.

Advertisement

Where National Guard troops have deployed under Title 32

Advertisement

Advertisement

Note: Elements of the District of Columbia National Guard were activated and deployed to Washington, D.C.

The New York Times

Advertisement

In Memphis, where the governor is commanding the Guard mission at Mr. Trump’s urging, and in Washington, D.C., where the president has authority over the local Guard, troops have deployed under a hybrid status. Guard soldiers in those cities have more openly patrolled the streets, but they have so far steered clear of serving warrants or making arrests.

Military law experts say the distinction between those different deployment statuses is critical not only to what troops can do on the ground but also to how courts will weigh the legal questions posed by Mr. Trump’s rapid assumption of power.

“There is very little case law on all of this,” said Elizabeth Goitein, a senior director at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s law school, “partly because domestic deployment of the military has happened extremely sparingly in our nation’s history.”

Advertisement

What the courts say

In court, the Trump administration has argued that the president has broad authority to federalize the National Guard anywhere in the country, at any time, whenever he feels it is necessary to enforce the law or suppress disorder.

Advertisement

That power, federal lawyers say, extends from an obscure, rarely invoked statute that gives the president authority to federalize the force in times of rebellion, invasion or when the president is otherwise unable to enforce federal law.

But the Trump administration has gone further, arguing that the same statute grants the president a sweeping exemption from the Posse Comitatus Act, the law barring the use of federal soldiers for law enforcement. Presidents typically have had to invoke the Insurrection Act, an extreme step, to claim such an exemption.

Further complicating the issue are Mr. Trump’s moves to deploy the National Guard across state lines, a step usually taken only with the consent of all parties involved, said Mark Nevitt, an associate professor at Emory University School of Law.

Advertisement

Mr. Trump has pushed to deploy federalized Guard troops from Texas to Chicago, and troops from California to Portland, while several Republican governors have agreed to send troops under their command to Washington, D.C.

Advertisement

National Guard troops that have deployed to another state

Advertisement

Note: National Guard deployments to Chicago and Portland were temporarily blocked by a court order.

The New York Times

State leaders in California, Illinois and Oregon have contested the Trump administration’s arguments in court, and rulings so far have been divided. The administration has recently appealed to the Supreme Court in the Illinois case, setting the stage for a high-stakes decision that could shape how the Guard is used moving forward.

Advertisement

Officials in Tennessee and Washington, D.C., have also challenged the deployments to their cities.

Military law experts described Mr. Trump’s actions as a rarity in U.S. history, highlighting that the president’s aggressive maneuvering of federalized Guard troops comes in the face of protests far more subdued than the kind of mass unrest that has been used to justify their use in the past.

Advertisement

But Kevin Greene, a co-director of the University of Southern Mississippi’s Center for the Study of the National Guard, said it also strikes at a question dating back to the country’s earliest days, and the founders’ skepticism of a standing army on domestic soil.

“The history of the United States is about the pendulum swinging back and forth as it relates to the militia and the National Guard, as to who has authority over it, and who should,” he said.

Advertisement

News

Amid Iran War, Remembering the Losses From Another Middle East Conflict

Published

on

Amid Iran War, Remembering the Losses From Another Middle East Conflict

Over the past several days, as clouds darkened the sky over Arlington National Cemetery, familiar scenes played out: school children on field trips, tourists on guided tours and veterans wearing jackets and caps adorned with unit patches, walking in loose formations to visit military brethren lost in combat.

There have been at least 13 service members lost in the current conflict with Iran and it is unknown how many more may join the roll of the honored dead if a fragile cease-fire and potential peace deal fail.

The unknown dead of this and future wars has manifested at the cemetery, where an expansion is underway along the southern reaches of the grounds, adjacent to Section 60.

Far from the ceremonies of Memorial Day, Section 60 is where those lost in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars rest. The thousands of people who visit know the risks being faced by today’s military families through the loss they endured decades ago from another Middle East conflict.

Long before her son’s ashes were interred in Section 60, Sarah Vaughan thought of Memorial Day as just another three-day weekend, a calendar invite to head to the beach in the Tallahassee area where she grew up.

