Fact check: What happened when governors historically refused federal National Guard deployment orders?

1. Summary of the results

The relationship between federal and state control over National Guard deployments has been shaped by significant legal precedents and historical events. The Supreme Court case Perpich v. DOD definitively established Congress's authority to order National Guard units to active federal duty without requiring governors' consent ^[1]. This was further solidified by the Montgomery Amendment of 1986, which was specifically designed to limit governors' ability to block such deployments ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several crucial historical contexts are missing from the original question:

• During the War of 1812, northern states successfully refused to release their militias for federal service, supported by legal opinions from state courts ^[3]
• Governors retain significant authority over National Guard units during peacetime and can activate them for domestic emergencies ^[4]
• Presidents have historically been reluctant to deploy National Guard troops without gubernatorial cooperation. The last major instance before recent events occurred in 1965, when President Johnson activated the Alabama National Guard without Governor Wallace's consent during civil rights protests ^[5]
• The Supremacy Clause, while establishing federal law's precedence, does have constitutional limits, particularly regarding state sovereignty ^[6]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question oversimplifies what is actually a complex legal and constitutional relationship between state and federal authorities. Several important stakeholders have different interests in this debate:

• State Governments: Benefit from emphasizing their sovereignty and control over National Guard units, as supported by historical precedents like the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling ^[3]
• Federal Government: Benefits from emphasizing supreme authority over military matters, as reinforced by the Perpich v. DOD decision and the Montgomery Amendment ^{[1] [2]}
• National Guard Units: Are caught between state and federal authority, effectively serving two masters depending on their activation status ^[4]

The reality is that while federal authority is generally supreme in National Guard deployment matters, the practical application often involves cooperation and negotiation between state and federal authorities rather than unilateral federal action ^[5].