Bill would block Arizona Guard from unauthorized U.S. wars

By Zachery Schmidt
The Center Square

A new bill seeks to make Arizona the first state in the country to prevent its National Guard from fighting in wars not authorized by Congress.

State Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff, who served in the Air Force for 20 years, introduced Senate Bill 1047. The legislation says Arizona’s National Guard can’t “be released from the state into active duty combat unless the United States Congress has passed an official Declaration of War or has taken official action pursuant to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15” of the Constitution.

The article allows Congress to federalize the National Guard to repel invasions, put down an insurrection and enforce America’s laws.

SB 1047, also known as the Defend the Guard bill, would require the Arizona governor to “take all actions necessary to comply” with the order.

Nationwide, the Defend the Guard bill has been pushed by an organization called Bring Our Troops Home, founded by Sgt. Dan McKnight, a 13-year veteran of the U.S. armed forces who served 18 months in Afghanistan from 2005 to 2007.

In the past, Trump administration officials, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., have endorsed the bill.

Also, Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Yuma, has supported the bill.

Defend the Guard bill is a “state-based prohibition on the use of militia unless [it has] been activated federally with proper authority,” McKnight told The Center Square.

“If they want ’em to fight in Afghanistan, Uzbekistan or Venezuela, the first thing they have to do is have that proper authorization from Congress,” he said.

The Defend the Guard bill is attempting to give governors and states “one more ounce of resistance that they can apply to the federal government to protect their own militia and citizens,” he explained.

The last time America had a congressionally approved war was in 1942 during World War II against Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania.

Since then, Congress “has abdicated [its] responsibility to decide when to change the condition of our nation from one of peace to one of war,” McKnight noted.

All the wars America has gotten into since World War II have been done by some quasi-legality, he said.

As examples, he brought up how America entered the Korean War based on a United Nations charter and how the Vietnam War was based on the Gulf of Tonkin resolution.

Since 9/11, the National Guard has turned from a defense force to an “expeditionary war-fighting force,” McKnight explained.

The “quasi-authority” has been used to deploy National Guard members overseas due to Congress giving authorization of use of military force to the president in 2001 after the Sept. 11 attacks, he said, adding that this is “not a legal declaration of war.”

Since the Global War on Terror, nearly 50% of the boots on the ground fighting outside of America have been National Guard members, McKnight stated.

McKnight noted his organization gets comments from National Guard majors, captains, lieutenants and enlisted members who agree with the Defend the Guard bill.

However, he said, people higher up in the military, such as generals, tend to oppose the bill.

A common argument against this bill is that it will affect National Guard funding, but McKnight called this argument an “absolute red herring.”

Congress decides “where the money goes and where it’s spent,” not the Department of Defense, he said.

He added that if funds were taken away from a state, it would be “political suicide.”

“Senators and their congressmen from that state would never allow it to happen,” McKnight said.

If the federal government did take money away from a state like this, McKnight explained, it would leave the state vulnerable to responding to emergencies and disasters.

“All we’re asking is that Congress does the one thing that they absolutely refuse to do, take up the issue and give the informed consent of the American people before we send our sons and daughters to fight and die somewhere else,” McKnight explained.

2026 is the fourth year in a row that the Defend the Guard bill has been introduced in Arizona, McKnight stated.

In the Arizona state Senate, the Defend the Guard bill has passed three times. However, the bill has never passed the state House.

Last year, when the Defend the Guard bill went to the state House, it passed the Arizona House Rules Committee and the House Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections Committee, but it never reached the House floor for a vote.

McKnight said House Speaker Steve Montenegro, R-Surprise, did not allow the bill to be voted on. This year, McKnight said his organization is “gonna put a lot of pressure on Speaker Montenegro to let the bill have its due process.”

The Center Square reached out to Montenegro for comment, but did not hear back before press time.

McKnight said he thinks the bill will have enough support in the House to have it reach Gov. Katie Hobbs’ desk. He added that he doesn’t know whether the Democratic governor would veto the bill or sign it, but he acknowledged her past history shows she may veto it.

“We look forward to that fight,” McKnight said.

During her time as governor, Hobbs has vetoed nearly 400 bills. Republicans hold majorities in both houses, but lack enough seats to override Hobbs’ vetoes.

Nationwide, McKnight told The Center Square that 35 states could introduce the Defend the Guard bill this year.

He added that he thinks the bill has a pathway to victory in Idaho, Arizona, Tennessee and New Hampshire, which recently passed the bill out of its state House.

McKnight said he anticipated the Defend the Guard bill would be put on a governor’s desk at in two states this year.