SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
insurrection act
'A Pretext to Take Over American Cities': JD Vance Sparks Alarm With Comments on Insurrection Act
"The guardrails are gone," warned Democratic political strategist David Axelrod.
Oct 12, 2025
Vice President JD Vance sparked alarm on Sunday when he said that President Donald Trump was considering invoking the Insurrection Act under the pretenses of combating violent crime in US cities.
During an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," host Kristen Welker asked Vance if Trump was "seriously considering" invoking the Insurrection Act, which would allow him to use the US military to carry out law enforcement operations.
Vance responded by saying Trump is "looking at all his options," and added that he hasn't felt the need to invoke it for the time being.
Vance proceeded to justify invoking the Insurrection Act, which he said could be necessary to protect the work of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials.
"We have to remember why we're talking about this, Kristen," he said. "Because crime has gotten out of control in our cities, because ICE agents, the people enforcing our immigration laws, have faced a 1,000% increase in violent attacks against them. We have people right now who are going out there, who are doing the job the president asked them to do, who are enforcing our immigration laws, they're being assaulted."
Welker countered by noting that a judge in Illinois found last week that the ICE facility in Broadview, Illinois has remained entirely open and operational despite being the target of protesters in recent weeks.
She also informed Vance that crime has been coming down significantly in both Chicago and Portland, two US cities where Trump has tried to deploy National Guard forces.
"Kristen, crime is down in Chicago and Portland often because they're so overwhelmed at the local level, they're not even keeping their statistics properly," Vance replied, without providing any evidence to back up his claim.
WELKER: Are you seriously looking at invoking the Insurrection Act?
VANCE: The president is looking at all of his options, right now he hasn't felt he needed to. But we have to remember we are talking about this because crime has gotten out of control in our cities
WELKER:… pic.twitter.com/vBBPkUidPu
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 12, 2025
Vance's justifications for invoking the Insurrection Act on the grounds that he laid out drew alarmed reactions from many critics.
"This is a pretext to take over American cities by force," wrote CNN political commentator Karen Finney in a post on X.
Shannon Watts, the founder of anti-gun violence organization Moms Demand Action, linked Vance's comments to the current shutdown of the federal government and questioned whether the government deserved to be funded when its executive branch was threatening to unleash the military against its own citizens.
"Why should Democrats vote to open the government while this is still happening?" she asked.
Cornell William Brooks, a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School and former president of the NAACP, argued in a post on Bluesky that Vance's comments show that the Trump administration "insults your intelligence."
"The same administration that fired an economist for reporting statistics on the economy," he wrote, "is asking you to not believe lower statistics on crime, not see safer streets, and accept the National Guard in your front yard."
Democratic political strategist David Axelrod warned that the Trump administration seems genuinely eager to send troops into US cities.
"Believe them when they tell you what they're planning, folks," he wrote. "Trump wanted to use American troops against Americans in his first term, and was dissuaded by responsible civilian and military leaders. No more. The guardrails are gone."
Attorney George Conway, a former Republican who left the party over its embrace of Trump, responded to Vance's comments by posting a video of anti-ICE protesters in Chicago dancing in the streets to the classic Neil Diamond hit, "Sweet Caroline."
Asked by Kristen Welker on Meet the Press this morning whether the White House was seriously considering invoking the Insurrection Act, Vice President Vance said, "The president is looking at all his options." pic.twitter.com/GVKxXf2YmI
— George Conway 👊🇺🇸🔥 (@gtconway3d) October 12, 2025
Talk of invoking the Insurrection Act has ramped up in recent weeks, despite the fact that protests against ICE facilities in Illinois and Oregon have remained overwhelmingly peaceful and have featured impromptu dance parties carried out by people dressed in inflatable animal costumes.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Omar Says Trump Plot to Invoke Insurrection Act an ‘Unhinged Act of Authoritarianism’
"Invoking the Insurrection Act in his manufactured war on American cities is both illegal and unconstitutional," warned the Minnesota progressive lawmaker amid growing concern over Trump plot to foment unrest.
Oct 08, 2025
President Donald Trump was nonchalant in his response to a question on Tuesday about the potential invocation of the Insurrection Act, which authorizes the president to deploy military forces inside the country to suppress rebellion, violence, or enforce the law, but Congresswoman Ilhan Omar was clear in her warning about the move that Trump suggested could be coming.
"Invoking the Insurrection Act in his manufactured war on American cities is both illegal and unconstitutional," said Omar on social media. "Another unhinged act of authoritarianism."
When asked in the Oval Office about invoking the Insurrection Act, which was last used in 1992 to quell unrest in Los Angeles after four police officers were acquitted of beating Black motorist Rodney King, Trump said that "it's been invoked before, as you know," before repeating the claim that "there's lots of crime in Chicago."
Q: Are you planning to invoke the Insurrection Act?
