The Left is clutching their pearls because Donald Trump actually did something about chaos in the streets. Imagine that — a president deciding that rampant lawlessness in major cities might warrant a little federal muscle, and the immediate response from the usual suspects is to run to court and cry “Posse Comitatus!” like it’s some magic incantation that makes crime disappear and blue cities govern themselves responsibly.
Let’s get one thing straight: the Posse Comitatus Act, a 150-year-old law designed to limit military involvement in civilian law enforcement, is not a blanket ban on presidential action. There are exceptions, and anyone with a Constitution in one hand and a clue in the other knows it. Presidents have historically used federal forces in times of rebellion, insurrection, or when local governments simply decide they’d rather virtue signal than do their jobs. The fact that the courts haven’t outright shut this down yet should tell you something.
Now, Judge Charles Breyer — a Clinton appointee and brother of one of the most reliably liberal Supreme Court justices in recent memory — thinks Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to L.A. crossed the line. Apparently, soldiers helping with riot control and backing up ICE agents during raids is just too much for California’s fragile governance to handle. You can practically hear Gavin Newsom hyperventilating into a paper bag while his sanctuary state policies fall apart in real time.
🚨 BREAKING: Federal court RULES FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP — overturns an activist judge ruling that blocked Trump’s National Guard deployment to LA as the case plays out.
Gavin is fuming.
Article 2 WINS AGAIN. pic.twitter.com/2zfGR0TW4j
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) September 10, 2025
But let’s talk about what’s really going on here: Democrat-run cities are spiraling. Crime is skyrocketing, drug trafficking is rampant, illegal immigration is out of control, and local leaders are twiddling their thumbs — or worse, actively undermining law enforcement. Trump sees that and says, “Nope, not on my watch.” And of course, the media calls it authoritarianism instead of what it actually is: leadership.
When Trump used the National Guard to support ICE and DEA raids or clear up protests that had turned into riots, the streets calmed down. When he sent reinforcements into D.C., crime plummeted. Carjackings dropped over 40%. Violent crime is down 27%. You don’t have to like Trump to admit the numbers don’t lie. Mayor Muriel Bowser, a Democrat, even thanked him. That must’ve tasted like vinegar on her tongue, but hey — results are results.
But of course, not everyone’s a fan. The D.C. attorney general — naturally — filed a lawsuit complaining about the Guard’s presence. Because, God forbid we interrupt the progressive experiment in criminal justice reform where criminals roam free and cops are told to stand down. Apparently, it’s more politically expedient to virtue signal than to keep your constituents safe.
🚨 BREAKING: The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has handed Trump a WIN, nullifying a Clinton judge’s order and allowing Trump to keep National Guard in Los Angeles while the case proceeds
Yet ANOTHER L for @GavinNewsom
You should send MORE troops into LA, President Trump pic.twitter.com/QMKf5DxGWe
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) September 10, 2025
And let’s not ignore the convenient hypocrisy here. Trump has, so far, only deployed the National Guard to deep-blue states. Critics scream political targeting, yet offer zero alternatives. What’s he supposed to do — ignore violent crime in L.A., Baltimore, or Chicago just because it’s inconvenient to Democrats? When governors and mayors won’t lift a finger, it becomes a federal issue by necessity. The Constitution permits it. The Insurrection Act permits it. And if it walks like an emergency and bleeds like an emergency, maybe — just maybe — it is one.
Does he not understand this is like a commercial for Trump to send the National Guard…what an idiot:
Gavin Newsom makes a strong case for President Trump to bring the National Guard to Oakland, Los Angeles and any other dumpster fire Gavin Newsom has created in California. pic.twitter.com/KHYLqopxnB
— Kevin Dalton (@TheKevinDalton) August 13, 2025
Legal experts, like Northwestern’s Andrew Stoltman and Heritage Foundation’s Zack Smith, are saying the same thing: this is legally justified, even if it ruffles some feathers. And the courts? They haven’t exactly been siding against Trump lately. The Ninth Circuit put a temporary hold on Breyer’s ruling — which is no small thing considering how historically anti-Trump that circuit’s been.
Here’s the irony: if Democrats actually enforced their own laws, if they backed their own police, if they actually took crime seriously, Trump wouldn’t have to get involved at all. But instead, they tie law enforcement’s hands, demonize ICE, legalize everything short of arson, and then whine when someone steps in to clean up their mess.
You can call Trump’s move bold, controversial, or even polarizing — but ineffective? That’s one thing it most definitely is not.
