Creating Your Own Police Department

LOS ANGELES — Free speech organizations filed a friend-of-the-court brief today in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Newsom v. Trump, California’s lawsuit challenging President Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops and active-duty Marines earlier this summer in Los Angeles and surrounding counties. This brief comes less than one week after the district court judge in the case found that the military’s activities in L.A. violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally forbids the president from using the military for domestic policing of civilians. “Protest plays an essential role in our democracy and President Trump is hellbent on suppressing it,” said Hina Shamsi, director of ACLU’s National Security Project. “The president is attempting to normalize military policing of civilians, but as the founders of this country made abundantly clear, turning troops on civilians is an intolerable threat to our liberties. President Trump is imperiling our First Amendment rights and we urge the court to hold him accountable for abusing his power.” The brief explains that protest is part of the fabric of our free society, and that President Trump’s deployment of military troops to quell protest is incompatible with the First Amendment. It underscores that the founding generation, which feared the military’s use as a tool of oppression, would have viewed President Trump’s deployment of troops to L.A. as an intolerable threat to liberty. “President Trump’s deployment of the military in Los Angeles chilled political protest and disregarded the First Amendment,” said Jennifer Jones, staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University. “The First Amendment requires the government’s response to be proportionate to the threat, and it forbids the government from holding peaceful demonstrators accountable for the sporadic violence of others. We urge the court to protect the right to dissent by asking whether it was truly necessary to respond to largely peaceful protests with military force.” The organizations press the Ninth Circuit to reconsider the deference it gave to the president in its previous ruling in light of the country’s history, tradition, and laws, which strictly limit the use of the military to police the American people, as well as the reality that troop deployment chills the exercise of constitutionally protected speech and association. The court’s decision allowed the president to retain control of the California National Guard as these proceedings continued. "Trump’s deployment of troops on our streets and parks is a direct threat to our collective safety and our Constitutional rights,” said Chandra Bhatnagar, executive director of the ACLU Foundation of Southern California. "But what has been extraordinary during this time is the courage of everyday people across Southern California who continue to show up for their communities, exercise their First Amendment rights and fight the administration’s unlawful and racist agenda. We stand with them.” “The Founders warned against standing armies on American soil, fearing that the military might be used not to defend the people, but to control them,” said John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute. “Deploying the military to deal with domestic matters that can—and should—be handled by local police violates the Posse Comitatus Act and crosses the line into authoritarianism. This militarized response to what is clearly a matter for local government is yet another example of President Trump’s disregard for the Constitution and the limits of his power.” This friend-of-the-court brief comes as President Trump continues to threaten major cities, including San Francisco, Chicago, and New York City, with deployment of military troops and federal agents, despite state governors’ objections. Amici include: American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU Foundation of Southern California, ACLU Foundation of Northern California, ACLU Foundation of San Diego and Imperial Counties, the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, and the Rutherford Institute. “Deploying federalized National Guard troops against people exercising their constitutional rights isn’t just unnecessary—it’s a dangerous abuse of power that undermines our democracy,” said Norma Chávez-Peterson, executive director of the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties. “When the government uses military force to silence dissent, it threatens the safety, dignity and fundamental rights of all people. The real harm we’re facing isn’t from peaceful protests, but from the rampant ICE raids tearing apart our communities, as well as the excessive force federal officers are employing against journalists and peaceful protestors.”

The recent militarization of D.C. is a reminder of how quickly government power can expand. Our guide explains what to do if you’re stopped by police or troops.

NEW YORK – The Washington Post reported over the weekend that the Trump administration plans to deploy military troops to Chicago against a made-up crime wave. President Trump has also renewed his threats to deploy troops in Baltimore, San Francisco, and New York City, despite state governors’ objections. This comes amidst news that some National Guard troops in D.C. are now armed and, separately, that 19 states are planning to mobilize up to 1,700 of their National Guard troops in the coming weeks to assist the Department of Homeland Security’s drive to detain and deport millions of people. The following is a statement from Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project: “President Trump is manufacturing ‘emergencies’ to expand his power and create fear in major American cities. Regardless of whether the president cites false crime statistics, villainizes immigrants, or claims peaceful protest is insurrection, sending armed federal agents and military troops into our communities is unjustified and dangerous. “President Trump’s escalating threats directly undermine our foundational value that the military should not be policing civilians, create legal jeopardy for servicemembers and federal agents, and put regular people going about their lives at high risk of having their rights violated. Governors and other state and local leaders must stay strong and take all lawful measures to protect their residents against the president’s repeated attempts to intimidate us.”

Policymakers are beginning to recognize that the boundaries between local surveillance and the Trump Administration are hard to maintain