Trump Governance’s Use of national Guard Raises Constitutional Concerns Over federal Power
WASHINGTON D.C. – The deployment of National Guard troops to cities like Los Angeles and Washington D.C.during the Trump administration sparked legal and philosophical debate regarding the appropriate role of the military in domestic law enforcement, raising concerns about the erosion of established boundaries between police and military powers. A judge ruled that the deployment did not qualify as suppressing a rebellion, and therefore did not preclude a conventional police response.
The debate centers on the principle of federalism – the division of power between national and state governments - and the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers not delegated to the United States to the states. Traditionally, police power, encompassing the authority to enforce laws protecting public welfare, safety, and health, resides with the states.
The Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits the use of the U.S. military for domestic law enforcement purposes, though exceptions exist. The use of military personnel for routine crime fighting, as proposed for cities including Chicago and Baltimore, challenges these long-standing constraints on presidential authority and highlights the significant federal power available to the executive branch.
Legal scholars argue the deployments blur the lines between military and police functions, possibly undermining constitutional safeguards and altering the balance of power within the U.S. system of government.
