Trump, The Insurrection Act, & Martial Law: What We Know About the History & Influencers

The Jack Hopkins Now Newsletter #360

Trump, The Insurrection Act, &Martial Law: What We Know About the History & Influencers

The Guessing Game That Shouldn’t Exist

The nation now finds itself caught in a grim guessing game: is Trump truly preparing to invoke the Insurrection Act…or worse…Martial Law?

What was once the realm of speculative fiction or authoritarian regimes is now an open question facing a democracy already frayed at the edges.

Words That Cloud—and Threaten

Trump’s words—ambiguous, menacing…and deliberate—hang heavy in the air… stoking confusion and tension in equal measure. No one knows where the line is… or whether he plans to cross it tomorrow…or already has in some way we’ve yet to fully grasp.

When the Military Appears on Main Street

We’ve seen troops on city streets. We’ve heard the justifications: chaos…order…threats to sovereignty. But the invocation of the Insurrection Act isn’t just a tool—it’s a trigger.

The Insurrection Act as a Trigger, Not a Tool

It shifts the balance between civilian and military authority…and in the hands of a president with open contempt for institutional limits…it becomes something darker: a threat with no clear expiration date.

Martial Law: The Unspoken Now Spoken

And hanging just beyond it, looming like a storm that hasn’t yet broken…is the specter of Martial Law—an idea so extreme that even mentioning it out loud feels like a breach of civic decorum.

The fact that this is even on the table should chill every American who believes in the rule of law.

A Threat Not Just to Opponents, But to Democracy Itself

When a leader signals that he might take the gloves off and do away with the ordinary constraints of democracy…it doesn’t just threaten his opponents—it threatens the whole structure of peaceful self-governance.

Fear Masquerading as Order

This isn’t law and order. It’s fear and force. And it's being floated in a moment of volatility where paranoia feeds power and silence becomes complicity.

We’ve Stopped Being Shocked—That’s the Real Emergency

What’s most disturbing is that we’ve lost the ability to be shocked. We’ve normalized too much, too quickly. But we cannot normalize Martial Law. We cannot shrug our way through the dismantling of democratic norms.

If we do, we won’t get them back. This is not a drill—it’s a warning shot. And if we ignore it, the next one might not be a shot across the bow.

Not Speculation. A Pattern.

Before we dismiss all this as speculation or paranoia…it’s worth grounding ourselves in what’s actually happened. Because this didn’t come out of nowhere.

The language, the posturing…the steady erosion of the line between civilian rule and military force—it’s all been building.

If you think the idea of invoking the Insurrection Act or declaring Martial Law is too extreme to take seriously…then it’s time to take a sober look at the road we’ve already traveled.

Trump’s Own Words and Behavior

• While Trump himself hasn’t formally proposed martial law, he has entertained or tolerated discussion of it by close allies, particularly during the post-2020 election period.

• He did not shut down suggestions by former General Michael Flynn (his first national security adviser), who explicitly called for martial law in December 2020 to "re-run" the election.

• Trump also reportedly floated extreme ideas in the Oval Office (per multiple sources, including Axios, The New York Times, and Woodward’s books) — like:

  • Seizing voting machines.

  • Deploying troops to “swing states.”

  • Declaring a national emergency.

⚠️ These discussions never materialized into action…partly due to pushback from military…legal advisors…and resistance from within DOJ and DHS.

Influential Voices in His Circle

• Steve Bannon and other MAGA-aligned influencers (e.g., Charlie Kirk, Flynn, Roger Stone) have repeatedly flirted with authoritarian ideas, including:

  • “War footing” rhetoric.

  • Describing political opponents as enemies of the state.

  • Advocating for use of the Insurrection Act and military policing in major cities.

These individuals often frame civil unrest or opposition as a “threat to national sovereignty” — which fits the narrative groundwork that could justify emergency powers.

Why This Matters Now in 2025

With Trump now president again and having already deployed troops in LA:

• He has demonstrated willingness to use the military for domestic issues, especially around immigration and protests.

• Martial law talk could resurface, particularly if:

  • Major unrest spreads.

  • There’s a significant national security incident.

  • He faces legal or political pressure (e.g., from ongoing investigations or impeachment proceedings).

What We Can Reasonably Predict?

Will….

Trump publicly flirts with martial law rhetoric to rally base or intimidate opposition? High probability.

Trump is advised by allies to use martial law? High probability.

Based on past patterns; Bannon, Flynn, etc.Trump actually declares martial law? Low probability. (It would spark instant constitutional crisis and would likely be blocked.)

Trump will use legal "gray zone" military power (e.g., Insurrection Act)? Moderate to High. More realistic and legally viable, already hinted at.

Institutional Safeguards Still Matter

Despite Trump’s rhetoric and inner circle:

• The U.S. military had strongly signaled it wouldn’t support unconstitutional orders (see General Milley's 2020 statements). Yes, Milley and the others that kept Trump from going off the rails during his first term are gone. How committed (or not) are the highest levels of leadership, now? I just don’t know.

• Federal courts and civil society (ACLU, governors, etc.) are actively prepared to resist authoritarian moves.

• The public’s awareness and media attention on these issues also act as guardrails. We must get louder.

Conclusion

Yes, martial law has been openly discussed in Trump’s orbit — that’s not conspiracy theory…it’s documented fact. However, actually declaring martial law is still unlikely unless there’s an extreme and unprecedented domestic crisis.

