Fact check: Can the POTUS deploy the USMC to a state and bypass the governor ?

1. Summary of the results

The President's ability to deploy military forces to states without governor approval is strictly limited and complex. While possible, it requires specific circumstances and legal mechanisms:

• The deployment must typically go through state governors for National Guard forces ^[1]
• Any deployment must comply with the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits federal troops from performing civilian law enforcement ^[2]
• The primary legal mechanism for such deployment is the Insurrection Act of 1807, which requires specific conditions like rebellion, invasion, or complete breakdown of law enforcement ^[3]
• Before deploying troops, the President must issue a formal proclamation ordering insurgents to disperse ^[4]

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Recent events provide important context:

• A controversial deployment of 2,000 National Guard members to Los Angeles occurred without Governor Newsom's consent ^[1]
• Subsequently, 700 Marines were deployed to Los Angeles without state approval ^[5]

Historical precedent shows that:

• Governors historically prefer using local law enforcement and state-controlled National Guard units over federal intervention ^[4]
• There are some narrow constitutional exceptions for protecting federal property ^[2]
• The President has broad discretion under specific circumstances, with multiple legal mechanisms available ^[6]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The question oversimplifies a complex legal and political issue:

• It doesn't acknowledge the crucial role of the Insurrection Act and Posse Comitatus Act in limiting federal military deployment ^{[3] [2]}
• It fails to mention that such deployments create significant legal and political tensions regarding federal authority versus state rights ^[5]
• The question implies a simple yes/no answer, when in reality, the President's power to deploy troops is highly circumstantial and requires meeting specific legal criteria ^{[3] [4]}

This issue often becomes politically charged, with different interpretations benefiting:

• Federal authorities seeking to expand executive power
• State governments defending their autonomy
• Legal scholars and constitutional experts who may be called upon to interpret these powers