【环时深度】从洛杉矶骚乱看美国联邦政府与各州“权力的游戏”

Core Viewpoint - The tensions arising from the Los Angeles riots are spreading to other U.S. cities, highlighting the ongoing conflict between federal and state government powers, particularly regarding the deployment of the National Guard without state consent [1][6]. Group 1: Federal and State Government Dynamics - The conflict between the federal government and state governments has intensified, with the Trump administration's deployment of National Guard troops in California being a focal point of contention [1][6]. - California's Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta are suing the federal government, claiming the deployment of National Guard troops without local consent infringes on state rights [6]. - The political polarization in the U.S. is evident, with Democratic governors supporting California's stance against the federal government, while Republican leaders generally support the federal actions [6][7]. Group 2: Military Deployment and Legal Framework - As of March 2023, the U.S. has approximately 1.32 million active-duty military personnel, with the majority stationed domestically [2]. - The National Guard in the U.S. consists of over 430,000 members, with California having the largest contingent at about 24,000 [3]. - The Insurrection Act allows the President to deploy federal troops domestically under certain conditions, although the use of federal troops for domestic law enforcement is generally prohibited [3][4]. Group 3: Political Implications and Historical Context - The last invocation of the Insurrection Act was during the 1992 Los Angeles riots, where federal troops were deployed at the request of local authorities [4]. - The current situation reflects a broader trend of increasing federal power at the expense of state authority, with historical precedents of federal intervention during civil rights movements [8][10]. - The ongoing conflicts between federal and state governments are reshaping the political landscape, leading to a "blue state versus red state" dynamic, particularly on issues like immigration and abortion [8][9].