Why a Tennessee Judge Stopped the National Guard from Deploying to Memphis
A Tennessee state court judge has temporarily blocked Governor Bill Lee’s deployment of National Guard troops to Memphis, ruling that the move likely oversteps the state’s legal boundaries. The decision, issued by Chancellor Patricia Head Moskal of the Davidson County Chancery Court, puts a hold on the governor’s plan to use troops for crime-fighting efforts in the city.
In her ruling, Chancellor Moskal emphasized that Tennessee’s militia law reserves the authority to activate the National Guard for public safety purposes to the General Assembly, not the governor. She stated that the crime situation in Memphis, while concerning, does not constitute a “grave emergency” or “disaster” that would legally justify the governor’s unilateral action.
The court order prevents Governor Lee from “continuing the activation and deployment of Tennessee National Guard personnel” until further legal proceedings take place. However, the ruling includes a five-day delay before taking effect, allowing time for the governor’s office to file an appeal.
The deployment had been part of a federal task force initiative requested by President Donald Trump in September to combat urban crime. National Guard troops had already begun patrolling Memphis streets when the legal challenge emerged.
Also Read: Saudi Arabia’s GDP’s Non-oil Sector will Grow by 2030, According to S&P Global
State lawmakers and Shelby County Mayor Lee Harris brought the lawsuit against Governor Lee, arguing that using military troops for law enforcement violates both the Tennessee Constitution and state laws. Mayor Harris described the court’s decision as “a positive step toward ensuring the rule of law applies to everyone, including everyday Tennesseans and even the governor.”
Memphis represents one of several cities where Trump has sought to deploy National Guard units, breaking from traditional norms against using military forces for domestic law enforcement. The president has maintained that troops are necessary to address civil unrest, support immigration enforcement, and combat crime, while Democrats have accused him of misusing military powers intended for genuine emergencies like foreign invasions.
This case differs from other legal challenges to National Guard deployments in cities like Los Angeles, Portland, Chicago, and Washington, D.C., because it centers on state rather than federal law. In Memphis, the troops were deployed by a Republican governor and remained under state control, whereas elsewhere, President Trump placed National Guard units under federal authority when facing opposition from local Democratic leaders.
Memphis, a city of 611,000 people, struggles with one of the nation’s highest violent crime rates according to FBI statistics. The city also faces significant economic challenges, with approximately 24 percent of residents living in poverty—more than double the national average.
The legal battle in Tennessee adds to growing questions about the proper role of military forces in domestic law enforcement and what circumstances truly constitute emergencies requiring military intervention.
Also Read:
Oil Updates: as Iran Downplays the Purported Israeli Attack, Prices Decline
The Riyadh Design Law Treaty was Signed During a Saudi Arabian intellectual Property Conference
