Some good-government groups have made their first tangible move to align their cause with protesters nationwide — pressing for 10,000 allies to decry "the unthinkable" use of the military to quell demonstrations.
President Trump has ordered National Guard troops to begin withdrawing from the nation's capital, responding to the widespread condemnation of his use of force to drive protesters away from the White House and his threatening to have troops put down demonstrations in other cities. Some of the rebukes came from current and former military leaders.
But the organizers of the petition drive say it is important to galvanize sentiment against any return of the armed forces to the streets — which they say would trample democracy not only by violating protesters' free speech rights but also by shredding the balance of power.
"Our cities are not a 'battlespace' to be dominated by our military and our citizens' constitutional rights cannot be infringed upon for a photo op," says the petition, which calls on Defense Secretary Mark Esper and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Mark Milley, to refuse any order "to turn the U.S. military against American citizens."
The groups started circulating their document online over the weekend, gathering 2,000 signatures as a week of protests against racial injustice and excessive policing spread across the country and were almost completely peaceful.
The groups backing the effort are the Renew Democracy Initiative, Protect Democracy, the Niskanen Center, Freedom House, Third Way, Stand Up Republic and the Lubetzky Family Foundation.
This week, the coalition will begin its digital media campaign to share the petition more widely and rally public support around this issue. The tentative goal is at least 10,000 signatures.
"The use of military might to quell peaceful protests is a tool of dictatorships like Russia or China that rule by terror and force," said RDI Chairman Garry Kasparov, the former world chess champion, adding that his organization will do "whatever it can to ensure that America sticks to rule of law."
Most notably, the troops had used chemical irritants and flash-bang grenades to clear peaceful protesters outside the White House for a photo opportunity by the president. National Guard helicopters flew low over demonstrators to scatter them and active-duty troops were summoned to just outside the capital.
On Sunday the president said the National Guard soldiers would withdraw "now that everything is under perfect control." But, he added on Twitter, "They will be going home, but can quickly return, if needed."
Claim: President Trump has the rights to invoke the Insurrection Act. Fact check: True
Bing Xiao, Medill School"I am mobilizing all federal and local resources, civilian and military, to protect the rights of law-abiding Americans."
"If a city or state refuses to take the actions necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them."
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said at a briefing June 1 that President Trump has the prerogative to invoke the Insurrection Act to resolve violent protests that broke out in support of George Floyd across the nation.
According to the definition from the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School, the Insurrection Actt, adopted in 1807, authorizes the president, at the request of a state government, to federalize the National Guard and to use the remainder of the Armed Forces to suppress an insurrection against that state's government. It further allows for the president to do the same in a state without the explicit consent of a state's government if it becomes impracticable to enforce federal laws through ordinary proceedings or if states are unable to safeguard its inhabitants' civil rights. However, the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the government from using military forces to act as a police force within U.S. borders.
Governors prefer relying on National Guardsmen to de-escalate the tensions.
On Wednesday, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said he does not support invoking the Insurrection Act and using active-duty military forces to deal with the unrest in U.S. cities — a statement that puts him at odds with his boss.
A golden tray sits on the Resolute Desk as President Donald Trump speaks during an announcement on American nuclear innovation in the Oval Office at the White House on July 24, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump is signing multiple executive orders targeting the nuclear energy sector and easing rules for new reactors and nuclear fuel supply chains.
Trump’s hubris rivals the fallen heroes of ancient Greek mythology
In January, the New York Times asked President Donald Trump if there were any limits on his global powers.
“Yeah,” the president responded, “there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
That was eight months ago, but fortunately Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation of “The Odyssey” has made ancient Greek literature newly relevant. Before that window closes, I’d like to talk about hubris.
Today, the term mostly means excessive pride or arrogance. That’s part of what the Greeks meant by it too, but the meaning was a bit richer and more specific. Hubris was an insolent or outrageous act that offended the gods, often because the transgressor was claiming abilities or authorities that solely belonged to supreme beings.
Nolan renamed and slightly modified the concept of xenia for the film, calling it “Zeus’ law.” In the director’s telling, mortals should follow the rules laid out by the gods, specifically the requirement to treat strangers with respect lest they be gods in disguise.
In a sense, hubris is the opposite, or at least the rejection, of xenia. The hubris of the suitors, and at times Odysseus himself, invites punishment by the gods and their mortal instruments.
Which brings me back to Donald Trump. His claim that there are no constraints on his personal power to dictate events on the global stage was one of the greatest expressions of hubris ever uttered by a political leader.
Trump’s claim was obviously false when he made it.
He vowed that he could end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours. He’s proved powerless to make that happen. If he had divine powers to work his will, why would he have balked at implementing his tariffs so often that Wall Street adopted the “TACO trade” term for his deals? “TACO” stands for “Trump always chickens out.”
And why would Trump have made so many embarrassing concessions to China — from rescinding tariffs on Chinese goods to allowing them to buy crucial and incredibly valuable computer chips?
But Trump saw his success at capturing Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro as proof of his ability to launch missiles to the same effect as Zeus’ lightning bolts. Trump believed he was the most powerful man who ever lived.
This is no exaggeration. In March, when the Iran invasion seemed successful, Trump gave a document penned by“Presidential Historian David King” to New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan purporting to prove that Trump was “the most powerful person to have EVER walked this planet.” King was, in fact, a businessman and occasional caddy for legendary golfer Gary Player.
King compared Trump favorably to many of history’s most powerful, and often heinous, figures: Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, William the Conqueror, Napoleon Bonaparte, Joseph Stalin, Genghis Khan, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler and Vladimir Lenin. Many of these men thought they were the most powerful person in the world, too. And many were defeated precisely because they believed it.
At least Napoleon and Hitler had a string of truly impressive victories before they learned the folly of hubris. The limits on Trump’s power have been exposed by far less august forces than the combined might of the allies in World War II or the fearsome Russian winter.
Iran is a comparatively middling power. But the regime’s ability to absorb punishment while imposing its will on the Strait of Hormuz has proved to be a greater constraint on Trump’s power than his morality or mind. We should note that, at least rhetorically, his morality has not proved much of a constraint. He has repeatedly promised to destroy Iranian “civilization” if the regime refuses to capitulate.
But they haven’t — and won’t anytime soon — because the regime’s tolerance for pain far outstrips Trump’s. The combined fear of skyrocketing oil prices, outrage of Gulf state potentates, diminishing weapon supplies and domestic unpopularity is doing the work that international law, congressional oversight and the collective opinion of foreign policy experts can’t or won’t do.
If I considered Trump more heroic than reason and facts could allow, I would say his Sisyphean predicament has the whiff of Greek tragedy to it. Trump is vexed by the fact that the Iranians won’t honor deals or ratify his countless premature claims of victory — giving new meaning to his vow that his presidency would make people tired of winning. It’s almost like they’re out-Trumping Trump.
Things might have gone better if he’d heeded that great Greek tragedian Sophocles: “For Zeus utterly abhors the boasts of a proud tongue.”
____
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.