Nancy Pelosi Cites Nonexistent ‘Article 10’ in Constitution, Gets Fact-Checked Amid Backlash Over Trump’s National Guard Deployment in LA

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi came under fire after inaccurately citing a nonexistent “Article 10” of the U.S. Constitution while criticizing President Donald Trump’s decision to deploy National Guard troops and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles amid escalating riots.

During a recent public statement, Pelosi urged the president and the public to “read Article 10 of the Constitution,” claiming that “section 12046 of Article 10” forbids the president from calling up the National Guard without a governor’s consent. 

This claim drew immediate skepticism from legal experts and constitutional scholars, as the U.S. Constitution consists of only seven articles, none of which address National Guard deployment or related powers.

Pelosi appeared to have confused the U.S. Constitution with Title 10 of the United States Code, which does outline the federal government’s authority over the National Guard, according to Conservative Brief. 

Contrary to her assertions, presidents have long held the power to federalize National Guard troops without needing permission from state governors.

A historical example frequently cited is former President Lyndon B. Johnson’s 1960s federalization of the Alabama National Guard to protect civil rights protesters, a move upheld by federal law and multiple Supreme Court rulings. 

Legal analyst Matt Margolis of PJ Media noted that the statute’s reference to issuing orders “through the governors” is a procedural step and does not require gubernatorial consent.

Federal law has consistently acknowledged the president’s authority to activate National Guard units during emergencies. 

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed this power in several decisions, reinforcing the president’s ability to act swiftly in crises.

Pelosi’s inaccurate statements coincide with heightened tensions in Los Angeles, where violent riots erupted following Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations targeting illegal immigrants. 

President Trump responded by deploying an initial force of 2,000 National Guard troops, later increasing the number by an additional 2,000 Guardsmen and supplementing the deployment with 700 active-duty Marines.

These federal forces have been tasked with protecting federal agents, facilities and property amid continuing unrest, which has resulted in more than 100 arrests to date, CB reports.

Despite Pelosi’s criticism, recent polling shows that a majority of Americans support the president’s response to the Los Angeles riots. 

A survey conducted by RMG Research among 1,000 registered voters found that 52 percent approved either strongly or somewhat of the deployment, while 42 percent disapproved and 7 percent were undecided, according to the Daily Signal.

The poll also revealed broad backing for immigration enforcement efforts in the city, with 57 percent approving ICE’s operations to locate and arrest illegal immigrants and 35 percent opposing the crackdown.

Pelosi’s repeated mischaracterizations highlight a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of federal authority concerning the National Guard’s role, per CB. 

By referencing a non-existent constitutional article, she questioned the legality of the president’s actions. 

However, established law grants the president authority to federalize the National Guard in domestic emergencies without requiring state consent.

This controversy underscores the complexity of federal-state relations regarding emergency responses, but federal statutes and court precedents remain clear on the scope of presidential authority.

WATCH:

The post Nancy Pelosi Cites Nonexistent ‘Article 10’ in Constitution, Gets Fact-Checked Amid Backlash Over Trump’s National Guard Deployment in LA appeared first on Resist the Mainstream.