I’m confused. Yesterday afternoon, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Trump could not send the National Guard to Chicago. Okay.
But a few minutes later, he mobilized the Louisiana National Guard and ordered it to New Orleans, where serious crime is declining. Jeff Landry, the Republican Governor of Louisiana, was delighted that Trump was sending in the Guard.
Questions:
If the president can’t send the Guard to Chicago, why can he send it to New Orleans?
If Governor Landry thought that New Orleans needed the National Guard, why didn’t he mobilize them himself? Maybe it’s because the federal government will pay part of the costs. But if the need was urgent, it seems the Governor would have acted without delay.
Answers?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
There is no legitimate reason for Trump to send the National Guard to US cities. Newsweek is suggesting that Roberts, Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett think that Trump is setting the stage to declare martial law before the midterms, and they do not want to associated with this misuse of power, which explains their vote. How dumb can they be? Trump’s bogus decision to send The National Guard mostly into blue cities was always about setting the stage to disrupt the midterms from day one. That would have been to correct time for the court to uphold the law. There was never just cause for such illegal, provocative action in any of the cities including New Orleans. As for Landry, he’s Trump’s new envoy to Greenland. I hope they show him a Viking welcome.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Apparently, Louisiana Governor Landry will retain his office while serving as Trump’s envoy to Greenland.
LikeLiked by 1 person
OK the only forum where I feel comfortable enough to ask what are probably stupid questions. How does sending Natl Guard into blue states – and even “blue cities” in red states—disrupt the midterms? Don’t state citizens generally bristle at fed govt interfering in their affairs to that degree? Given there’s no credible justification for doing it, it seems to be simply pandering to the Trump-encouraged MAGA fantasy that big crime in big cities is at an all-time high, when actually the opposite is true. But he’s already got their votes. And could even lose some, as it reinforces public sentiment even among some MAGAs that his ICE/ DOGE/ Natl Guard actions are over the top. Not to mention votes of others that swung to Trump in hopes he’d “fix” an economy that is increasingly unaffordable for middle/ working classes [which he has if anything worsened].
LikeLike
Ginny,
The logic is that he’s sending in troops and ICE in hopes of provoking mobs to resist. This would give him justification to invoke the Insurrection Act and call off the midterm elections because of civil disorders.
LikeLike
The Governor of IL and mayor of Chicago sued, hence the court decision. Louisiana governor is bending the knee. Remember he is also the special envoy to Greenland – doing the president’s bidding.
LikeLiked by 2 people
My guess is that Landry wanted to legitimize the idea of the unitary powers of the president. Posse Comitatus, passed during the violence that arose during 1877, is very clear that this is not a presidential power. Only Thomas, Grosuch, and Alito were for allowing Trump to send troops to Chicago. I was a bit surprised that Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett voted the way they did, but to suggest that Trump’s Chicago move was legal is monstrous, and any real congressional body would take up impeachment immediately.
Heather Cox Richardson wrote of the history of Posse Comitatus recently in a very good quick history. This appeared in one of her recent daily commentary essays.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Roy,
You are too generous to Landry. I think he just wanted to defer to King Donald.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think all Republicans who are still around are going full throttle despot. Landry would have to be really stupid not to know what he is doing by kissing up to Trump.
LikeLike
SCOTUS bows to the Executive Branch, lower courts decisions are reversed, a Reichstag Fire incident will occur, the Insurrection Act will declared , reeducation camps popping up …
LikeLiked by 1 person
Blue led cities in MAGA KKK loyalist red states are targets. I think the somewhat murky USSC ruling says Trump can only send in troops if a state’s governor makes the request or says it’s okay to let the Toxic T do what he wants. Washington DC is in its own column since it’s not a state.
Most of the rulings by the USSC that support Trump are not final. They just extend the time Trump may continue to spread chaos as his regime is dismantling the US Constitution and turning the federal government into a tool for revenge and greed.
“The U.S. Supreme Court has often ruled in favor of Donald Trump, particularly on his second-term agenda and executive authority, through numerous emergency “shadow docket” rulings allowing controversial actions like mass firings and immigration policies, alongside significant decisions granting presidential immunity and blocking challenges to the 2020 election, though some lower court rulings went against him and some early moves were rejected.
“While a precise number is hard to pin down due to the nature of emergency rulings, many analyses point to a high success rate for the Trump administration on the high court’s emergency docket, even if full merits cases showed more mixed results initially. …
“Many federal judges, even Trump appointees, often ruled against the administration’s policies, leading to numerous nationwide injunctions.
“Merits Docket: In cases decided with full arguments, the ideological split was sometimes less stark, with some decisions rejecting certain administration moves, though this shifted over time.
“In essence, the Supreme Court has often empowered Trump’s second-term agenda and asserted presidential power, especially through emergency rulings, even as lower courts pushed back.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
THE MOST IMPORTANT FACT FOR THE U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICES — ESPECIALLY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THEY ARE ORIGINALISTS — TO KEEP IN MIND are the words that our Founding Fathers wrote in our Declaration of Independence as one of the reasons why the Declaration of Independence was declared and why Americans fought the bloody Revolutionary War.
In our Declaration of Independence, our Founding Fathers stated as a reason for being willing to go to war and to die was because “He [the King of England] has kept among us standing armies without the consent of our legislatures.”
That is exactly what would-be-king Trump is doing today by sending federal troops and federalized National Guard units into states without the consent of the state legislatures.
Our Founding Fathers were willing to die to end that, and many thousands of Patriots did die to end that.
Will the U.S. Supreme Court betray our Founding Fathers, our Declaration of Independence, and all the blood of The Patriots by allowing Trump to do what the King of England did to American colonists?
The Insurrection Act’s Title 10 includes sections permits the President to federalize the National Guard and send it into a state — but, this can only be done in instances of insurrection, rebellion, or severe public violence that deprive citizens of their constitutional rights and that the state cannot deal with on its own, and that THE STATE’S GOVERNOR OR LEGISLATURE REQUESTS SUCH FEDERAL HELP.
“Insurrection” requires more than just a high crime-rate in a city. The key legal requirements for a situation to qualify as “insurrection” are that the activity:
MUST BE an actual publicly-declared revolt against civil authority that has stated its aim as overthrowing, ending, and replacing the civil authority. 2.
MUST BE conducted by a significantly-sized group — not just individuals or a small group — that has been proven to be of such major size that the state cannot successfully oppose it. 3.
MUST BE shown that the group is well-organized and has made specific plans for overthrowing civil authority. 4.
MUST BE shown that the revolt uses such great force that local and state governments cannot overcome it.
ONE OF THE GOALS OF ICE is to arrest immigrants by using such force and cruelty that the ICE actions trigger group actions against ICE of such a scale that Trump has the excuse to declare that there is an “insurrection”.
Civil rights and immigrant rights organizations must make special efforts to restrain people from taking actions against ICE that would give Trump the excuse to declare “insurrection”.
Of course, that won’t stop Trump’s minions from staging violent confrontations against ICE in order to be able to cry “Insurrection!”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rulings in the shadow docket only apply to the specific issue/place that’s being examined. So, legally, the ruling in Chicago can’t be applied to any other area.
As to why Landry would welcome this intrusion: he’s just another Trump sycophant. It’s disgusting.
LikeLike