Trump Loses on Tariffs & Sending Troops Into Los Angeles

0:00When you're running a business, the best days are the ones where priorities stay on track. For midsize and large companies, risk can affect multiple parts of the organization at once, from property and liability to cyber and regulatory challenges. At that level, managing risk becomes an ongoing discipline. At the Hartford, the focus is on helping businesses manage risk before it turns into something more disruptive. And when losses do happen, that work is paired with insurance coverage shaped by years of underwriting, risk engineering, and claims experience. Learn more at thehartford.com slash risk mitigation.

0:35Policies provided by Hartford Fire Insurance Company and its property and casualty affiliates, Hartford, Connecticut. Everyone's talking about how AI is transforming work, especially in sales. While the landscape shifts, one thing remains the same, the thrill of closing a deal. Whether it's a gong or a confetti machine, every team has its celebration rituals. Adio is designed for that moment. It's the agentic CRM that turns customer signals into actionable insights, helping you close deals faster with revenue agents and automations working around the clock. You'll have everything you need to scale your go-to market efforts.

1:06Elevate your wins with Adio. Start your free trial at adio.com slash iHeart. Discover a spectacular island destination with crystal blue seas, endless sunshine, and the cool Bahamian breeze. Bahamar, located in Nassau, Bahamas offers your choice of three luxury hotels, the richly refined Rosewood, the playfully hip SLS, and the stylishly modern Grand Hyatt. With over 45 restaurants, bars, and lounges, Bahamar serves up delicious dining from world-renowned chefs like Daniel Bouloud and Marcus Samuelson, nightlife venues like the new Jean-Baptiste Jazz Club, and the Caribbean's most luxurious casino.

1:44At Bahamar, you'll find every pleasure under the sun and one-of-a-kind experiences for the entire family, like Baja Bay, our 15-acre lush tropical water park, interactive wildlife experiences, including our daily flamingo parade, world-class golf, tennis, spa, and so much more. Visit BajaMar.com today and discover a vacation destination where memories are made for a lifetime. Baja Mar, life spectacular. This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio. If I didn't send the National Guard into Los Angeles, I would be making an announcement today. I'd be talking about Huntsville and I'd simultaneously be saying, by the way, the Olympics is not coming to Los Angeles.

2:32But a federal judge has found there was no rebellion, nor was civilian law enforcement unable to respond to the protests and enforce the law in Los Angeles this summer. Judge Stephen Breyer ruled that the Trump administration willfully violated federal law by deploying National Guard troops and U.S. Marines to carry out local law enforcement in Los Angeles. In a scathing ruling, Breyer noted that Trump has stated his intention to deploy National Guard troops to other cities across the country, raising concerns that Trump is creating a national police force with the president as its chief. And today in the Oval Office, Trump confirmed that Chicago is next, that he'll direct federal law enforcement intervention to combat crime in Chicago, despite staunch opposition from state and local officials.

3:28If the governor of Illinois would call up, call me up, I would love to do it. Now, we're going to do it anyway. We have the right to do it because I have an obligation to protect this country. And that includes Baltimore. I saw where Governor Moore was asking me to take a walk down the street of Baltimore. Well, Baltimore is a very unsafe place. Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker reiterated today that crime is down in Chicago and that the city doesn't need nor does it want federal troops there. None of this is about fighting crime or making Chicago safer. None of it. For Trump, it's about testing his power and producing a political drama to cover up for his corruption.

4:17If you need any proof of this, that it's all a big show. My guest is constitutional law expert Harold Krent, a professor at the Chicago-Kent College of Law. Hal, is Judge Breyer's decision a complete refutation of Trump sending troops into Los Angeles? It's a partial refutation, and indeed, Judge Breyer's order allows the military to remain. What he has done is delineate what they can and cannot do. And so this is an effort by the judge to steer clear of the earlier Ninth Circuit decision, which lifted a stay on his earlier preliminary injunction. So the court here is trying to be careful in trying to say what the National Guard can do and can't do, and it's up to the Ninth Circuit to react, and I'm sure they'll react one way or the other.

