by Daniel Brouse
June 8, 2025
In a volatile and potentially unconstitutional series of events, President Donald Trump has ordered the deployment of the National Guard in California in response to growing protests against controversial Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations on U.S. soil.
The protests erupted after reports surfaced of military-style ICE raids targeting immigrant communities, sparking public outrage and civil unrest in several California cities, including Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Sacramento. Critics argue that the ICE actions—described by some as resembling military occupation tactics—violate both civil liberties and the separation of federal and state powers.
Governor Gavin Newsom has strongly condemned both the raids and the federal response, stating, “California will not stand by while its residents are terrorized by federal agencies acting outside the bounds of constitutional authority.” Legal experts and civil rights groups have also raised alarms, suggesting the President’s use of the National Guard to quell protests could breach the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts the use of the U.S. military for domestic law enforcement.
“This is not just about immigration anymore,” said ACLU legal director Maya Walker. “This is about whether the President can use federal force to suppress dissent in a state that disagrees with his policy.”
The Trump administration, however, maintains that the actions are necessary to maintain public order and enforce immigration laws, with the President tweeting, “We will not allow lawlessness and anarchy to take over our cities. ICE is doing a great job protecting our borders.” Meanwhile, the Secretary of Defense has confirmed that the Marines are on standby.
Constitutional scholars warn this confrontation could lead to a historic legal battle between state and federal authority. With tensions escalating and the legality of Trump’s actions being called into question, the situation represents one of the most significant challenges to American federalism in recent memory.
As protests continue and legal challenges mount, the nation watches closely to see whether the courts—or Congress—will intervene in what may become a defining constitutional moment of the Trump presidency. Yes, this is deeply troubling. Many political observers have long warned about the potential for such outcomes. The use of the military to suppress protests represents an extreme and dangerous escalation. Additionally, actions such as sanctioning Harvard, deporting activists, and filing lawsuits against ABC and CBS News — along with punitive measures against the Associated Press — raise serious concerns about the erosion of democratic norms and press freedom. These tactics bear disturbing similarities to authoritarian regimes of the past.