• Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
    6·
    8 days ago

    Trump’s claim isn’t quite that tenuous. Check section (2):

    there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States

    That’s the basis for this. They’re characterising Angelinos resisting ICE as “a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States”, since ICE is an extension of that same authority. It’s a weak claim, but not as completely buckwild as claiming a foreign invasion.

    • jonathan7luke@lemmy.mlEnglish
      5·
      8 days ago

      That’s a fair point. I was under the assumption that they were still using the “invasion” thing since that was what they leaned into for the deportations. I can definitely see them going with “rebellion” instead.

      Seems like there is some (temporary) good news on the topic at least:

      A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order Thursday directing President Donald Trump to return control of the National Guard to California.

      The order, which takes effect at noon Friday, said the deployment of the Guard was illegal and both violated the Tenth Amendment and exceeded Trump’s statutory authority.

      - https://apnews.com/article/california-immigration-national-guard-newsom-trump-lawsuit-aedf8cdd95ee899c9559d5e54a2e4833

      • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        2·
        7 days ago

        When taking to the press they purposefully used words like “invasion” and “rebellion” to help with justification of invoking this obscure law but it is clear it is not.

      • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
        5·
        8 days ago

        Like all judgments against Trump, ir’s only as powerful as the enforcement. If the Guard leadership chooses to follow Trump over Newsom, the courts mean nothing.