5:11But Hal, didn't he find that sending the National Guard in was a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act? He did, but he said that there were some duties that the federalized National Guard could, in fact, undertake consistent with the Posse Comitatus Act, but that the fact was that he made a factual finding that the troops had done more than that. They had engaged in general law enforcement activity, which she said was proscribed under the Posse Comitatus Act and tradition. So he made a more narrow, nuanced finding than he had previously, saying he didn't even question the ability of the president to federalize the National Guard against the governor's wishes, which obviously took place earlier in the year.

5:57But he said even if the president can do that, they can't engage in general law enforcement activities, including covering ICE agents, including dispersing crowds, and so forth. So it's a more narrow decision than he issued previously, and we'll see how the Ninth Circuit again reacts to it. So he said there were indeed protests in Los Angeles, and some individuals engaged in violence, yet there was no rebellion, nor was civilian law enforcement unable to respond to the protests and enforce the law. There were two sides. He earlier had ruled that the president lacked the authority to federalize the National Guard because of the reasons you suggested.

6:42And so he is trying to create a decision in my mind here that is consistent with the broad principles he articulated previously, limiting the president's ability to nationalize the Federal Guard, but then realizing that the Ninth Circuit had overruled him in part previously, then decided to add more granularly that even if the president could nationalize the National Guard, that they could not engage in sort of typical law enforcement authorities, which he said, including, you know, dispersing crowds, including protecting ICE agents and so forth. But I think the consensus has been that the president cannot nationalize the National Guard, you know, unless all typical law enforcement has collapsed, you can't enforce court orders, or there's an insurrection.

7:33And obviously, those two things are not in place in Los Angeles. In my mind, though, this is a sideshow, because President Trump continually says that he can federalize the National Guard and send them wherever he wants to, including Chicago, just for ordinary criminal law enforcement. So it's clear that there's a clash between the court's view of the limits of the president's authority under the Tassi Comitatus Act and what the president thinks he can do and has continually espoused he can do in terms of federalizing the troops at a moment's notice. The judge cited a C-SPAN broadcast of Trump's August 27th cabinet meeting where he discussed sending the National Guard into Chicago and said, quote, I have the right to do anything I want to do.

8:22So Judge Breyer cited that, and then he expanded his order beyond Los Angeles to all of California. He clearly limited the order to California, but decided that because California itself was a plaintiff, he was empowered to extend the relief to grant protection to the plaintiff in the case. Do you think that went too far? Well, my only concern about the court's opinion is that the court seemed to be dismissing the president's sort of inherent authority. As a statutory matter, I think the court is on strong ground, both historically and in terms of texturally, of understanding the limits of the Posse Comitatus Act.

9:05I think the court was a little bit quick in terms of dismissing the president's sort of inherent authority under the Commander-in-Chief Clause of the Constitution. Clearly, presidents have to make tough calls, tough calls in terms of riots on the streets, tough calls in terms of potential invasions and so forth. And so if the president said we need to protect federal buildings, we need to protect federal instrumentalities, I think that Article 2 itself might give the president, arguably she does give the president, that kind of authority to order troops to protect those even if states say they don't need it.

9:45So that's not at stake here. And President Trump's news conference clearly illustrates that that's not at stake here. But I think that might be a weakness in the court's opinion, because I do think that the chief executive has to make those tough calls if there are threats in the president's mind to federal instrumentalities within the states. What Trump has said today is there are lots of murders in Chicago and crime is up in Chicago and they're going in. But he didn't say when. But there seems to be absolutely no justification for what the president said he's going to do in Chicago, which is even more indefensible than what he did in California.

10:29And I would expect that the mayor of Chicago, Mayor Johnson, and the governor of Illinois, Governor Pritzker, will immediately go to court, not only cite the most recent Judge Breyer decision, but cite just more convincingly that the president has acknowledged the purpose for why he's sending in troops into Chicago. And that's absolutely prohibited by the Posse Comitatus Act under any construction of the terms of the statute. So Judge Breyer's decision has no effect in Illinois. Correct. But is the reasoning strong enough to apply to Illinois? I think that reasoning will cover the same situation.

