National Guard Mobilized Without Governor Approval in LA \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ President Donald Trump deployed National Guard troops and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles to suppress protests—against Governor Gavin Newsom’s wishes. He followed that with a highly politicized rally at Fort Bragg, raising alarms over military neutrality. Courts have since ruled the National Guard deployment illegal, signaling pushback against unchecked executive power.
Quick Looks
- Unilateral deployment: Trump ordered National Guard and Marines into Los Angeles amid protests, bypassing Gov. Newsom.
- Political theater: A Trump campaign-style rally at Fort Bragg featured cheering troops, sparking concerns over politicizing the military.
- Court ruling: A federal judge found the Guard’s deployment violated the law; appeals court temporarily froze that decision.
- Historical precedent: First unauthorized National Guard use since LBJ’s 1965 Alabama intervention.
- Institutional politicization: Trump’s administration has extended political influence over multiple federal agencies.
- Parade controversy: Upcoming D.C. Army parade looms, drawing criticism—even as polls show cost concerns outweigh partisan support.
Deep Look
In a week of high-stakes controversy, President Donald Trump executed a series of moves that critics say pushed the boundaries of executive power, inflamed partisan divides, and politicized America’s most trusted institution—the military. It began with Trump’s unilateral mobilization of the California National Guard and deployment of U.S. Marines into Los Angeles, where immigration protests had escalated. Ignoring opposition from California Governor Gavin Newsom, Trump justified the move by claiming the state government had “lost control” and was failing to uphold federal law.
This deployment marked the first time since 1965—when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to enforce civil rights laws in Alabama—that the National Guard was used without a governor’s consent. Governor Newsom immediately challenged the action in federal court, calling it an unconstitutional power grab and accusing Trump of acting “like a tyrant.” The situation escalated rapidly, setting off alarms among legal experts, military leaders, and political scholars.
On Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge Charles R. Breyer ruled that the president had violated federal law barring domestic military use unless in cases of rebellion or invasion. Breyer emphasized that peaceful protests against government policy, protected by the First Amendment, do not constitute rebellion. He ordered the National Guard to be returned under state control. However, that ruling was paused by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals pending a full hearing, creating a temporary legal limbo.
What followed only intensified scrutiny. Trump traveled to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and held a campaign-style rally on the base—flanked by uniformed soldiers cheering his speech. He used the occasion to blast California’s leadership, President Joe Biden, and Democrats broadly. The setting raised red flags about the president using active military personnel as political props, further blurring lines between government functions and political campaigning.
Many experts say the rally reflects a broader trend under Trump’s renewed presidency: the systematic politicization of federal institutions. Since returning to power, Trump has reshaped top military leadership, firing the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other senior commanders seen as insufficiently loyal. His administration has also reportedly directed agencies like the FCC to investigate media outlets he disapproves of and the DOJ to launch probes into political opponents, including Democratic Party figures and election officials from 2020.
The upcoming military parade in Washington, D.C., scheduled for Saturday, has come under particular scrutiny. Ostensibly organized to commemorate the U.S. Army’s 250th anniversary, the parade coincides with Trump’s 79th birthday. Though Army leaders have worked to distance the event from politics, critics argue its symbolism is impossible to ignore. “No matter how much effort goes into depoliticizing the parade, the optics are unmistakable,” said Carrie Ann Lee, senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund.
A movement called “No Kings” has organized protests around the event, highlighting fears of authoritarianism. Trump, however, has dismissed those concerns, laughing off the movement’s message during a White House appearance: “I don’t feel like a king—I have to go through hell to get stuff approved.”
Legal scholars and military ethicists have voiced growing concern. William Banks, a national security law expert, noted that deploying soldiers and Marines in law enforcement roles is corrosive to democracy. “They’re trained to kill enemies, not police American citizens,” he said. The danger, according to many, is the militarization of civic spaces and the transformation of the military from a neutral force into a partisan instrument.
Meanwhile, public opinion remains sharply divided. An Associated Press–NORC poll found that 60% of Americans oppose the military parade due to its cost, while views of Trump’s use of military power fall along party lines. A majority of Republicans support his actions; most independents and Democrats strongly oppose them. In a separate April 2025 poll, more than half of Americans said Trump wields “too much” power, yet only 23% of Republicans agreed.
Trump’s critics argue this is part of a long pattern. During his first term, he attempted to overturn the 2020 election, falsely claiming it was rigged. Upon returning to office, he issued pardons to over 1,000 people convicted for their roles in the January 6 Capitol attack. Leaked documents from that time included a draft executive order directing the military to seize voting machines—an order that would have involved the Secretary of Defense.
The courts, so far, have served as a check. As political scientist Kurt Weyland put it, “The courts have been the main line of defense.” But the endurance of democratic institutions may hinge on how effectively those courts can continue to push back—especially as Trump seeks to consolidate control over the federal government and its levers of enforcement.
Looking ahead, the implications are profound. The use of the military for domestic enforcement, politicized rallies on military bases, and symbolic shows of power like the parade all suggest a shift in how executive power is wielded—and perceived. Whether these developments are outliers or signposts for a more permanent transformation remains the question shaping the future of American democracy.
National Guard Mobilized National Guard Mobilized National Guard Mobilized
You must Register or Login to post a comment.