President Donald Trump is actively considering invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807 to deploy federal troops in U.S. cities, citing what he describes as rampant crime and obstruction by Democratic governors and mayors. The move comes amid mounting legal resistance from federal judges and local officials, particularly in cities like Portland and Chicago, where National Guard deployments have been blocked or challenged. Trump stated that if people were being killed and courts or governors were holding up federal intervention, he would “do that”—referring to invoking the Act.

The Insurrection Act, codified in 10 U.S. Code §§ 251–255, allows the President to override the Posse Comitatus Act and use active-duty military or federalized National Guard forces to suppress rebellion, enforce federal law, or protect constitutional rights. Historically, the Act has been invoked about 30 times, most notably during the Civil Rights era to enforce desegregation and protect activists, and during the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Legal scholars warn that using the Act without clear evidence of rebellion or obstruction of law could be challenged as unconstitutional or politically motivated.

Federal courts would be responsible for reviewing whether the conditions for invoking the Act are met. The Supreme Court may ultimately weigh in if the legality of such a deployment is contested. Critics argue that invoking the Act now could escalate tensions and be used as a pretext to suppress dissent or influence electoral outcomes.

In Colorado, Governor Jared Polis has voiced strong opposition to any federalization of the Colorado National Guard for domestic enforcement purposes. His office stated that the Governor would not support the use of the Guard for “extralegal uses” such as those the President appears to be advocating. The Colorado National Guard, led by Major General Laura Clellan, is primarily tasked with disaster response and community support—not law enforcement. Local officials and legal experts in Colorado have emphasized the importance of maintaining state control over the Guard and respecting constitutional boundaries.

For Colorado Springs and surrounding communities, the prospect of federal troop deployment raises serious questions about local governance, public safety, and civic trust. Would such a move affect the state’s ability to manage its own emergency response systems? Could it strain relationships between federal and state agencies? These are questions the Dispatch will continue to explore.

As the situation develops, the Dispatch will provide ongoing coverage of legal challenges, state-level responses, and the broader implications for civil liberties and federalism. For now, Colorado stands firm: its Guard is not a tool for political theater.