“Can’t a Governor Activate the National Guard to End This BS?!”

Yes...but not the way you think. Here's what a governor can do that hits harder.

*Minnesota Governor Tim Walz

Author’s Note:

Look, I’m not an attorney. Most of you already know that.

So when I write about legal matters…understand what you’re getting: it’s not the product of some vast storehouse of legal education…courtroom experience…or years of bar association cocktail parties.

It’s research. A lot of it. Probably 90% of it.

I read. I cross-check. I hunt down primary sources when I can. I look for what’s actually true…what’s likely true…and what’s just somebody’s narrative dressed up as certainty.

And then I do the part that is my forte.

I package it.

I deliver it.

So…you can digest it without needing a law degree…a decoder ring…or a weekend retreat to “process your feelings.”

Because I’m not trying to impress you with how many big words I know.

Hell, I have a hard enough time saying my own name clearly.

I don’t need bigger words.

And…you don’t either.

What you need is clarity. You need the signal pulled out of the noise. You need the moving parts laid out in a way your brain can actually hold onto…especially in a moment when everyone’s trying to overwhelm you…confuse you…and wear you down.

That’s what I’m doing here.

And…if you want legal advice…go hire a lawyer. I’d get you thrown in jail in a courtroom.

If you want a clear…research-backed breakdown you can use…that’s what I’m built for.

Now, let’s dig in…

“Can’t a Governor Activate the National Guard to End This BS?!”

Yes...but not the way you think. Here’s what a governor can do that hits harder.

The Jack Hopkins Now Newsletter #738: Saturday, January 17th, 2026.

Yes.

A governor can activate the National Guard.

But…no…not the way most people mean it when they’re mad and looking for a lever to pull.

Because here’s the trap:

People hear “National Guard” and imagine a governor snapping their fingers and putting a big, armed STOP sign in front of federal agents.

That’s not how this works.

And if a governor tries to play it that way, two things happen fast:

1. They get hit with federal supremacy and obstruction claims.

2. The President has tools to federalize Guard units and strip the governor of control.

So let’s cut through the fantasy and get to the usable truth.

Here’s the real deal in plain English

1) Governors can deploy the Guard…for state missions

When the Guard is under state control (State Active Duty, and often Title 32 situations), the governor can use it for:

• protecting state buildings

• keeping order during protests

• traffic control and perimeter safety

• logistics, medical support, communications

• supporting state/local law enforcement on state law missions

That part is real. That part is common.

2) Governors cannot lawfully use the Guard to “block” federal operations

This is the line people keep wanting to cross.

States have plenty of power to refuse to help.
States have far less power to interfere.

That distinction matters.

The cleanest summary is this: “Refusing to help is not the same as impeding.”

So a governor can say:

• “Our state police won’t assist.”

• “Our state facilities won’t be used for staging.”

• “Our state databases won’t be used like your personal search engine.”

• “Our jail won’t hold people for you unless you follow proper legal process.”

But…a governor generally can’t say:

• “We’re putting troops in the street to stop you from doing your job.”

Try it…and you’re begging for a constitutional cage match.

Why this makes you feel powerless

Because it is designed that way.

The federal government has supremacy in federal enforcement.
States have sovereignty over their own resources and policing priorities.

So…what’s the winning move for a state governor who believes federal immigration enforcement is abusing power?

Not a standoff.

A choke point strategy.

You don’t win by chest-thumping.
You win by cutting oxygen.

The strongest moves a governor can make

Move #1: Non-cooperation…weaponized legally (the anti-commandeering doctrine)

The federal government cannot simply “order” states to run federal programs.

That’s the anti-commandeering principle under the Tenth Amendment…reaffirmed by the Supreme Court.

Meaning: the feds can enforce federal law.
But they can’t force the state to provide personnel…time…money...data systems…or institutional help on demand.

This is why sanctuary-style policies keep surviving in court: the state isn’t “blocking,” it’s not volunteering.

