"If there is one question everyone in America is trying to game out at this moment, it's this one: Can the judiciary impose meaningful checks on President Donald Trump's ability to deploy the National Guard in American cities to retaliate against political protests? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9 th Circuit grappled with that question over the past week, although it failed to reach anything approaching consensus."
"On one side, Judge Ryan Nelson (a Trump appointee) argued that courts have no authority at all to halt the president's domestic mobilization of the Guard. Several of his colleagues believe that courts must give immense deference to the executive branch's decision that an "emergency" necessitates the use of troops. Still others have warned that judges have a duty to carefully review-and, when necessary, block-any unlawful deployment within the United States."
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit split over judicial authority to block presidential domestic deployments of the National Guard. One judge, Ryan Nelson, held that courts lack any power to halt a president's domestic mobilization of the Guard. Several judges argued for substantial deference to executive determinations that an "emergency" requires troop use. Other judges maintained that courts have an obligation to scrutinize and to block unlawful domestic deployments when necessary. Judge Susan Graber emphasized that the public and judiciary must not abandon oversight and urged active engagement to preserve constitutional checks on executive power.
Read at Slate Magazine
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]