President Trump announces National Guard deployment to Memphis
President Donald Trump told Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” that he plans to send the National Guard to Memphis.
MEMPHIS, Tenn. — A Tennessee judge on Thursday temporarily blocked the deployment of the National Guard to Memphis, siding with state and local lawmakers who argue that using the National Guard for law enforcement violates the state constitution.
In a 35-page court order filed late Nov. 17, Davidson County Commissioner Patricia Moskal said Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee’s authority to deploy the Guard is “not unlimited.” The judge ruled that Memphis’ crime rate was not a “severe emergency” or “disaster” that would warrant Lee, as commander-in-chief of the National Guard, to send in troops.
“The governor may only call out the militia in case of rebellion or invasion, and only upon a declaration by the General Assembly that public safety requires it,” Moskal wrote.
“And while the Constitution refers to the ‘armed forces’ of Tennessee, the Tennessee Military Code defines the ‘armed forces’ as the Tennessee National Guard and establishes the governor’s power and authority as commander-in-chief of the National Guard, including when and under what conditions (sic) the National Guard may be called into active duty,” she continued.
Moskal also said the governor’s decision to deploy the Guard is not subject to judicial review, something attorneys with the Tennessee Attorney General’s Office argued during a Nov. 3 hearing on the preliminary injunction. She also said there had been no formal order to mobilize the Guard.
“The absence of a clear documentary record substantiating a request made directly to Governor Lee or an order or order by Governor Lee regarding the activation of the Tennessee National Guard makes it difficult for the court to evaluate the circumstances and purpose of the activation and deployment of the Tennessee National Guard to Memphis,” Moskal wrote.
In September, President Donald Trump announced he would deploy the Guard to Memphis and continue an aggressive campaign to use military force as part of a crackdown on crime. President Trump has already deployed Guard troops to Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., amid strong criticism and legal challenges from Democrats in those areas.
But in Memphis, Trump is targeting a Republican-controlled state whose governor had welcomed intervention. Democratic state and local lawmakers have criticized President Trump’s plan, and Memphis Mayor Paul Young previously said he didn’t think it was “a way to curb crime.”
What did the Prime Minister say about the merits of this case?
Moskal said the Democratic officials suing Lee will likely be successful in arguing that Lee violated Tennessee law, adding that she doesn’t need to decide whether they are likely to win the constitutionality argument on that basis.
In granting the temporary restraining order, Moskal said the plaintiff must post $50,000 bail before the restraining order takes effect. The state said in a Nov. 14 legal filing that immediately withdrawing Guard members from Memphis could cost “at least” $8 million.
If a restraining order is granted, bail is often issued. This bond is used to protect against financial harm to anyone who may ultimately be found to have been unreasonably restricted from doing something. The injunction will not take effect unless the bond is paid.
According to the state’s proposal, “more than $6.8 million remains unpaid on existing contracts for vehicles, hotels, and meals.”
There is currently approximately $560,000 outstanding on the vehicle contract. The filing also said there are hotel and dining contracts for the Guard, totaling $5.2 million and $1.1 million, respectively.
“An injunction requiring the reassignment of Guard members supporting the Memphis Safety Response Force would require termination of these contracts and could give rise to claims for damages,” the filing states. “Furthermore, short-notice compliance with the injunction will have a direct negative economic impact on Guard members who will not be able to receive pay without an appropriate pathway back to non-Guardian employment.”
The state also cited a 2015 study from Middle Tennessee State University that argued the Guard’s withdrawal from Memphis could result in “additional economic loss to Memphis businesses.” According to the filing, there were “significant financial and literal benefits to existing Guard operations in Shelby County.”
Lawsuits filed over security guard deployment in Chicago and Los Angeles
The deployment comes after judges blocked similar moves in Chicago and Portland, Oregon. Government lawyers in both cases said the military was needed to protect federal employees and property from protesters.
Last month in Chicago, U.S. District Judge April M. Perry questioned the Department of Homeland Security’s interpretation of the situation and granted part of a request by the state of Illinois to block the deployment of troops to the nation’s third-largest city.
Perry said sending in the military would only “add fuel to the fire that the defendant himself started.” She cited a number of recent legal decisions handed down against the Trump administration in federal court in Chicago.
A Los Angeles trial court ruled that President Trump’s decision to send the Guard to the area over the summer was illegal. The Trump administration appealed the ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which reversed a lower court’s ruling in June, citing escalating violence and property damage during anti-ICE protests.
The Washington, D.C., city government also sued the Trump administration in September, arguing that the deployment of 2,200 security forces is unconstitutional and violates federal law.
Contributors: Thao Nguyen, Zac Anderson, N’dea Yancey-Bragg, Jack Armstrong, Michael Loria, Christopher Cann, USA TODAY. Reuters
Lucas Finton covers crime, police, prisons, courts and criminal justice policy for The Commercial Appeal. You can reach us by phone or email: (901)208-3922 and Lucas.Finton@commercialappeal.com, follow us at X @LucasFinton.