Of course, as we know…and extreme and unprecedented domestic crisis is something that Trump is more that capable of creating…if that’s what he really wants to do. So…we’ll see.

What’s more likely is:

• Aggressive rhetoric that uses “martial law” to create fear and rally support.

• Targeted use of the military under Insurrection Act pretext…especially in blue cities or states.

• Ongoing legal battles over the limits of executive power.

Here’s a timeline of how we got here:

Timeline: Martial Law Rhetoric & Authoritarian Signals Around Trump

November–December 2020 (Post-Election Period)

• Nov 2020: Trump loses the election to Joe Biden but refuses to concede.

• Dec 1, 2020: Attorney General Bill Barr declares there is no evidence of widespread election fraud.

• Dec 17, 2020: Michael Flynn (Trump’s former National Security Advisor) appears on Newsmax and openly suggests that Trump should declare martial law and re-run the election in swing states.

• Mid-Dec 2020: In a White House meeting, Trump discusses:

  • Seizing voting machines.

  • Appointing Sidney Powell as special counsel to investigate fraud.

  • Invoking the Insurrection Act or even Martial Law. (Reported by NYT, Axios, and others.)

January 6, 2021 – Capitol Riot

• Trump incites crowd to march to the Capitol.

• Some insurrectionists wore patches saying “Martial Law Now” or carried signs invoking the Insurrection Act.

• Trump does not immediately deploy National Guard — delayed response seen by many as intentional or at least negligent.

Post-January 6 Fallout (2021)

• General Mark Milley, then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, expresses grave concern about Trump attempting a "Reichstag moment".

• In the book Peril by Woodward & Costa, Milley reportedly said:

“We’re not going to let the military be used for a coup.”

2022–2023: Trump’s Public Reframing

• Trump continues “stolen election” claims in speeches.

• While not directly calling for martial law anymore, he increasingly uses “enemy within,” “deep state,” and “military justice” language.

• Allies like Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, and Michael Flynn continue hinting at military solutions to political conflict.

• Flynn launches media campaigns suggesting the military should “step in to save the Republic”.

2024 Campaign Period

• Trump returns to law-and-order themes and hints that cities are “out of control.”

• At various rallies, he says things like:

  • “We may need the military to restore order.”

  • “The Constitution allows strong action in times like this.”

• Bannon and others repeat calls to purge the federal bureaucracy (a.k.a. the “deep state”) — laying rhetorical groundwork for emergency measures.

2025 – Trump’s Second Term

• January 20, 2025: Trump is inaugurated as the 47th President.

• June 2025: Trump deploys thousands of National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles after unrest related to immigration raids.

• Trump says he's “considering the Insurrection Act” and that “more cities may need military intervention.”

• Legal challenges filed by California and civil rights groups.

Takeaway: A Consistent Pattern

Trump’s team has:

• Openly discussed or endorsed martial law (Flynn, Powell).

• Used it as a rhetorical threat to assert strength or frighten opposition.

• Tested the legal boundaries of military use in domestic settings — first in theory (2020–21), now increasingly in action (2025).

We are living through a moment that demands clarity—not just of thought, but of courage.

The president’s flirtation with extraordinary powers isn’t just a test of the system—it’s a test of us.

The Constitution was never designed to enforce itself. It relies on people—judges, lawmakers, citizens—willing to say no when it matters. We are no longer debating hypotheticals.

We are watching the architecture of American democracy shake under the weight of a leader who has shown, time and again…that he’s willing to push until something gives.

The question now is whether enough of us are willing to push back. Not with violence or panic…but with vigilance…with protest…with law…and with principle.

The Insurrection Act and Martial Law are not just policies—they are breaking points.

If we cross them without consequence…we lose more than a battle. We lose the republic in slow motion. The time to take this seriously is not when it becomes undeniable—it’s when it still feels like it might be stopped.

That time is now.

We have to step up. Whatever we’re doing now—tweeting…meeting…posting… whispering to each other that “this can’t really be happening”—it’s not enough. Not even close.

The machinery is moving faster than our resistance. We are being outpaced by a force that doesn’t care about norms…doesn’t blink at the Constitution…and certainly doesn’t wait for permission.

If you think this is bad…wait until we look back and realize this was the calm part.

If we’re serious about stopping what’s coming…then everything we’re doing right now has to scale up—fast.

This isn’t a moment for “awareness.” It’s a moment for action. Real…uncomfortable… visible action. The kind that risks something. The kind that makes noise.

We don’t need more commentary; we need confrontation. Confrontation isn’t illegal.

We don’t need cautious statements; we need bold…public refusal.

The president is playing for keeps. If we’re still playing for optics…we lose. If you’ve been waiting for someone else to go first…stop waiting. The time for half-measures is over.

The future doesn’t beg—it demands.

If this hit you in the gut—or lit a fire—you’re who I’m writing for. Become a paid subscriber to keep this work going.

No ads, no fluff, no corporate filters—just straight, unflinching analysis. If you want more of it, help fuel it. Let’s not whisper through a crisis.

I’ve had offers—more than a few—from sponsors and backers who’d love to put their name next to this work. The answer has always been no. And it always will be.

I want complete control over what I say, how I say it, and who I say it for. No strings. No filters. Just truth. That’s how it’s got to be. You allow that.

Okay, I’ll be back soon…with even more.

Have a great evening.

Warmly,

Jack