TRUMP: Well, it's been invoked before. If you look at Chicago -- Chicago is a great city where's a lot of crime and if the governor can't do the job, we'll do that job. pic.twitter.com/BJHrSJmueE
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 7, 2025
As Common Dreams reported in August, crime in all of the cities Trump has threatened to deploy federal agents and troops to has been falling—contrary to his vague repeated claims that conditions are “bad, very bad" in the nation's largest and most diverse cities.
Chicago—a longtime target of the president—has seen fewer homicides this year than any year in the past decade, and reported a 30% decline in shootings and homicides in 2024. Violent crime in the city is down 25% from 2019—one of the largest declines among large cities.
But "Operation Midway Blitz," Trump's deployment of hundreds of armed federal immigration agents to the city, has brought what Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker called "chaos" to the city where residents have held nonviolent protests against the anti-immigration raids and detentions by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Since the operation began on September 9, ICE and other immigration agents have fatally shot an undocumented immigrant, Silverio Villegas-Gonzalez, during a traffic stop; slammed congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh to the ground at a protest; attacked a priest and a journalist with pepper balls; pointed a gun directly at a civilian who was filming them; and imposed other violence on communities.
Pritzker said on Monday that he believes the president is intentionally causing "fear and confusion" on the streets of Chicago—as well as other cities such as Portland, Oregon—to create the appearance of chaos that's being fueled not by armed, masked federal agents, but by the communities there, and that must be stamped out by an even larger show of force.
Pritzker: “The Trump administration is following a playbook: Cause chaos, create fear and confusion, make it seem that peaceful protesters are a mob by firing gas pellets and tear gas canisters at them. Why? To create the pretext for invoking the Insurrection Act.” pic.twitter.com/bSlHVEaQPo
— The Bulwark (@BulwarkOnline) October 6, 2025
Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich did not mince words in a Substack article on Monday about what he believes the president is planning.
"The direction we’re going is either martial law or civil war," said Reich. "I don’t want to unduly alarm you, but you need to be aware of this imminent danger. It’s unfolding very rapidly."
This week, Trump intensified federal forces' presence in Chicago and Portland by deploying not only the Illinois National Guard but also 400 members of the Texas National Guard to the two cities, the latter of which the president has described as "war-ravaged" due to protests that have been held outside an ICE facility in recent months. A federal judge found no veracity to the claim last weekend when she barred the administration from deploying to Oregon National Guard to Portland.
Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, however, embraced the president's claim that the National Guard needed to protect federal agents to the public, telling Pritzker in a social media post, "You can either fully enforce protection for federal employees or get out of the way and let Texas Guard do it."
Reich wrote that "Americans from so-called 'red' states, with the backing of their Republican governors and legislatures, are on the brink of using lethal force against Americans in so-called 'blue' states, whose Democratic governors and legislatures strongly oppose the moves."
He added that several steps toward a wider deployment of military forces via the Insurrection Act have already been taken, when Trump deployed ICE to cities, provoked demonstrations with their presence, and exaggerated "the scale and severity" of the protests.
Reich wrote:
The third step is for Trump and Hegseth to deploy federalized National Guard troops to control the demonstrators, an act that’s already enflaming the public and provoking some actual violence.
Until Trump’s announcement that he was sending troops into Portland, protests rarely numbered more than two dozen people. Since his announcement, clashes have become more violent.
The fourth step will be for Trump and Hegseth to invoke the Insurrection Act.
He said as much today. The Insurrection Act empowers a president to deploy the US military and to federalize the National Guard units of the individual states to suppress civil disorder, insurrection, or armed rebellion against the federal government of the United States.
Reich expressed hope that federal courts including the Supreme Court will stop Trump's plan to deploy the military in US cities, which the president also teased in his speech in Quantico, Virginia on September 30, when he told the nation's top generals and admirals that the country is "under invasion from within" and said cities should be used as "training grounds" to target domestic "enemies."
"I hope we don’t come near to this," said Reich. "But I believe it is Trump’s plan... and they are implementing it as quickly as they can."
The ACLU last week called for "more concrete protections" at the state and local level as the invocation of the Insurrection Act appears increasingly imminent.
"States and cities should move to limit or withdraw from partnerships with the Trump administration that are being used to terrify and attack our neighbors and loved ones, like ICE’s expanding 287(g) program," wrote Naureen Shah, director of government affairs at the group's national political advocacy division.
"Our schools, healthcare facilities, libraries, and shelters should establish protocols to limit law enforcement access without a warrant so that they are safer for our community members to visit," she added. "Our state and local governments should invest in proven public safety strategies and reject the administration’s attempt to redeploy the military as a police force in America’s streets."
"While much of the formal power to stop these deployments lies in the hands of local, state, and federal officials, we are not powerless—and it’s imperative that we keep speaking out," Shah added. "The Trump administration is relying on people being too scared to resist its cruel and unlawful measures. But the deployments in Los Angeles, Washington D.C., Chicago, Portland, and Memphis have shown us that we are stronger together."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Stephen Miller Says ‘Quiet Part Out Loud,’ Claims Trump Has Unlimited ‘Plenary Authority’ Before Going Silent in Interview
"Miller's statements show their real position," said writer Greg Sargeant. "Trump's power to invent pretexts for emergency actions is limitless."