11:12And again, Chicago is an easier case. And I think that to the extent that the president would say that ICE agents are under attack and that he, as commander chief, can't ensure an orderly function of immigration processes in this country without calling in supportive troops, that would be the strongest sort of justification that I can understand in the California context for the use of either the Federalized National Guard or for the Marines. But he clearly in Chicago basically said, I don't even need that justification. I can send troops wherever I want, whenever I want, because I'm the president of the United States.

11:49And that downright is frightening. Not only is it clearly outlawed by the Pasukamatatus Act and by the history that led to the act, but it's a huge step towards autocracy. What if he just, instead of sending in the National Guard or military troops, if he just sent in lots and lots of federal agents, FBI, DEA, ICE, is there a problem with that legally? There may be pockets of restrictions, but I think ordinarily that would be within his power. And certainly he can shift FBI agents over to ICE as temporary details. He has the power to do that under prior statute. So in that respect, he could accomplish at least some of his goals.

12:34But again, he could not engage those FBI agents in terms of taking over for general law enforcement for Chicago because the FBI is not authorized. The agents aren't authorized to deal with conventional robbery, theft, etc. that are state crimes, not federal crimes. So the Insurrection Act is an exception to the Posse Comitatus law? That's correct. And so if he would deem that we are under insurrection, I don't even know what the theory would be in Chicago. But if he says that there is a insurrection because undocumented workers are rising up in arms against the authority, or he would say that some other kind of insurrection is taking place, then he could justifiably use federal troops.

13:21He has not made that claim, and indeed, one is very far-fetched, given the facts as we know them now. And particularly in light of the fact that he did not declare an insurrection on January 6th of 2021. Coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show, I'll continue this conversation with Professor Harold Krent of the Chicago-Kent College of Law. So what can Illinois' governor and Chicago's mayor do? I'm June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg.

14:19keep you in control however buying happens next new markets new ai powered selling services a whole new agentic era where you decide how your business will show up and stand up paypal is built to help your business come out ahead we're built for payments built for growth built for agentic paypal open built for all business visit paypalopen.com to get started That's paypalopen.com.

15:18elevate your wins with Adio. Start your free trial at adio.com slash iHeart. This is Tony A.O. from The Real Report with Tony A.O. and Uncle Murda. You ever notice how everything keeps going up? Rent's going up, streaming services are going up. Even your favorite burrito spot suddenly thinks salsa should cost extra. But with Boost Mobile, you and your phone bill don't have to play the will it's go up soon game because Boost Mobile has an unlimited talk, text, and data plan at a price that'll never go up. It's the same price you'll pay for life, meaning you're set to never worry about your bill increasing again for as long as you're on the plan.

15:52While the world keeps finding new ways to nickel and dime you, Boost Mobile gives you unlimited wireless at one set price for life. Imagine something in your budget actually staying the same. You'll pay the same for unlimited wireless when you're posting mirror selfies in your 20s and when you're posting mirror selfies in retirement. Some things never change. Switch now for unlimited wireless at a price that'll never go up, only at Boost Mobile. After 30 gigabytes, customers may experience slower speeds. Customers will pay$25 a month as long as they remain active on the Boost Unlimited plan. President Donald Trump said today that he'll direct federal law enforcement intervention to combat crime in Chicago, despite staunch opposition from Chicago's mayor and Illinois' governor.

16:37Well, we're going in. I didn't say when we're going in. We know before anything has happened here that the Trump plan is to use any excuse to deploy armed military personnel to Chicago. If someone flings a sandwich at an ICE agent, Trump will try and go on TV and declare an emergency in Chicago. I've been talking to Professor Harold Krent of the Chicago-Kent College of Law. So how before the break we were talking about Judge Breyer's decision that the Trump administration willfully broke federal law when they sent National Guard troops to Los Angeles. And we were talking about the Insurrection Act and that that's an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that Judge Breyer said the president could have invoked.

