In essence, the deployment occurred because the President asserted his authority to federalize the National Guard under a specific legal provision, even though it went against the usual practice of state governors calling for the National Guard.
Well the governor is the leader of the NG I thought so if they then deploy without his go on an illegal order from Trump one should assume they are braking some laws.
In this case, Trump invoked Section 10 U.S.C. 12406, which allows the President to federalize the National Guard if the country is facing an invasion, rebellion, or if the President cannot execute federal laws with regular forces. He argued that the protests in Los Angeles constituted a rebellion.
In this case, Trump has circumvented that step by invoking a specific provision of the US Code of Armed Services titled 10 U.S.C. 12406, which lists three circumstances under which the president can federalise the National Guard.
The National Guard is typically activated by the state governor to respond to domestic emergencies or natural disasters. However, under specific circumstances outlined in the US Code, the President can federalize the National Guard, meaning they are under federal control.
So then he have that power. But of course if Trump this under one law that is not valid here then he are doing something illegal. But then who can stop him?
Comments
https://www.military.com/benefits/reserve-and-guard-benefits/whats-difference-between-title-10-and-title-32-mobilization-orders.html