Oct 08, 2025
White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller appeared to slip up in an interview Monday, admitting that he believes President Donald Trump possesses the authority of a dictator.
Miller, who has made himself the face of the Trump administration's efforts to crush political dissent, made the comments while appearing on CNN to defend the president's deployment of troops to Portland and Chicago, which have run into roadblocks from federal courts.
The anchor, Boris Sanchez, asked Miller about a ruling by US District Judge Karin Immergut on Saturday that the president had no legal or factual basis to commandeer the Oregon National Guard and deploy the forces in Portland against protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Over the weekend, Miller had referred to the ruling as a "legal insurrection," adding that "the president is the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces, not an Oregon judge."
Given Miller's comments, Sanchez asked, "Does the administration still plan to abide by that court ruling?"
Miller responded: “Well, the administration filed an appeal this morning with the 9th Circuit. I would note the administration won an identical case, in the 9th Circuit, just a few months ago, with respect to the federalizing of the California National Guard. Under title 10 of the US Code, the president has plenary authority, has…”
Miller then suddenly stopped speaking.
"Stephen? Stephen? Hey, Stephen, can you hear me?" Sanchez asked as Miller sat, wordlessly, his eyes blinking and darting around.
Sanchez then apologized, saying, "It seems like we're having a technical issue," before cutting to a break.
The recording of the interview reveals that there was not, in fact, a "technical issue." Miller had appeared to cut himself off in the middle of his sentence before sitting motionless for approximately 15 seconds.
In a post with over 32,000 likes, one social media user speculated that it was because Miller had "said the quiet part out loud," adding, "The plan wasn't to be made public. Clearly, someone hit the panic button in his earpiece."
After returning from the commercial, the interview continued. But the oddly specific phrase "plenary authority" was not invoked again. As the same user noted, the interview appears on CNN's YouTube channel, but has mysteriously been edited to remove Miller's mention of "plenary authority."
According to Cornell University's Legal Information Institute, "plenary authority" refers to “power that is wide-ranging, broadly construed, and often limitless for all practical purposes.”
The law Miller cited, Title 10 of the US Code, states the three conditions under which the president may deploy a state's National Guard: if there is a military invasion by a foreign power, if there is a rebellion against the US government or the danger of one, or if the president is “unable with the regular forces” to execute US laws.
The phrase "plenary authority" does not appear anywhere in the code. But as Huffington Post reporter Sara Boboltz explained, "Miller appeared to mean that the president has total control over everything the military does, even though he shares some of that power with Congress."
Though Trump has asserted that Portland is "war-ravaged" to justify his use of military force, Immergut—a Trump appointee—shot this characterization down in her ruling as "untethered to facts," as there was “substantial evidence that the protests at the Portland ICE facility were not significantly violent or disruptive in the days—or even weeks—leading up to the president’s directive.”
But Miller's invocation of the phrase "plenary authority" in this context seems to imply that Trump alone is the judge of what situations warrant the use of the most extreme emergency powers.
"Trump just threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act if governors and judges act lawfully within the constitutional system in ways that displease him," said New Republic writer Greg Sargent on social media. "Miller's statements show their real position: Trump's power to invent pretexts for emergency actions is limitless."
Sargent described this theory in more detail in a piece published Wednesday: "Miller is working overtime to polarize the public debate about Trump’s increasingly dictatorial abuses of power. And he’s doing so quite consciously. He relentlessly depicts Democrats as allied with a vast, inchoate class of violent criminals and insurrectionists operating in every shadow of American life."
Trump's deployments of troops to US cities are decisively unpopular. A CBS survey published Sunday found that 58% of Americans oppose Trump’s National Guard deployments.
But Sargent argued that "Miller plainly believes there’s a latent majority out in the country that can be sleepwalked into authoritarianism," in part due to the muted response from many top Democrats.
With the exceptions of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker—the latter of whom Trump stated should be arrested on Wednesday along with Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson—Sargent says that many of the opposition party's leaders have declined to confront Trump's narratives of urban anarchy head-on, seeing them as a "trap" to lure them into "a losing debate about crime."
One Democratic strategist recently told Politico that “just like with immigration, Trump has found another issue where the Democratic Party is on a back foot“ and repeated false claims that crime is rampant in the nation’s large cities; in fact, violent crime is on the decline in the major cities the president has targeted, with particularly stark drops in Portland.
"Do Democrats, broadly speaking, have a theory of this moment that’s consciously matched to MAGA’s authoritarian politics? They need one," Sargent said. "Because guess who does have a theory of the moment? Miller does. And he’s amassing unprecedented power to put it into practice as we speak."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular