Fact check: Can state governors legally refuse to deploy National Guard troops for federal missions?

1. Summary of the results

The analyses unanimously confirm that state governors can legally refuse to deploy National Guard troops for federal missions. This is specifically outlined in Section 502(f) of Title 32 U.S. Code, which uses the word "request" rather than "demand" or "order" when referring to federal deployment requests ^[1]. This legal right was demonstrated in practice during the summer of 2020, when four governors declined President Trump's request to deploy National Guard troops ^{[1] [2]}.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several important contextual elements were missing from the original question:

• The legal framework is specifically outlined in 32 U.S.C. § 328, which empowers governors to maintain control over their National Guard units ^[1]
• There is a historical precedent of governors challenging federal authority, with Governor Gavin Newsom of California notably challenging a federal deployment as "unlawful" and a "serious breach of state sovereignty" ^[3]
• This issue has significant implications for state sovereignty, as governors maintain primary control over their National Guard units ^[1]
• The summer 2020 incident involved requests to 15 governors, of which four declined, providing a clear real-world example of this authority in action ^[1]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question might suggest uncertainty about governors' authority, when in fact the legal framework is quite clear. Some important considerations:

• The question might imply that federal authority supersedes state authority in National Guard matters, which is incorrect under normal circumstances
• It's worth noting that this was the first time in six decades that a president attempted to federalize National Guard troops without a governor's permission ^[3], highlighting how rare such conflicts are
• The framing of the question might overlook the fundamental principle of state sovereignty in the U.S. federal system, which is central to this issue ^[1]