The National Guard Deployment

Since fall of 2024, several states and the District of Columbia have filed lawsuits against the Trump administration regarding their attempted deployment of the National Guard across the country for domestic law enforcement. The lawsuit questions the extent of the President's authority to deploy Guard troops within U.S. borders and debates the balance of power between the federal government and the states. 

DC: In September 2025, Washington D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb sued the Trump administration over the deployment of National Guard troops where they were deployed to  address crime in the nation's capital. Schwalb asserted that the "unconstitutional military occupation" was done without the consent of D.C. leaders, and a coalition of 22 other state attorneys general filed an amicus brief supporting the suit. 

California: In June 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom sued the Trump administration after Trump federalized a portion of the California National Guard to patrol protests in Los Angeles. A district judge initially ruled that Trump had overstepped his authority, finding that conditions for a "rebellion" were not met. However, a federal appeals court later paused the ruling, leaving the government in place as the case continued.

Portland: In late September 2025, Oregon and the city of Portland filed a joint lawsuit to block the deployment of federalized National Guard troops to protect federal facilities and immigration enforcement officers from the imagined threat of the immigrants. Oregon state leaders argued that the deployment was an unlawful and "heavy-handed" flexing of political muscle by the Trump Administration.

The lawsuits are challenging the use of the National Guard in the:

• Insurrection Act: The core of the lawsuits revolve around the Insurrection Act. This act allows the President to call up the National Guard for domestic law enforcement under the  limited conditions of a  rebellion or the regular police’s inability to enforce federal law. The lawsuits argue that the Trump administration did not meet the conditions for using the Insurrection Act and that federalizing troops under other authorities like Title 32 or Title 10 circumvents the law.

• Posse Comitatus Act: When federalized, National Guard troops are subject to the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits the military from being used for domestic law enforcement. A federal judge in California ruled that the Trump administration's use of federalized National Guard troops to perform law enforcement functions violated this act.

• State Sovereignty: Opponents of the Trump administration's deployments of the National Guard argue that the President is undermining the balance of power and state sovereignty by using the Guard units for domestic purposes without the consent of state governors. In the 1990 Supreme Court case Perpich v. Department of Defense, the Court affirmed that the National Guard is a state force until it is federalized, also stating that the governor's consent is crucial for domestic deployment.

The National Guard issue is still ongoing and we can only wait and see to find out what will happen next.