17:24Judge said if the president wants to avoid the act's restrictions, he must invoke a valid exception like the Insurrection Act, along with its requisite showing that state and local law enforcement are unable or unwilling to act. When we had riots in the wake of the assassination of Martin Luther King, when we had the unrest because of the George Floyd murder, arguably local law enforcement could not take the helm and preserve law and order. And that is an exception of the Potsdam-Taddeus Act. And indeed, the courts would be in difficult position if the president made a careful finding that that is why he is sending troops, that there is no local law enforcement that can take care of law enforcement activities.

18:10He's never made that finding. And given the fact that the crime has gone down in cities like Washington, D.C. and Chicago, it's simply far-fetched, which is understandable why he doesn't want to make that kind of specific finding. So, yes, presidents have sent in troops, and President Trump could in the future, respecting Congress, but not in these situations. Obviously, the Constitution ascribes a principal role to Congress in deciding when to introduce the military into civilian situations. Congress has done so in the Posit Cacomatitis Act, as well as the limitations in the Insurrection Act.

18:48And that's the role that the Constitution gives to Congress. And President Trump is just riding ruckshad over the constitutional structure. The mayor of Chicago and the governor and other officials held this press conference. And is there anything that the governor or the mayor can do to stop him from federalizing the National Guard? I mean, the National Guard is supposedly under the governor's control, right? Absolutely. But there are circumstances where the president can federalize the National Guard. And at this point, they may preemptively go to court. I'm sure they're discussing it, both in terms of filing a lawsuit before the president sends troops, or they'll wait them out.

19:31And at the first sign of when the president does introduce troops into the streets of Chicago, then they'll run into the federal court and, you know, hope for the best. I think they will receive a favorable reception in the Seventh Circuit in this area, but time will tell. Suppose they started using the National Guard for other things in Chicago or in Illinois, cleaning up the streets of every town or something like that. Suppose they just use the National Guard themselves. Yeah, I mean, the governor can do that. And the governors in the past have used the National Guard to help enhance the safety of their communities.

20:04But absent the governor's directions, the president lacks the authority to do so, except for these delineated exceptions that Congress has carefully thought through. And it would be up to the courts then to respect that dividing line between Congress and the president. Otherwise, we're going to have not a separation of powers of three equal branches, but everything will be totally dominated by one branch. And that's something that the framers were very cognizant about, the fear of having one branch exceed too much power to its own. And that's what we're confronting in the near future. Tell us what the Ninth Circuit ruled before.

20:39Earlier it said that it's really difficult for courts to second guess a justification by the president that there was simply not sufficient local law enforcement to protect federal undertakings. In this case, the federal undertakings, of course, were the ICE agents attempting to round up undocumented individuals and sending them out of the country. And so the court decided two to one to not weigh in and say that they would have a hearing on whether or not the president's justification was pretext or not. And so, again, the district court here, Judge Breyer, cleverly said, even if that's true, the president has violated the comitatus statute because it has not limited the use of the troops for those permissible functions.

21:30So they didn't want to get into pretext or non-pretext, but rather just said that what, in fact, the troops did in Los Angeles exceeded their permissible bounds under the statute. So, I mean, if the Seventh Circuit follows the Ninth Circuit, then they wouldn't stop the troops from coming in. I don't think that's going to happen. I mean, I think that it obviously depends upon what district court judge gets the case once it's filed, assumably by Governor Pritzker. But I think that the logical outcome here is different because of the fact that there's no fig leaf. The president has not even come close to complying with the Post-Hocomitantus Act.

22:10He's just said local law enforcement time at a time at news conferences and not even suggesting that there's an insurrection or a failure of the state and local government to comply with judicial commands. So I think the rule is quite clear here in a lawsuit to simply issue an injunction to say, you're outside your lane. And it would be up then to the Seventh Circuit if there is an injunction to determine whether to grant it or not. I think they would uphold it. And Judge Breyer said something that really resonates in light of the fact that President Trump has talked about Chicago and next Baltimore and New York.

22:52He said it raises concerns that they're creating a national police force with the president as its chief. And that's what it seems to be because it's about crime, which is usually a local issue. Yeah, it's one thing for the president as quasi-governor for D.C. to decide what's needed to maintain law and order on D.C. streets. Obviously, that's very controversial in its own, but it's another thing for him to do that in states where there are governors trying to displace gubernatorial authority. And, of course, if you step back and look at this, you know, the president has said he's doing this in Chicago, maybe New York, maybe Baltimore.

