Experts warn Supreme Court tried to rein Trump in but accidentally gave him his next move

The Supreme Court's decision blocking President Trump from deploying the National Guard into American cities has alarmed legal experts who fear the ruling may inadvertently create a pathway for the administration to invoke the Insurrection Act.

Trump and his aides have repeatedly suggested they would invoke the rarely used law, which would be politically unpopular but give him broad authority to deploy the military for domestic law enforcement, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a footnote that the court's opinion "could cause the president to use the U.S. military more than the National Guard," reported CNN.

The implication is stark: Having lost his first legal avenue, Trump may pursue a more dramatic option.

Legal experts express deep concern about this trajectory. William Banks, a Syracuse University law professor specializing in the Insurrection Act, warned that deploying the 82nd Airborne "in heavy armor and gear" would create "heavy martial images" far more alarming than National Guard presence. "There's only a little bit of daylight between no law and the Posse Comitatus prohibition and the Insurrection Act," Banks noted.

Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program, predicted the administration will "run into similar trouble" attempting to invoke the Insurrection Act, though the legal terrain remains murky.

Justice Neil Gorsuch's dissent underscored the constitutional stakes, asking: "When, if ever, may the federal government deploy the professional military for domestic law enforcement purposes consistent with the Constitution?" He expressed discomfort venturing answers to these questions, preferring they receive "full airing" in a future case.

The Supreme Court's decision, while blocking National Guard deployment, left the Insurrection Act question unanswered — a legal gap that could prove consequential.

The administration's defeat on this narrow front may simply redirect it toward a more constitutionally troubling path, potentially setting up future litigation over the military's role in American cities.