The Daily Populous Thursday October 23rd, 2025 day edition
Authored by truthout.org and submitted by Truthisnotallowed

The president hinted that he may invoke the Insurrection Act to send the US military into San Francisco.

Truthout is a vital news source and a living history of political struggle. If you think our work is valuable, support us with a donation of any size.

In a Fox News interview this past weekend, President Donald Trump claimed that invoking the Insurrection Act would allow him to have “unquestioned power,” and even suggested that it could be used to suspend court cases — despite nothing in the statute indicating as such.

Trump has sent National Guard troops to a number of U.S. cities, ostensibly to assist other federal agents carrying out immigration raids and operations. In two of those cities (Chicago and Portland), federal judges have blocked his use of troops, noting that the deployment of troops was likely unnecessary and provocative.

In the interview, Trump suggested he would next try to send troops to San Francisco, and that, were he blocked from doing so this time around, he would invoke the Insurrection Act, an 1807 law that allows presidents to use the National Guard or military to enforce laws where it’s currently impossible to do so due to unlawful obstruction or rebellion.

“I can use the Insurrection Act,” Trump said, wrongly claiming that “50 percent of the presidents” have done so.

“And that’s unquestioned power,” Trump added.

Trump: "Don't forget I can use the Insurrection Act. 50% of the presidents almost have used that. And that's unquestioned power." pic.twitter.com/2MBpQoo8Ij — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 19, 2025

Everybody agrees you’re allowed to use that and there are no more court cases, there is no more anything. We’re trying to do it in a nicer manner, but we can always use the Insurrection Act.

However, political observers and legal experts disagree with that interpretation of the law. Nothing in the Insurrection Act actually states that court cases can be suspended, for example.

“While it would be awful to see our military patrol the streets like police officers, there would still be courts and judges and good old fashioned laws, even under the Insurrection Act,” wrote Joan Walsh, national affairs correspondent for The Nation. “It’s not a scenario anyone who believes in democracy wants to come to pass, but even that won’t give Trump the absolute power he craves.”

Critics noted that Trump’s comments suggested he believed otherwise, and that he may try to invoke the law with the intention of using it as a springboard for additional power grabs beyond its purview.

“The Insurrection Act does nothing except you can then use soldiers as cops,” democracy journalist Andy Craig said. “They can enforce laws, but they’re the same old laws. It doesn’t suspend the Constitution. No martial law, no closing courts, no removing state officials, none of that.”

“Zero ambiguity here, folks. Trump is now threatening to use the ‘unquestioned power’ of the Insurrection Act under the phony (and unconstitutional) pretense of fighting crime in cities,” wrote Mother Jones journalist Mark Follman in a Bluesky post.

“If Trump invoked the Insurrection Act, as he has threatened to do, that would be a declaration of war against the American people,” opined Mark Jacob, former editor at The Chicago Tribune. “The insurrection is coming from the White House.”

Trump is aiming to stifle and defund nonprofits. Progressive nonprofits are the latest target caught in Trump’s crosshairs. With the aim of eliminating political opposition, Trump and his sycophants are working to curb government funding, constrain private foundations, and even cut tax-exempt status from organizations he dislikes. We’re concerned, because Truthout is not immune to such bad-faith attacks. Nevertheless, we refuse to be intimidated or forced to back down. We continue to publish fearlessly and independently thanks to direct reader support. That’s why we’ve launched a fundraising campaign with a goal to raise $18,000 in the next 24 hours. Resist the right-wing agenda: make a tax-deductible one-time or monthly donation to Truthout now!

NoFreePi on October 23rd, 2025 at 00:01 UTC »

In most cases when the act was invoked it was with support of the states governor.

A better question is when was Insurrection Act invoked over the objection of a states governor.

Only five (5) presidents have invoked the Insurrection Act six (6) times over the objection of a states governor

1861 - Lincoln - Confederate states To suppress secession and rebellion after governors rejected federal authority (Civil War).

1894 - Grover Cleveland - Illinois To break the Pullman railroad strike after the governor opposed federal troop deployment.

1957 - Eisenhower - Arkansas To enforce school desegregation in Little Rock against Governor Faubus’s obstruction.

1962 - JF Kennedy - Mississippi To enforce federal court order admitting James Meredith to the University of Mississippi.

1963 - JF Kennedy - Alabama To enforce school desegregation at the University of Alabama over Governor Wallace’s protest.

1965 - LB Johnson - Alabama To protect civil rights marchers in Selma after Governor Wallace refused to act.

Matt_Netherlands on October 22nd, 2025 at 23:46 UTC »

Imagine our country going down by the hands of a corrupt reality show star with the IQ of a cob of corn. Of all the people to take down the United States, it’s really going to be this monumental dipshit? 🫠

snoo_spoo on October 22nd, 2025 at 23:38 UTC »

I hope the Supreme Court remembers that the next time they rule on something. His game plan is to get rid of you, so maybe stop handing down shitty rulings making things easier for him?