President Donald Trump on Thursday threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to deploy U.S. troops to Minnesota if state officials did not work to quell protests there against federal immigration authorities, who he said are “only trying to do their job.”
In a Truth Social post, Trump said invoking the centuries-old law would “quickly put an end to the travesty that is taking place in that once great State.” The president called Minnesota officials, who have repeatedly urged residents to protest peacefully, “corrupt” and described demonstrators as “professional agitators and insurrectionists.”
Protesters have taken to the streets of Minneapolis daily since Jan. 7, when an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer fatally shot 37-year-old Renée Good, and the Department of Homeland Security has continued to send droves of officers to Minnesota. On Wednesday night, a federal officer shot someone in the leg as protesters across the city yelled at ICE to leave Minneapolis amid bursts of tear gas and stun grenades.
Even as tensions boil, legal experts told The Washington Post that invoking the Insurrection Act would be an extraordinary — and potentially illegal — measure.
What is the Insurrection Act, and how is it invoked?
The Insurrection Act, enacted around the turn of the 19th century, gives the president power to deploy the U.S. military, including federalized National Guard troops, on domestic soil.
Its language allows the president to use the military to “suppress rebellion,” including in cases when a state has not requested or consented to the presence of federal armed forces. The law is intended to apply only in extraordinary circumstances, when federal troops are necessary to bring a domestic situation under control, said Richard Painter, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School. Hypothetically, Painter said this might be necessary if large mobs were attacking ICE officers who couldn’t defend themselves and the governor refused to call in the state’s National Guard or other law enforcement.
But from his observations in Minnesota and examinations of news reports, Painter said, nothing that has happened in the state so far would reasonably justify an invocation of the Insurrection Act.
“We’re not even anywhere possibly close,” he said.
Painter added that the levels of protest activity and clashes with law enforcement this week in Minneapolis were far from what the city saw in 2020 after the murder of George Floyd by police. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) activated the National Guard that year but received some criticism that he acted too slowly.
Trump has previously threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act, but he has backpedaled each time.
The Insurrection Act was last invoked in 1992 in response to civil unrest in Los Angeles, following the beating of Rodney King by police. It hasn’t been used without the consent of the relevant state’s governor for 60 years. In the rare instances when the law has been used, state and local officials mostly have supported the measure and have often requested it, said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center for Justice’s liberty and national security program.
“No governor, no mayor wants to see mass violence in their own city, in their own jurisdiction,” she said.
What would happen if Trump invokes the law in Minnesota?
The Insurrection Act, which has not been meaningfully updated since 1874, does not place specific limits on the number of troops who can be deployed domestically or the length of time they can be deployed. The law only states that the president can deploy the forces deemed “necessary” to quell an insurrection or enforce federal laws before withdrawing the forces “within a limited time.”
If he decided to use the Insurrection Act, Trump would be able to send active-duty U.S. military forces and federalized National Guard forces to Minnesota. They would join the ICE and DHS officers who are already on the ground there.
This year, Trump used other presidential authorities to send National Guard troops to Washington and other Democratic-led cities to address what he characterized as rampant crime in those places. Across Washington; Chicago; Portland, Oregon; and Los Angeles, the presence of the National Guard inflamed tensions between the service members and residents, leading to demonstrations and arrests.
Trump’s efforts to use the National Guard have been met with legal challenges. Most recently, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops in Chicago. Within days of that ruling, the president said he was pulling the troops out of Chicago, Portland and Los Angeles.
Can an order invoking the law be challenged in court?
The Insurrection Act has not faced significant legal tests because it has been used sparingly, only about 30 times in more than 200 years. Should Trump invoke it, particularly against the wishes of Walz, Painter said the move probably would be met with legal action.
To fight the deployment of federal forces under the Insurrection Act, Walz, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison (D), and other state and local government officials could sue the administration and ask a federal judge to block the troops’ presence, Painter said.
Minnesota officials are already in a legal battle with the administration over the ICE and DHS officers in the Twin Cities area. The state has asked a judge to temporarily stop or limit the agencies’ operations there while the case plays out. A hearing on the issue is set for next week.
The post What could happen if Trump invoked the Insurrection Act in Minnesota appeared first on Washington Post.
