This reporting out of Utah, https://www.visaverge.com/news/utah-national-guard-seeks-volunteers-to-support-ice-logistics-in-september-2025/, confirms early reports that Trump and Hegseth are activating the National Guard in 19 states. (See next post for link to one report.) 1/
Discussion
Loading...
@heidilifeldman that’s Great News! Imprisoned the Communist Traitors!
@heidilifeldman Where is the US going??!!
According to this report, #NewMexico is among the 19 states where Trump is activating the National Guard for an initial deployment to run from August to November. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-national-guard-military-states-cities-b2812837.html 2/
@heidilifeldman reminds me of Snyder's 7th recommendation:
Reportedly the activation is under Section 502(f) of this statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/32/502. During the first Trump administration, Trump and his then AG Bill Barr sent National Guard Troops into the District of Columbia, involving this same statutory provision. The legality of the deployment under 502(f) was questionable but because it was to the District, Trump got away with it. 3/
Whether the Guard can be activated in a state without the Governor's consent is a separate question. Along with other lawyers and legal scholars, I believe the answer is no. 4/
So far I haven't found reporting on whether NM Gov Michelle Lujan Grisham was consulted about the reported activationof National Guard, NM. I would be surprised if she consented. 5/
@heidilifeldman I saw that some states had declined, so I *assume* they were asked to activate and the red states complied
If she hasn't, I would expect NM to challenge the activation in court, which is probably what Trump/Bondi want. They would hope the issue goes to the Supreme Court and that the SC would rule in the Trump regime's favor - which of course if might, regardless of the correct interpretation of 502(f). Such a ruling would pave the way for the activation of the National Guard by Trump in every state. 6/
@heidilifeldman
My two cents. I think the case of California going to the courts about deployment of NG without consent shows that it is not a viable strategy. It is most probably even counterproductive: it ties your hands while the process is grinding along, and in the end it may produce more rights for the aggressor, but now with an approval of the courts and a total wastage of your time.
You have to base your tactics and strategy of resistance on something that doesn't need courts.
According to a DoD official, the National Guard soldiers will serve as a “visible deterrent force.” Soldiers supporting ICE will be performing case management, transportation, logistical support, and clerical functions associated with the processing of illegal migrants at detention facilities, including personal data collection, fingerprinting, DNA swabbing and photographing of people in ICE custody. 7/
1 more replies (not shown)
bonfire.cafe
A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate
Automatic federation enabled