Advertisement

“Memorial Day was just a holiday. I knew the meaning of it, but I didn’t pay any attention to it,” Ms. Vaughan, 72, said in an interview from her Vail, Colo. home.

“But, boy, do I now,” she said.

Looking back, she said she realized that her son John S. Vaughan seemed destined for a military career. She remembered the schoolboy who sketched American flags into the corners of the school papers and always wore camouflage clothes around his hometown. Even his childhood TV favorites were The History Channel and The Military Channel, she said.

Ms. Vaughan described her son as “straight as an arrow,” doting on his younger sister Becca and looking after his single mother whenever he could. His independent spirit led him to hunt, thread his own lures for fly fishing and to get a pilot’s license.

John Vaughan joined the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and after graduation entered the U.S. Army.

Advertisement

By June 2006, he was a 2nd lieutenant deployed to Mosul, Iraq, when a sniper ended his life on patrol at age 23, Ms. Vaughan said.

Now, Ms. Vaughan said, she will visit military cemeteries or memorials when she travels and tries to thank those in uniform for being willing to stand up for American values and freedoms.

“I think about it more than just on Memorial Day. I think about it a lot, and I’m just so proud of the bravery and the camaraderie these people have,” she said.

Ms. Vaughan said she prayed for those who remain in harm’s way and offered a piece of advice to their families.

“Stand up straight,” she said, “and be so proud of what their children are doing.”

Advertisement

More than 20 years ago, in 2005, Patty Stubenhofer spent Memorial Day searching for answers as she stood in Section 60 holding her three children in front of the grave of their father and her husband, U.S. Army Capt. Mark Stubenhofer.

Military service had been a big part of her upbringing. Her father served in the Navy; her grandfathers were in the Air Force and Navy; and her grandmother joined the Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps.

Yet, she said, she did not fully realize the commitment of military life until she was married, experiencing the months apart because of training or deployments. Mrs. Stubenhofer said she also learned the pride and love of a country born of those sacrifices. Two decades later, she said, it is still hard to put that feeling into words.

Mark Stubenhofer was killed on Dec. 7, 2004, in a firefight in Baghdad, Iraq.

“I am living the military family’s worst nightmare and it doesn’t take a conflict for them to become a surviving family,” she said, referencing training accidents and other non-combat deaths. “There’s nothing I can say that can prepare anyone for this.”

Advertisement

“I spent my first Memorial Day as a military widow holding the hands of our three children,” she said, “searching for the right words to explain the significance of this day.”

Ensuing Memorial Day weekends were not spent at graveside ceremonies, but with other surviving military families at the TAPS Good Grief Camp, she said.

During those weekends, her son and two daughters were paired with a mentor and placed in groups with other children to learn how to process their grief. Now, her children are in their 20s and have become mentors for the program.

“To us now, every day is Memorial Day,” she said. “It’s knowing that he loved us and his country so much that he was willing to stand on the front line and sacrifice his life to protect us and our freedom. ”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Trump’s emerging plan to end Iran war draws criticism from hard-line Republicans

Published

on

Trump’s emerging plan to end Iran war draws criticism from hard-line Republicans

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s emerging deal to end the Iran war is drawing heavy criticism from some fellow Republicans who favor a harder line against the government in Tehran and fear a lost opportunity to finally rein in a longtime Mideast nemesis.

The deal the Republican president had said was “largely negotiated” has left a range of lawmakers, former Cabinet members and conservative analysts wondering aloud whether the terms as currently known will render the conflict all “for naught.”

READ MORE: Trump says not to rush as U.S. nears potential Iran deal

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said the president’s decision to strike Iran was the “most consequential” of his second term and that he should not let up now.

“If the result of all that is to be an Iranian regime — still run by Islamists who chant ‘death to America’ — now receiving billions of dollars, being able to enrich uranium & develop nuclear weapons, and having effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, then that outcome would be a disastrous mistake,” Cruz wrote Saturday on the social media platform X. It was in reaction to Trump’s update after he had spoken with the leaders of Israel and other U.S. allies in the region.

