Fact check: Can a governor deploy their state guard in another state

1. Summary of the results

The analyses conclusively show that a governor cannot unilaterally deploy their state guard to another state ^{[1] [2]}. This limitation stems from the principle of territorially limited sovereignty between states ^[2]. While deployment across state lines is possible, it requires either:

• Federal authorization/intervention ^[3]
• Pre-arranged mutual aid agreements like EMAC ^[3]
• Presidential federalization under specific circumstances ^[4]

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several crucial pieces of context are important to understand:

• The President has the power to federalize National Guard troops without a governor's consent under specific circumstances, including:
• Cases of rebellion
• Invasion
• When regular forces cannot execute laws ^[1]
• This presidential power was demonstrated in a recent case where President Trump deployed 2,000 California National Guard troops against Governor Newsom's wishes ^[5]
• This type of federal intervention is extremely rare, with the previous occurrence dating back to 1965 ^[4]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question oversimplifies a complex legal and constitutional arrangement:

• It fails to acknowledge the dual nature of state guard control between state and federal authorities ^[4]
• It doesn't recognize the existence of legal frameworks for interstate cooperation like EMAC ^[3]
• The question of state guard deployment has become politically charged, as evidenced by Governor Newsom's characterization of federal intervention as a "serious breach of state sovereignty" ^[5]

This issue particularly affects:

• State governors who might want to maintain complete control over their National Guard
• Federal authorities who benefit from maintaining ultimate control over interstate military operations
• Political actors who can use this issue to argue for or against state sovereignty