NEWS
Marines in Los Angeles: Is This How Democracy Dies?
The Constitution is being tested and so is the military’s oath
DISCLOSURE: Due to the urgency and importance of this historical news, I have taken the unprecedented step of using A.I. to write this article, in order that I can get it out to the world as fast as possible.
This morning, the world woke to shocking news: Donald Trump has mobilised 700 U.S. Marines — alongside 2,700 National Guard troops — into Los Angeles to respond to protests sparked by immigration raids.
It marks the first time in 60 years that active-duty Marines have been deployed on American streets without state approval, fueling accusations of federal overreach and alarming echoes of authoritarian playbooks.
Today’s militarisation of domestic policing — without the governor’s consent — is not just controversial; it is also legally and morally resonant with historical cases of democratic backsliding.
As Trump’s second term unfolds, his administration’s actions, particularly those recently ruled unconstitutional, have sparked comparisons to other moments in history when democratic institutions were tested. While the United States in 2025 is not Weimar Germany, certain structural parallels with Adolf Hitler’s rise to power are striking: a charismatic leader leveraging national resentment, exploiting emergency powers, and attempting to bend independent institutions to his will.
Like Hitler in the early 1930s, Trump has used executive authority not merely to implement policy, but to challenge the very framework of checks and balances that define democratic governance. Courts have so far pushed back, but the pattern of overreach is worth close scrutiny.
Here’s a clearer, more accurate breakdown of actions by Donald Trump in 2025 that have been challenged or struck down as unconstitutional:
1. Birthright Citizenship Executive Order (EO 14160)
- Aimed to revoke automatic citizenship under the 14th Amendment.
- At least four federal judges blocked it outright — calling it “blatantly unconstitutional,” directly defying a clear constitutional guarantee.
- The Supreme Court explicitly refused to stay lower-court injunctions while hearing arguments, signifying that courts viewed multiple preliminary blocks as legitimate
2. Anti‑DEI / Anti‑Transgender Funding Executive Orders (EO 14151, EO 14168, EO 14173)
- These required recipients of federal grants to cease “promoting gender ideology” or diversity.
- Federal courts in California (Judge Tigar) blocked enforcement, stating the EOs “reflect an effort to censor constitutionally protected speech” and are “vague” and discriminatory under the First and Fifth Amendments.
3. Executive Orders Targeting Major Law Firms
- EOs imposed restrictions (e.g. revoking security clearances) on firms such as WilmerHale, Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block.
- Courts struck these down:
- WilmerHale EO: ruled unconstitutional for undermining legal independence.
- Perkins Coie & Jenner & Block: declared unconstitutional and retaliatory — violated First Amendment and separation-of-powers principles.
4. Federalizing National Guard in Los Angeles
- Trump deployed ~2,000 federalized National Guard troops without California’s permission to handle immigration-related protests.
- California sued, alleging it violated the Tenth Amendment and the Militia Clauses of the Constitution.
- The ACLU condemned it as “unnecessary…an abuse of power” that threatens the principle that the military should not police civilians.
5. Use of the Alien Enemies Act to Deport Venezuelans (J.G.G. v. Trump)
- Trump invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act claiming Venezuelan gang infiltration and deported individuals without due process.
- A federal judge found this “willful disobedience” of court orders and probable contempt; ordered tribunals grant habeas corpus rights.
- Appeals court and Supreme Court have only paused procedural enforcement — not validated the policy’s legality; courts continue to scrutinize due process violations.
6. Tariffs Under IEEPA (V.O.S. Selections v. U.S.)
- Used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose “Liberation Day” tariffs on imports.
- In May 2025, a federal trade court permanently struck them down, declaring the action exceeded Constitutional limits on executive authority.
The Choice Before Us — and Them
In 1933, the German military did not resist the Nazi consolidation of power; it complied, believing it was serving order and national unity. That choice sealed the fate of a republic. Today, as active-duty Marines stand deployed on the streets of Los Angeles, history offers a stark warning: obedience without principle can enable tyranny.
The United States is not yet in crisis beyond repair, but it is at an inflection point. Courts have begun to push back. Citizens are speaking out. But the final guardrail may be those in uniform. Members of the U.S. military swore an oath not to any one man, but to the Constitution of the United States.
That oath demands more than discipline — it demands conscience.
We call upon military leaders and service members alike: remember your oath. Refuse illegal orders. Resist being used to suppress lawful dissent. Side with the people — not a presidency spiralling into authoritarianism. The survival of American democracy has always depended not just on laws, but on those willing to defend them. Now is such a moment. Choose wisely.
N.B. This article is not paywalled. If you’d like to support more content like this, please buy me a coffee here.