Advertisement

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who also is close to Trump, panned any deal that would leave Iran perceived as being a dominant force in the region and in which it would retain its ability to destroy oil infrastructure throughout the Gulf.

Sen. Roger Wicker, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, questioned the merit of a proposed 60-day ceasefire, saying it would be a “disaster.”

“Everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught!” said Wicker, R-Miss.

Trump says it will take time to ‘get it right’

Trump, who has said he only makes good deals and detests being seen as not having the upper hand in any negotiation, dismissed objections to a deal that he said was not “even fully negotiated yet.”

“So don’t listen to the losers, who are critical about something they know nothing about,” he said on his social media platform.

Advertisement

Trump said the deal he and his representatives are working out is “THE EXACT OPPOSITE” of a nuclear pact that Iran agreed to under the Democratic Obama administration. Trump pulled out of that agreement and has been trying to iron out a new one.

“Both sides must take their time and get it right. There can be no mistakes!” Trump said.

READ MORE: Trump says deal with Iran, including opening Strait of Hormuz, is ‘largely negotiated’

He added that a U.S. military blockade of Iranian ports would remain “in full force and effect until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed.”

Some support for Trump came from Capitol Hill, too.

Advertisement

GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, often a thorn in the president’s side, defended the White House’s approach.

“War virtually always ends with negotiations,” Paul wrote on X. “Critics of President Trump’s peace negotiations should give President Trump the space to find an American First solution.”

Under the proposal, the war would come to an end and Iran would reopen the strait and give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, with the details and timelines to be worked out during a later 60-day window, regional officials told The Associated Press on Sunday.

Critics air objections as details trickle out

Polls show the war, which began when the United States and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28, is unpopular with the American public and has cost U.S. taxpayers at least $29 billion, as of this month. Thirteen service members have been killed during the operation.

Trump initially said the war would be over in four weeks to six weeks, but the standoff continues. Iran’s closure of the strait, through which about 20% of global energy supplies transit, has jolted the world economy and sent prices for gasoline and other goods climbing.

Advertisement

READ MORE: Senate advances bill aimed at ending Iran war as Cassidy, after primary loss, flips to support it

Mike Pompeo, one of Trump’s first-term secretaries of state, asserted on Saturday that the emerging deal seemed to him to be the same as the Obama-era one from which Trump withdrew.

“Not remotely America First,” Pompeo said on X, prompting a profanity-laced rejoinder from Steven Cheung, the White House director of communications.

John Bolton, a national security adviser in the first term who has become a critic of the president, said the emerging plan details seemed to favor the Iranian government.

“If news reports about the impending Iran deal are correct, the ayatollahs will have won a significant victory,” Bolton wrote Sunday on X. “They will be back on the road to nuclear weapons, supporting global terrorism and repressing their own people.”

Advertisement

Rubio says a nuclear Iran is ‘not going to happen’

Secretary of State Marco Rubio pushed back on Sunday during a diplomatic mission in India, telling reporters at a news conference that no president has been stronger against Iran than Trump.

“His commitment to that principle that they’ll never have a nuclear weapon shouldn’t be questioned by anybody,” Rubio said. “And the idea that somehow this president, given everything he’s already proven he’s willing to do, is going to somehow agree to a deal that ultimately winds up putting Iran in a stronger position when it comes to nuclear ambitions is absurd. That’s just not going to happen.”

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, a Trump antagonist who had pushed legislation to restrain the president’s ability to wage war against Iran, told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that while the terms are not yet fully known, “if Lindsey Graham and Ted Cuz are crashing out last night, I’d say it’s probably a pretty good deal.”

Massie will leave Congress in January after incurring Trump’s wrath and losing his GOP primary last week to a Trump-backed challenger.

A free press is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy.

Advertisement

Support trusted journalism and civil dialogue.


Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Firefighters Still Working to Cool Garden Grove Chemical Tank

Published

on

Firefighters Still Working to Cool Garden Grove Chemical Tank

An industrial tank containing about 7,000 gallons of a highly flammable toxic chemical appears to have cracked, Southern California officials reported on Sunday. The development was interpreted as a possible sign that a catastrophic explosion or rupture might yet be averted as tens of thousands of evacuees waited to return home.

