

Mixed Reaction in Courts to Trump's US Troop Plans
Oct 9, 2025
Leon Fresco, an immigration law expert at Holland & Knight, dives into the complexities surrounding the National Guard's deployment to Portland and Chicago, debating its implications on immigration enforcement. Meanwhile, Richard Briffault, a Columbia Law School professor, explores the intricacies of standing in the Supreme Court's review of mail-in ballot challenges, highlighting concerns about election laws and potential political forecasting by the judiciary. Together, they unravel the legal battles shaping current immigration and voting rights.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
Limits On Guard Use Matter
- Federal deployment of National Guard can be lawful when limited to protecting federal property and personnel.
- Courts will scrutinize whether deployments are actually augmenting civil-law enforcement, which would be unconstitutional.
Two Legal Paths To Deploy
- The administration can deploy the Guard either to quell rebellion or to protect federal property and agents.
- The legal question is which justification the government relies on and whether facts support avoiding civil-law enforcement.
Deference To Presidential Judgement Is Unsettled
- Appellate panels may give broad deference to presidential threat assessments, but en banc review or the Supreme Court could limit that deference.
- The outcome may create new law on how much leeway presidents have to deploy forces domestically.