General Discussion

ancianita

(40,732 posts)

19. Why "clearly." The OP clearly infers Newsom's likely position; so what if it doesn't mention Newsom. You're

Mon Jun 9, 2025, 11:30 AM

Jun 9

clearly creating a strawman argument over a fluid legal situation right now -- that the OP assumes that Newsom doesn't know the law, and that this isn't the law Newsom would/could apply because ""maybe we don't know if" .
If you're not a lawyer, the question is why. It's just not helpful.

Newsom's still working out the constitutional language that represents other states' rights under the US Constitution. It's language that in this current context, might get appealed to the SCOTUS. IMO, it would be easier for the nine to rule against the defendant felon than for the nine to even consider applying their immunity ruling re the felon's "'core duties" to this case by the State of California -- because they would literally overwrite the meaning of states' rights.

The overall spiritof the OP still helps get people thinking, which, in this fluid situation, is a good thing.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

68 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Guard call up is invalid- they can be held personally responsible. [View all] James48 Jun 9 OP

Will TACO taco or will he pardon all the troops, or will he double down? Get popcorn out! marble falls Jun 9 #1

Double Down JustAnotherGen Jun 10 #48

Gavin needs to communicate this directly to those soldiers. Javaman Jun 9 #2

I recommend the protestors print that and hand them out to the National Guards. Doodley Jun 9 #3

I recommend blunt-nosed paper airplanes HariSeldon Jun 9 #14

Love it! FailureToCommunicate Jun 9 #24

Oh dude, you have no idea jmowreader Jun 10 #60

Yes! If only they could be dropped from upper story windows, like confetti parades. FailureToCommunicate Jun 9 #23

I doubt this matters, since when have laws stopped Trump? dem4decades Jun 9 #4

He is losing lots of court cases MadameButterfly Jun 9 #33

I think the goal is to let the Guardspeople know--they don't have spooky3 Jun 9 #5

So far, I've only seen LA police roughing up anyone. In fact, other than National Guard around detention center, not Silent Type Jun 9 #6

and I doubt they WILL do much of anything. There's hardly any protest. No rioting. LymphocyteLover Jun 10 #50

The convict doubled down even worst by calling up Marines, active duty troops... brush Jun 9 #7

The Insurrection Act of 1807 applies here Kaleva Jun 9 #18

What insurrection? LearnedHand Jun 10 #52

Here Kaleva Jun 10 #59

I'm aware of the Act, but there was no insurrection LearnedHand Jun 10 #61

They used the Act to do what they did so it is applicable Kaleva Jun 10 #62

A friend was an officer in the Army in Vietnam. He was ordered to go into Cambodia, armed with a camera and surfered Jun 9 #8

If they are smart (Which I believe they are) HarryM Jun 9 #9

Charge who? For what? reACTIONary Jun 9 #10

Clearly, you are mistaken Fiendish Thingy Jun 9 #11

Thank you, although if past is prologue on DU, this misinfo OP will rack up 100+ recs. Celerity Jun 9 #13

A lie travels around the world... Fiendish Thingy Jun 9 #15

as predicted, 122 recs and counting Celerity Jun 9 #27

+1 Kaleva Jun 9 #17

Why "clearly." The OP clearly infers Newsom's likely position; so what if it doesn't mention Newsom. You're ancianita Jun 9 #19

It's not a strawman argument Fiendish Thingy Jun 9 #22

It is you that are clearly mistaken. W_HAMILTON Jun 9 #40

Indeed, that is the law quoted in Newsom's suit Fiendish Thingy Jun 9 #41

You're saying a suit needed to be filed to .... what? intrepidity Jun 9 #43

The suit *alleges* that particular law was violated Fiendish Thingy Jun 9 #46

I'm confused Bluesaph Jun 10 #47

The governor doesnt sign off DetroitLegalBeagle Jun 10 #51

Was that done? Did they follow the procedure? Bluesaph Jun 10 #58

So if not properly activated, they are held personally accountable? Would they then be held on Scalded Nun Jun 9 #12

False. nt LexVegas Jun 9 #16

Gavin seems to be growing a pair. He can throw down the gauntlet and have the CA Guard commander flashman13 Jun 9 #20

Trump Mblaze Jun 9 #21

Or something like that. intrepidity Jun 9 #44

"My evidence refuting the OP's claim is that Newsom (and the AG, and other legal experts) have not made this claim.)..." ancianita Jun 9 #25

I didn't "call out people's facts as opinions" Fiendish Thingy Jun 9 #42

Grabber Blue Ozarks Jun 9 #26

Before the Civil War, that was correct Polybius Jun 9 #28

NYTimes had an article on it yesterday - TBF Jun 9 #29

I have a paywall remover link Polybius Jun 9 #30

The question is intrepidity Jun 9 #45

In that case it looks like LBJ was trying to protect marchers - TBF Jun 10 #54

This is not accurate! It's dangerous misinformation. Please edit/remove. LauraInLA Jun 9 #31

Are you not aware that Trump federalized this shit specifically so he could do this? Because it sure sounds like it. Karasu Jun 9 #32

Prosecute them all. Moostache Jun 9 #34

arrest them under state law moonshinegnomie Jun 9 #35

All nice but who's doing anything about it? Firestorm49 Jun 9 #36

Does California need to build it's own military Fullduplexxx Jun 9 #37

They already have one basically DetroitLegalBeagle Jun 10 #57

Wikipedia is your friend... progressoid Jun 9 #38

Guest on Nicolle Wallace said the same thing. Katinfl Jun 9 #39

And will the remedy be remedied? William769 Jun 10 #49

How does the fed have authority to send NG troops to Iraq? JohnnyRingo Jun 10 #53

Title 10 DetroitLegalBeagle Jun 10 #56

Thank You. JohnnyRingo Jun 11 #63

K&R bdamomma Jun 10 #55

Here is the Court Pinion calling it a violation of the Comstitution: James48 Jun 13 #64

It's already been reversed on appeal. GaYellowDawg Jun 13 #65

NO it hasn't. James48 Jun 13 #66

Well, I'm glad, then GaYellowDawg Jun 13 #67

What would happen if Newsom ordered his guard to STAY PUT bluestarone Jun 13 #68