Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Just the Facts: Standoff Between National Guard and L.A. Protesters

News

Just the Facts: Standoff Between National Guard and L.A. Protesters

Protesters stand off with National Guard soldiers and police outside the Metropolitan Detention Center, MDC on June 08, 2025 in Los Angeles, California.

Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images

LOS ANGELES, CA - California National Guard troops began to arrive in Los Angeles Sunday on the orders of President Donald Trump despite the state's governor's objections, where protests led to clashes between immigration authorities and demonstrators.

Governor Gavin Newsom sharply criticized the move as inflammatory and unnecessary. "The federal government is sowing chaos so they can have an excuse to escalate. That is not the way any civilized country behaves.


Newsom urged protesters to remain calm. "Don’t give Trump what he wants," Newsom wrote on social media.

“We’ll send whatever we need to make sure there’s law and order,” Trump said about sending troops to Los Angeles. “Last night (Saturday) in Los Angeles, we watched it very closely; there was a lot of violence there, and it could have got much worse.”

The unrest began on Friday when law enforcement officials in full riot gear arrived in Los Angeles to detain day laborers at a building supply shop. This operation was part of a broader enforcement initiative by the Trump administration aimed at addressing issues related to undocumented immigration.

So, when can a president deploy the National Guard? Here is the answer and more in the latest edition of Just the Facts:

The President can deploy the National Guard directly under the Insurrection Act, but only in specified situations.

The Insurrection Act of 1807 allows the President to federalize the National Guard and deploy it on US soil when:

  • The US is invaded or in danger of invasion
  • There is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the US government
  • The President is unable to execute the laws of the United States with regular forces.

Did Trump invoke the Insurrection Act?

In response to the outbreak of protests in Los Angeles, President Trump did not invoke the Insurrection Act but instead referenced a specific provision of the U.S. Code on Armed Services, which allows for the federal command of National Guard troops in the event of "a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority" of the United States.

However, the law also stipulates that such orders should be issued through the governors of the states, raising questions about Trump's legal authority to bypass Governor Newsom.

Examples of National Guard deployments by presidents

  • 1965: President Lyndon B. Johnson deployed the National Guard to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators.
  • 1968: The Martin Luther King Jr. Assassination Riots prompted the federalization of the National Guard in several cities.
  • 1970: The New York Postal Strike led to the deployment of the National Guard to assist with postal operations.
  • 1992: President George H.W. Bush deployed the National Guard to Los Angeles after riots following the acquittal of police officers in the Rodney King beating case.
  • 2020: In the wake of protests following the killing of George Floyd, National Guard troops were deployed in some states.

Calls for reform

In 2022, the Brennan Center for Justice submitted a proposal to the House committee investigating the January 6 Capitol attack, advocating for reforms to the Insurrection Act. The aim of these reforms is to clarify ambiguous language and update the Act to address contemporary issues.

The Brennan Center identified specific sections that require clarification, including the criteria under which the President can invoke the Act, which states that "any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy" is acceptable grounds.

The Center contends that this language is overly broad and could be interpreted in a way that allows the President to use the Act to respond to various forms of conspiracy, including protests or minor criminal acts, with active-duty military forces.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum. He is the publisher of the Latino News Network and an accredited Solutions Journalism and Complicating the Narratives trainer with the Solutions Journalism Network.



Read More

How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change

Claiming Contested Values

FrameWorks Institute

How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change

Claiming Contested Values: How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change, produced by the FrameWorks Institute, explores how widely shared yet politically contested values can be used to strengthen public support for systemic reform. Values are central to how advocates communicate the importance of their work, and they can motivate collective action toward big, structural changes. This has become especially urgent in a climate where executive orders are targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, and some nonprofits are being labeled as threats based on their stated missions. Many civil society organizations are now grappling with how to communicate their values effectively and safely.

The report focuses on Fairness, Stability, and Freedom because they resonate across the U.S. public and are used by communicators across the political spectrum. Unlike values more closely associated with one ideological camp — such as Tradition on the right or Solidarity on the left — these three values are broadly recognizable but highly contested. Each contains multiple variants, and their impact depends on how clearly advocates define them and how they are paired with specific issues.

Keep ReadingShow less
America’s Human Rights Reports Face A Reckoning Ahead of Feb. 25th
black and white labeled bottle
Photo by Markus Spiske on Unsplash

America’s Human Rights Reports Face A Reckoning Ahead of Feb. 25th

The Trump administration has already moved to erase evidence of enslavement and abuse from public records. It has promoted racially charged imagery attacking Michelle and Barack Obama. But the anti-DEI campaign does not stop at symbolic politics or culture-war spectacle. It now threatens one of the United States’ most important accountability tools: the State Department’s annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices.

Quiet regulatory changes have begun to hollow out this vital instrument, undermining America’s ability to document abuse, support victims, and hold perpetrators to account. The next reports are due February 25, 2026. Whether they appear on time—and what may be scrubbed or withheld—remains an open question.

Keep ReadingShow less
Reducing the Influence of Money in Presidential Politics is Within Our Reach, from where we Least Expect it: the Electoral College

American flag funnel with money

Illustration provided

Reducing the Influence of Money in Presidential Politics is Within Our Reach, from where we Least Expect it: the Electoral College

Reducing the influence of money pouring into presidential politics since the 2010 Citizens United decision may actually be possible by addressing the "winner-take-all" (WTA) structure of the Electoral College. By changing how electoral votes are allocated, the incentive to concentrate money in a few swing states could be reduced.

The winner-take-all (WTA) feature of the Electoral College narrows the focus of massive campaign expenditures in a “Funnel Effect”* to a handful of closely divided battleground states. Because candidates have little to gain from spending in states where they are comfortably ahead or hopelessly behind, they concentrate all their financial resources on 15 or 16 states, or in some cycles, as few as seven key swing states. All this could change if the "battleground state" phenomenon were taken away from the wealthy, as the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) would accomplish.

Keep ReadingShow less