TJ McGovern, the interim fire chief of the Orange County Fire Authority, said in an update that firefighters conducted a “successful operation” on Saturday night to inspect the tank at a plant in Garden Grove that belongs to GKN Aerospace, a company based in the United Kingdom that manufactures aircraft components.

The container became increasingly pressurized on Thursday, heating the chemicals inside and releasing gas that could trigger an explosion. Firefighters responded, dousing the tank with copious amounts of water in an attempt to cool it. But GKN Aerospace’s team was unable to inject a neutralizing agent to reduce the chemical’s instability because of several failed valves.

“No one has ever had this situation before because the chemical is so volatile,” Chief McGovern said. He called the situation “unprecedented.”

The chemical inside the tank, methyl methacrylate, is used in the manufacture of resins and acrylic plastics, most notably plexiglass.

Advertisement

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, exposure to methyl methacrylate can irritate the eyes and skin and make it difficult to breathe, among other symptoms. Birth defects have appeared in animals exposed to the chemical.

On Saturday, local fire officials said the temperature inside the tank had risen more than 20 degrees and was still rising. By Sunday, it had reached at least 100 degrees.

There is fear of a “thermal runaway,” which could further generate heat, build pressure and cause a blast, said Elias Picazo, an assistant professor of chemistry at the University of California.

Alternatively, he said, a tank failure — in which the tank ruptures but does not necessarily explode — could lead to a controlled leak that could then be neutralized.

“I think the temperature within the tank has been steadily increasing and that’s indicative that the reaction is moving forward,” he said.

Advertisement

It is possible, officials said on Saturday, that the increase in temperature is occurring because the liquid inside the tank is solidifying. If so, and if the tank holds, that could make a rupture less likely.

A specialized team of officials from the fire departments in Los Angeles, San Bernardino County, Orange County and Long Beach were working on alternative solutions to prevent the tank from breaching, Chief McGovern said on Sunday. He did not provide details.

In a video posted to social media on Sunday, he said the team had found a potential crack in the tank, which might relieve some of the internal pressure.

“With this new information, it could change our trajectory and our strategy to this event,” he said.

Senator Thomas J. Umberg, a state legislator who represents the area, said that “several courageous firefighters” had discovered the small crack last night at about 8:30 p.m., after approaching the tank to adjust the water being sprayed on it.

Advertisement

The firefighters, he said, got close enough to the tanks to see that the internal temperature had hit at least 100 degrees, the maximum level that the gauges would register.

But no liquid was leaking from the crack, he said, which emergency responders interpreted as “a slight bit of good news.”

Mr. Picazo had said that the potential of the chemical solidifying would be an “ideal” but “unpredictable” outcome. “Then you have a lot of time to figure out what the best approach would be to open the tank and quench the remaining active material,” he said.

The fire authority said in another post that areas outside of the evacuation zone were considered “completely safe” and that daily activities could continue as normal.

​​Gov. Gavin Newsom of California declared a state of emergency in Orange County on Saturday. More than 40,000 residents in the surrounding areas are under evacuation orders, and officials have become increasingly concerned that some may be prematurely attempting to return home.

Advertisement

“We have a lot of citizens displaced and, when it’s safe to do, one of the things we want to do is to get them back in their homes,” Chief McGovern said in a phone interview.

Erika Ocana, who lives about a five-minute walk from the plant, evacuated on Friday with her four children, three dogs and a cat.

“I’m just thinking, like, what about the ones that are really close to it, what about the houses, what’s going to happen?” she said.

In a video posted to Facebook, Dr. Jason Low of the South Coast Air Quality Management District detailed the air measurements being taken in the community near the facility.

On Friday, the regional agency had begun measuring pollutant levels around the evacuation zone. Dr. Low said officials were “happy to report that levels are completely normal in our measurements.”

Advertisement

That agency has worked with the E.P.A. to deploy 24 monitors to continue the air measurements.

“We’re happy to report we have not seen any contaminants in those monitoring stations and we’ll continue to do that until the scene is secure,” said Harry Allen, an on-scene coordinator for the E.P.A.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending