🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened to invoke the Act of Insurrection, a statute that authorizes the commander-in-chief to deploy armed forces on US soil. This action is seen as a approach to manage the deployment of the national guard as judicial bodies and state leaders in cities under Democratic control keep hindering his initiatives.

But can he do that, and what are the implications? Here’s what to know about this long-standing statute.

Understanding the Insurrection Act

This federal law is a US federal law that provides the chief executive the ability to deploy the armed forces or bring under federal control National Guard units inside the US to quell internal rebellions.

This legislation is commonly referred to as the 1807 Insurrection Act, the year when President Jefferson signed it into law. Yet, the current act is a combination of statutes passed between 1792 and 1871 that define the duties of American troops in civilian policing.

Generally, the armed forces are restricted from performing civilian law enforcement duties against American citizens except in emergency situations.

The act enables troops to participate in domestic law enforcement activities such as detaining suspects and executing search operations, functions they are usually barred from performing.

A legal expert noted that national guard troops are not permitted to participate in routine policing unless the chief executive initially deploys the Insurrection Act, which authorizes the use of armed forces within the country in the instance of an uprising or revolt.

This move heightens the possibility that military personnel could employ lethal means while performing protective duties. Moreover, it could act as a harbinger to additional, more forceful force deployments in the coming days.

“There’s nothing these units are permitted to undertake that, like law enforcement agents targeted by these demonstrations could not do independently,” the expert stated.

Past Deployments of the Insurrection Act

The statute has been invoked on numerous times. This and similar statutes were utilized during the civil rights era in the 1960s to safeguard activists and students desegregating schools. The president sent the 101st Airborne Division to Arkansas to guard Black students entering Central High after the governor mobilized the national guard to block their entry.

Following that period, however, its application has become highly infrequent, as per a study by the Congressional Research Service.

Bush deployed the statute to address violence in the city in the early 90s after law enforcement seen assaulting the motorist Rodney King were cleared, causing deadly riots. California’s governor had sought armed assistance from the commander-in-chief to control the riots.

What’s Trump’s track record with the Insurrection Act?

Donald Trump threatened to deploy the act in June when the governor challenged the administration to block the use of armed units to support federal agents in LA, calling it an unlawful use.

In 2020, he urged leaders of multiple states to mobilize their state forces to Washington DC to control protests that emerged after George Floyd was killed by a officer. Several of the executives agreed, deploying forces to the federal district.

During that period, he also suggested to invoke the act for protests following Floyd’s death but did not follow through.

While campaigning for his next term, Trump suggested that things would be different. He informed an group in Iowa in 2023 that he had been prevented from deploying troops to suppress violence in locations during his first term, and stated that if the problem occurred again in his next term, “I will act immediately.”

He has also vowed to send the National Guard to help carry out his immigration objectives.

Trump remarked on recently that to date it had not been necessary to deploy the statute but that he would evaluate the option.

“We have an Insurrection Law for a reason,” the former president stated. “In case lives were lost and the judiciary delayed action, or state or local leaders were holding us up, certainly, I would act.”

Controversy Surrounding the Insurrection Act

There exists a deep historical practice of keeping the national troops out of civilian affairs.

The nation’s founders, after observing abuses by the colonial troops during the revolution, were concerned that providing the chief executive total authority over troops would erode freedoms and the democratic process. Under the constitution, governors typically have the power to maintain order within their states.

These values are expressed in the Posse Comitatus Law, an 19th-century law that usually restricted the armed forces from participating in police duties. This act acts as a legislative outlier to the Posse Comitatus Act.

Rights organizations have long warned that the law provides the chief executive extensive control to employ armed forces as a domestic police force in ways the founding fathers did not envision.

Judicial Review of the Insurrection Act

The judiciary have been unwilling to question a commander-in-chief’s decisions, and the ninth US circuit court of appeals commented that the executive’s choice to deploy troops is entitled to a “great level of deference”.

However