By Darius Spearman (africanelements)

Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.

The streets of Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland have become the center of a massive legal battle. President Trump recently halted plans to send the National Guard into these cities. This decision followed several blocks from the court system. The move highlights a long history of tension between federal power and local control. This struggle is as old as the United States itself. It involves the basic rights of every citizen .

Cities across the nation have faced intense protests over the past year. These demonstrations focus on the need for justice and reform. The federal government often views these protests through the lens of law and order. However, local leaders frequently see the situation differently. They argue that federal force can make local tensions much worse. This conflict creates a major question about who holds the ultimate authority over American streets .

Presidential power to use the military at home comes from the Insurrection Act of 1807. Thomas Jefferson signed this law more than two centuries ago. It allows the president to deploy troops to stop rebellions or domestic violence. Originally, the law was meant for situations where federal law could not be enforced. It served as a tool to handle "lawless combinations" that local police could not manage .

The use of this act has changed over many years. Historically, the president usually waited for a request from a governor. For instance, the 1968 riots led to many such requests. Local officials often admitted they needed extra help to keep the peace. In those cases, the federal government acted as a partner to the state. However, the current situation involves the federal government acting without being invited .

2020 (43k+)

1992 (10k)

1968 (50k)

The 2020 peak deployment was the largest since the 1960s civil unrest .

Another major law limits how the president uses the military. This is the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. Congress passed this law after the Reconstruction Era ended. It followed a period where federal troops protected the rights of Black citizens in the South. The act was a result of a political compromise that removed those protections. It generally prevents the military from doing the work of local police .

This law established a very important principle in American life. It says the military should stay out of local matters unless the law specifically allows it. This is why the sharing of power between the state and federal government is so complex. The federal government cannot simply take over a city whenever it wants. This restriction protects the idea that local communities should govern themselves whenever possible .

The history of this act is tied to a time when the federal government failed to end slavery in a meaningful way. After federal troops left the South, the Jim Crow era began. Black citizens lost the protection of the federal government. This led to decades of state-sanctioned violence and discrimination. Today, the debate over federal intervention still carries the weight of this difficult history .

One of the most famous federal interventions happened in 1957. President Dwight D. Eisenhower sent troops to Little Rock, Arkansas. He did this to protect nine Black students who were trying to go to school. The governor of Arkansas had used the National Guard to block them. In this case, the federal government acted against the wishes of the state leader .

The legal basis for this move was the 14th Amendment. This amendment guarantees equal protection under the law for everyone. When a state fails to protect the rights of its people, the federal government has a duty to step in. This was a rare moment where federal force was used to expand civil rights. It showed that federal intervention could be a tool for justice .

This history makes the current situation in Chicago and Portland very interesting. In 1957, the federal government intervened to protect citizens from a hostile state. In 2020, many people believe the federal government is intervening to suppress citizens. The goal of the intervention determines how the public perceives the use of force. Legal experts often look back at Little Rock to understand the limits of this power .

The year 1968 saw some of the largest domestic troop deployments in history. After the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., riots broke out in over 100 cities. This period is often called the "Holy Week Uprising." Frustration over poverty and systemic racism reached a boiling point. The government responded with over 50,000 National Guard and Army troops .

These riots forced Congress to pass the Fair Housing Act. This showed that social unrest could lead to real legislative change. However, the use of federal troops also created a heavy sense of military presence in Black neighborhoods. Many people felt the government was more interested in stopping property damage than in fixing inequality. This feeling remains a major part of the conversation today .

State Requested

Federal Imposed

Historical interventions (like 1992) were usually requested by states. Recent 2020 efforts were often imposed over state objections .

The primary reason for the recent protests was the murder of George Floyd. A police officer in Minneapolis knelt on his neck for over nine minutes. A bystander recorded the event on video. This provided undeniable proof of police brutality. It sparked a global movement led by Black Lives Matter .

Protests occurred in more than 2,000 cities and towns. This became one of the largest movements in the history of the country. The focus shifted from single incidents to a critique of the whole system. People demanded reforms like the "George Floyd Justice in Policing Act." They also called for moving money from police budgets to social services .

The response from the Trump administration was "Operation Diligent Valor." This mission was supposedly about protecting federal property in Portland. However, protesters saw it as an attempt to stop their movement for racial justice. They argued that federal agents were being used to silence their voices. This led to even more conflict between the protesters and the government .

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) played a major role in the 2020 response. They sent agents from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to cities far from the border. These agents often lacked training in urban crowd control. They were also documented using unmarked vehicles to detain people. This created a major controversy over "secret police" tactics .

Legal experts argued that this was an overreach of federal authority. These specialized units were designed for high-risk border work. Using them for domestic protests was seen as a threat to civil liberties. It bypassed the normal separation between the military and local police. This created a "gray area" in the law that many found dangerous .

The deployment happened even though local mayors and governors said no. This created a constitutional tension. The federal government claimed it was protecting its buildings. The states claimed the federal government was interfering with their right to manage public safety. This disagreement eventually led to the court battles that halted the plans .

Another major initiative was "Operation Legend." This program was named after LeGend Taliferro. He was a four-year-old Black child killed in Kansas City. The operation sent over 1,000 federal agents to cities like Chicago. The goal was to fight violent crime during a spike in homicides .

Critics argued that the operation focused too much on low-level crimes. They believed it was a way to flood Black neighborhoods with law enforcement. Many people felt this did not address the root causes of violence, such as poverty. Civil rights groups worried about increased surveillance and over-policing .

Some local leaders called the operation "political theater." They believed it was designed to make certain cities look chaotic. They argued that the administration was trying to create a specific image for the upcoming election. This added another layer of distrust between the federal government and the communities it claimed to help .

Over 50 lawsuits were filed to block federal intervention in cities .

Federal judges eventually stepped in to limit the actions of federal agents. They issued restraining orders to protect journalists and peaceful protesters. These court blocks are why President Trump had to halt the National Guard plans. The courts found that agents could not target people without a clear reason. They also had to respect the right to free speech .

These rulings reinforced the philosophy behind the Posse Comitatus Act. They signaled that the executive branch cannot act as a national police force. The judicial system acted as a check on executive power. This is a vital part of the American system of government. It ensures that no one person has too much control .

The courts also considered the issue of intersectional oppression and how policing affects different groups. By blocking certain actions, the courts protected the rights of everyone involved. This includes the right to protest against inequality in education and other areas of life. The legal system remains a key battleground for the future of civil rights .

The halting of these plans represents a significant moment in history. It shows that federal intervention is not a one-sided right. It is a process that requires cooperation with local governments. It also must respect the rules set by the Constitution. This ensures that the rights of citizens remain protected even during times of unrest .

The 2020 events established a new precedent for the nation. While the Insurrection Act is still a law, its use is more restricted than before. The courts have shown they will not stay silent if they see federal overreach. This creates a more balanced approach to managing national security and local safety. It reminds everyone that the law serves the people .

Looking back at history helps us understand the headlines of today. From the end of the Civil War to the present, the struggle for rights has continued. The battle over federal troops in cities is part of that larger story. As long as there is a debate over power, there will be a need for strong legal protections. This is how the country moves forward toward a more perfect union .

Darius Spearman is a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College, where he has been teaching for over 20 years. He is the founder of African Elements, a media platform dedicated to providing educational resources on the history and culture of the African diaspora. Through his work, Spearman aims to empower and educate by bringing historical context to contemporary issues affecting the Black community.