So a governor can push:

• limits on state/local participation in immigration enforcement

• strict rules on access to nonpublic state data

• strict rules on facility access and detentions

• state-level legal aid infrastructure

• clear guidance for state agencies: “do not assist unless X legal standard is met”

This is boring.

And…it’s devastatingly effective.

Move #2: Go to court fast…injunctions…restraining orders…discovery

If the claim is illegal action…the adult move is: court orders.

Not vibes. Not outrage. Not an armed photo op.

You file…you document…you force sworn testimony…you force discovery…and you get a judge involved.

Because once there’s an order on the books…the game changes from “political argument” to “contempt of court.”

Move #3: Make the state a hostile operating environment…legally

Not physically hostile. Legally hostile.

Meaning:

• Mandate body cams and preserve footage when state/local officers interact with federal ops

• Require documented warrants / documented authority for certain requests

• Create rapid-response legal observer networks

• Fund public defender and civil rights litigation capacity

• Require state agencies to produce monthly transparency reports on federal requests and interactions

That…is how you raise the cost.

Not by playing militia theater.
By building a paper trail so thick it sinks ships.

Move #4: Protect the public space

This is where the Guard can be used smartly.

If you anticipate chaos…confusion…protests…or opportunistic violence…deploy the Guard to stabilize:

• Traffic flow

• Medical support

• Protection of state facilities

• De-escalation support around crowd movement

• Logistical support for state emergency management

You’re not “fighting the feds.”

You’re preventing the environment from being turned into an excuse for escalation.

The big risk everybody ignores: the President can federalize the Guard

If a governor tries to use the Guard as a barrier to federal enforcement, the President has statutory pathways to call the Guard into federal service under Title 10 authorities—one of them is 10 U.S.C. § 12406, which includes circumstances where the President claims he’s unable to execute federal law with regular forces.

And…broader domestic deployment arguments often run through the Insurrection Act framework and related interpretations.

Translation:

If you think “send the Guard” is a simple state trump card…

…you’re walking into a trap where the feds can turn your own troops into a federal tool.

So what’s the answer to “Can a governor end this BS?”

Not with one dramatic move.

With a campaign.

A real one.

A governor can’t wave a wand and make federal enforcement disappear. They cannot.

But a governor can do three things that matter:

1) Stop feeding the machine

Non-cooperation. No extra staff. No state intel. No state logistics. No free fuel. No free facilities.

2) Force legality into the open

Lawsuits. Injunctions. Discovery. Documentation. Transparency reporting. Court oversight.

3) Keep the state from becoming a staged “crisis”

Because crises get used to justify more force…more authority…more “emergency” measures.

You want to win?

Don’t give them the optics they’re trying to manufacture.

Final word (listen closely)

Your instinct…“Why doesn’t someone with power just stop this?”…is normal.

This article is the result of a conversation my Dad and I had last night, and this was a question I didn’t have a clear and immediate answer to…at least not one I was confident of. (Which could have been the simple result…at least in part…of having a lot on my plate, like you likely do as well)

But…the system isn’t built for one heroic button.

It’s built for slow pressure…legal leverage…and institutional choke points.

So yes:

A governor can activate the Guard.

But…if the governor uses the Guard like a battering ram against federal authority… they WILL lose…and possibly trigger the very escalation they’re trying to prevent.

The smarter play is colder:

• Refuse to assist.

• Litigate aggressively.

• Document everything.

• Protect the public space.

• Raise the legal and operational cost…without crossing into obstruction.

That’s how you “end the BS” in real life.

Not with a standoff.

With a squeeze.

#HoldFast

Back soon,

-Jack

Jack Hopkins

P.S. If you’re ready to go deeper, paid subscribers get the full breakdowns, extra context, and the action steps I don’t publish publicly. If that sounds useful…you can upgrade anytime.

P.P.S. Paid subscribers…later tonight, you’ll get this week’s issue of the series that started last week in your inbox.