23:28But you don't hear about New Orleans, Memphis, St. Louis, places with higher crime rates that are in Republican states. So, again, to think about what the president is accomplishing here, he's trying to flex his muscles in a way which creates an incredibly dangerous precedent for the entire country. Well, let's hope it doesn't happen. If it does, there's certainly going to be a lot of litigation about it. Thanks so much, Hal. That's Professor Harold Krent of the Chicago-Kent College of Law. Coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show, a federal appeals court has ruled that President Trump had no legal right to impose sweeping tariffs on almost every country.

24:10But the next stop is the Supreme Court. I'm June Grosso, and you're listening to Bloomberg.

24:22Every sale comes down to a single second. The one between buy now and maybe later. PayPal is built to help your business win that moment. With a checkout experience that feels certain, reliable, and familiar. With a global two-sided network and hundreds of millions of buyers who already know us. all to keep you in control however buying happens next new markets new ai powered selling services a whole new agentic era where you decide how your business will show up and stand up paypal is built to help your business come out ahead we're built for payments built for growth built for agentic paypal open built for all business visit paypalopen.com to get started that's paypalopen.com everyone's talking about how ai is transforming work especially in sales while the landscape shifts one thing remains the same the thrill of closing a deal whether it's a gong or a confetti machine every team has its celebration rituals adio is designed for that moment.

25:31It's the agentic CRM that turns customer signals into actionable insights, helping you close deals faster with revenue agents and automations working around the clock. You'll have everything you need to scale your go-to market efforts. Elevate your wins with Adio. Start your free trial at adio.com slash iHeart. This is Tony A.O. from The Real Report with Tony A.O. and Uncle Murda. You ever notice how everything keeps going up? Rent's going up? Streaming services are going up? Even your favorite burrito spot suddenly thinks salsa should cost extra. But with Boost Mobile, you and your phone bill don't have to play the will it go up soon game because Boost Mobile has an unlimited talk, text, and data plan at a price that'll never go up.

26:10It's the same price you'll pay for life, meaning you're set to never worry about your bill increasing again for as long as you're on the plan. While the world keeps finding new ways to nickel and dime you, Boost Mobile gives you unlimited wireless at one set price for life. Imagine something in your budget actually staying the same. You'll pay the same for unlimited wireless when you're posting mirror selfies in your 20s and when you're posting mirror selfies in retirement. Some things never change. Switch now for unlimited wireless at a price that will never go up, only at Boost Mobile. After 30 gigabytes, customers may experience slower speeds.

26:42Customers will pay$25 a month as long as they remain active on the Boost Unlimited plan. A federal appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump had no legal right to impose sweeping tariffs on almost every country. In a 7-4 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that Trump overstepped his authority under an emergency powers law. It's a major legal blow, but it largely upheld a May decision by a specialized federal trade court in New York. But it's a liberal court, and it's going up to the Supreme Court, who I think have been incredible people. I think they've made very wise decisions.

27:27But the tariff question, because without the tariffs, this country is in serious, serious trouble. We've taken in almost $17 trillion of investment is coming in. Most of it is coming because of tariffs. The appeals court didn't strike down the tariffs immediately, allowing the administration until mid-October to appeal to the Supreme Court, although Trump says they'll do so immediately. My guest is Jimmy Garule, a professor at Notre Dame Law School and the former undersecretary for enforcement at the Department of the Treasury. Jimmy, will you explain why the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Trump's tariffs?

28:08Well, first, let me just back up. So on Friday, as you stated, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court decision by the Court of International Trade. That decision was issued back in May. And in that decision, the Court of International Trade set aside five executive orders issued by President Trump that imposed tariffs of unlimited duration on nearly all goods from nearly every country across the globe. So that decision was affirmed. And the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that IEPA, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, that the authority under that statute to authorize the president to regulate, and this is an important term in the statute, regulate imports, does not authorize President Trump to impose tariffs under either the reciprocal tariffs or the drug trafficking tariffs.