President Donald Trump and Stephen Miller have contemplated invoking the rarely-used Insurrection Act to escalate military intervention on city streets amidst the protests in Los Angeles. However, administration lawyers are working on a less confrontational approach to safeguard federal enforcement capabilities without aggravating the situation. The focus is on the Insurrection Act, which allows the president to use military forces to quell insurrections on US soil.

While Trump has mobilized Marines and National Guard troops under a different legal authority to protect federal buildings, there is a possibility of expanding their mission by invoking the Insurrection Act. Trump has been involved in discussions regarding the act but has not made a final decision.

Despite initial indications against using the act, a lawsuit by California challenging the federalization of National Guard members could alter the administration’s stance. Homeland Security assets, including Customs and Border Protection, are expected to remain in LA for immigration enforcement. Attorney General Pam Bondi is actively shaping the administration’s response, coordinating with the Justice Department.

The debate on using military intervention mirrors previous instances, such as in Washington and Portland in 2020. The administration’s response in LA currently relies on Title 10 powers to intervene when federal law enforcement is obstructed. The federal government has utilized National Guard military police from other states with state authorization to assist in restoring order in Washington, D.C.

Trump’s past statements indicate a preference for state requests before deploying National Guard, emphasizing a commitment to upholding laws and processes. The evolving situation in LA will determine if the administration ultimately invokes the Insurrection Act.