rump's DC Press Conference

[struggle4progress]

6. The legality of rump's D.C. takeover

... Protester:

If they can place us under military control without our consent, they will carry this playbook to every community that dares to push back in the United States of America ...

Steve Vladeck, Georgetown University Law Center: ...

... in California, President Trump purported to federalize the National Guard. So he took the state National Guard and tried to basically drop them into federal authority. In D.C., he doesn't have to do that. The president is actually already the commander in chief of the D.C. National Guard. It's the only National Guard for which that's true.

And so D.C. is the only place in the country where actually we don't have the question that's arisen in California about the validity of a federalization. Here, the president can act without any trigger. It's part of why I think folks were so critical of President Trump for not using the D.C. National Guard back on January 6 ...

I think the real key is for folks to not get desensitized to the radicalism of using federalized police, using federalized military authority for ordinary law enforcement contexts in a setting in which the facts don't seem to support it ...

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/the-legality-of-trumps-d-c-takeover-as-statistics-show-decline-in-crime