Here's a short #thread with answers (and citations to authority) for the five big questions:
A: Yes, the MN National Guard has been deployed by Gov. Walz. But the Guard wears (at least) two hats. Right now, it's wearing its "state" hat, subject to the control solely of the Governor, which is uncontroversial.
A: No. The PCA only bars such use of the military *without* statutory authorization.
law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18…
Several statutes *authorize* such use of the military for law enforcement.
When these statutes are (properly) invoked, there is no Posse Comitatus problem with domestic use of the military.
A: Not necessarily. Although *some* of these authorities require a state request before federal regulars or federalized Guard troops can be used for domestic law enforcement, some of them don't.
A: No. The authorities to federalize the Guard do not depend on what they were doing beforehand; there may just be less *need* to do so if they're already on site.
But it's not implausible to argue that these statutes *could* apply now.
Instead, the real constraint today might be *responsibility*; if Trump invokes these statutes, he'd own all that follows.
If you're curious about the broader historical and constitutional foundation for these authorities, see this paper I wrote back in 2004:
digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewconten…
Thanks for reading!!
/end
Many will still be wary of domestic use of troops, but it’s not a per se threat to the rule of law.