this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2025
48 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

3174 readers
383 users here now

Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

Post anything related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 29 points 1 month ago

Absolutely fucking not.

[–] taco@piefed.social 19 points 1 month ago

What a pointless article. It doesn't even address the key line of the law they're using for justification, which states "Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States or, in the case of the District of Columbia, through the commanding general of the National Guard of the District of Columbia." That detail should be the main topic of discussion when the governor is actively against the involvement of the National Guard.

[–] seahorse@midwest.social 15 points 1 month ago

Even if it was, it doesn't matter. Fuck the law at this point.

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

If an article title ends in a question, the answer is always "No."