Your fact-checks will appear here
A law that limits the use of federal troops for domestic law enforcement, and its implications for National Guard deployments.
Courts have focused on tangible indicia of who exercised command and control—legal status (Title 10 vs. Title 32), orders issued, chain-of-command communications, funding and mission definitions, and ...
The Insurrection Act authorizes the president to deploy federal armed forces and federalize National Guard units to suppress insurrections, enforce federal authority, or assist civilian authorities wh...
A U.S. governor can, under state constitutions and statutes and historical practice, proclaim martial law within his or her state when faced with insurrection, invasion, or extreme civil disorder, sub...
The core legal question is whether President Trump can lawfully invoke the Insurrection Act, withhold federal funds, or otherwise deploy federal forces in Minnesota to suppress protests linked to ICE ...
If the president explicitly invoked the Insurrection Act in 2026, federal courts would apply a mix of statutory text, historic practice, constitutional limits, and evolving standards from recent refor...
Governors have used the National Guard both to cooperate with and to resist federal immigration operations, leveraging different duty statuses, lawsuits, and public orders to shape outcomes . The resu...
Title 10 places National Guard members on federal active duty under presidential control and federal funding, while Title 32 keeps Guard members under state control but may be paid with federal dollar...
The Insurrection Act is the narrow statutory bridge that permits the President to federalize state National Guard units or deploy active-duty forces for domestic law‑enforcement purposes in three spec...
Local leaders can and do ask for National Guard help, but the legal pathway, who controls the troops, and when they can be used depend on whether the Guard is serving under state or federal authority,...