Legal Framework & Historical Context - The Posse Comitatus Act is a criminal prohibition on the US Armed Forces or federalized National Guard members from engaging in domestic law enforcement unless explicitly allowed by the Constitution or an act of Congress [7][8] - The Insurrection Act creates exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act, outlining specific scenarios where the military can be used for domestic purposes, such as suppressing an insurrection at the request of a governor or preserving civil rights when a state fails to do so [18][20][21] - The Tenth Amendment reserves police power to the states, emphasizing that domestic law enforcement is primarily a state and local responsibility, not a federal or military one [11][12] Concerns Regarding Military Use - Experts express concern that military personnel are trained for combat against foreign enemies with lethal force, which differs significantly from the rules of engagement for domestic law enforcement [13][14] - There are concerns about the safety of deploying armed military members on US streets due to the different rules of engagement they are trained for [15] - The government's attempt to use a technical provision (Title 10 Section 12406) to federalize the National Guard against the wishes of state governors has been challenged in court, with judges finding that the facts did not support the use of this provision [36][37] Title 32 Authority & Potential Loopholes - Title 32 of the US Code allows the President to use the National Guard for federal functions while they remain under the governor's control, meaning they are not subject to Posse Comitatus; some governors have voluntarily used this authority, while others have resisted [61][62][64] - The Department of Justice has argued in OLC memos that it does not violate Posse Comitatus to use the military to protect federal functions and federal property, though this has never been tested in court [43][44] International Operations & Use of Force - The US military has engaged in strikes against boats in the Caribbean Sea, claiming they were carrying drugs, but the legal authority for these actions is questionable, with some arguing it constitutes murder [83][87] - The government's theory is that the cartels are in an armed conflict with the United States, making them subject to the laws of war, but this justification is seen as dubious and potentially setting a dangerous precedent [91][92][93]

Legal & Judicial Analysis - A federal judge ruled President Trump's deployment of troops to patrol Americans is illegal, resembling an illicit bid to create a national police force [2] - The ruling is based on a 19th-century law, the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA), forbidding the president from using the army for general law enforcement unless expressly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress [4][5] - The judge found Trump appeared to have an illicit purpose of creating a national police force with the president as its chief, raising concerns about autocratic national police forces [6] - The judge noted that Trump's DOJ's argument is so extreme that the President could assert he's unable to enforce obscure tax laws and then use the federalized National Guard to execute a range of laws, including election laws [11] - Judges are sounding the alarm and trimming Trump's powers, as he vows to appeal the case [14] Political & Governmental Implications - The concern is that Trump would use military powers to interfere in the election itself or in the vote counting if he thinks he might lose [12] - Trump's effort to explore getting the military to seize voting machines was abandoned when Giuliani said it went too far [13][14] - The administration's approach of seizing powers, threatening to defy courts, and trying to run out the clock resulted in months of troops in the streets of LA before the setback [15] - Trump is threatening to send troops to other places like Chicago, indicating a goal of a personalized police state which other leaders have used to try to steal elections and end democracy [20] Societal Impact & Response - The Democratic governor of Illinois responded to the president's remarks, refusing to call him and asking him to send troops to Chicago [23] - The governor urges citizens to know their rights, film things that they see happening in their neighborhoods, and be loud, as authoritarians thrive on silence [23][24]

A federal judge has ruled that President Trump's use of the National Guard in Los Angeles this summer was illegal. In his 52-page ruling, federal judge Charles Brier says that Trump violated a 19th century law barring the use of soldiers as cops. The judge then warned the efforts to send troops into other cities could amount to quote creating a national police force with the president as its chief.Joining us now, former federal prosecutor and former lawyer with the Department of Justice and the National Sec ...