Up First from NPR - National Guard Powers, Marking October 7th, SCOTUS: Conversion Therapy

Episode Date: October 7, 2025

Texas deploys National Guard troops under President Trump’s orders as legal battles intensify over his authority to send them into Democratic-led cities. As the war in Gaza enters its third year, hopes rise over a new U.S.-backed plan aimed at ending the fighting. And the Supreme Court hears a case on state bans of conversion therapy, weighing free speech rights against protections for the LGBTQ community.Want more comprehensive analysis of the most important news of the day, plus a little fun? Subscribe to the Up First newsletter.Today’s episode of Up First was edited by Alina Hartounian, Miguel Macias, Krishnadev Calamur, Mohamad ElBardicy and Alice Woelfle.It was produced by Ziad Buchh, Nia Dumas and Christopher ThomasWe get engineering support from Stacey Abbott. And our technical director is Carleigh Strange.Join us again tomorrowLearn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

The governor of Texas says his state's National Guard troops are on the move at President Trump's direction. Democratic states are challenging the president's power to deploy the military at home. I'm Steve Inskeep with Michelle Martin, and this is up first from NPR News. Today marks two years since Hamas fighters attacked Israel. The resulting war has transformed the Middle East with thousands dead and effects across the region. As Israel and Hamas negotiate over a U.S. plan to end the war, how much hope is there for peace? And the Supreme Court takes up a challenge to state bans on conversion therapy, setting up a fight over free speech, medical care, and LGBTQ rights. Stay with us. We've got

news you need to start your day. In the U.S., national security news can feel far away from daily life. Distant wars, murky conflicts, diplomacy behind closed doors on our new show, Sources and Methods. NPR reporters on the ground bring you stories of real people helping you understand why distant events matter here at home. Listen to sources and methods on the NPR app or wherever you get your podcasts. These days, with all the information coming at you, it can be hard to know what's accurate, what's not, and what's worth your time. Here to help you navigate it all is 1A. Five days a week, the 1A podcast provides a forum for,

curate's minds to explore different angles on the biggest headlines and give you a more balanced take on what's happening. Listen to the 1A podcast from NPR and WAMU. Texas Governor Greg Abbott gave an update on President Trump's plan to use the Texas National Guard last night. Governor Abbott tweeted a picture of troops boarding a military plane, deploying now he wrote, although he did not give any details about where they were going. President Trump is called on the Texas Guard to move into cities led by Democrats, including Portland, Oregon, and Chicago. The president asserts those cities are suffering from crime and that troops are needed to support his immigration crackdown. Elected officials in those

cities see a political provocation on the streets. NPR's Jacqueline Diaz has been following this and she's with us now. Good morning, Jacqueline. Good morning. So give us the latest in the legal battle over these troops that are supposedly heading to Chicago. Yeah, so Illinois and Chicago filed a lawsuit yesterday morning to try to stop the Trump administration from federalizing hundreds of National Guard troops, saying it's unnecessary, it's illegal, but a federal judge declined to block the deployment of troops from inside the state along with the force from Texas, at least for now. This all came a day after another federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deploying any National Guard troops into Portland, Oregon. And around that same time that the

federal judge out of Chicago weighed in, President Trump was asked by a reporter under what circumstances is he would use the Insurrection Act. And that's the law that gives presidents the authority to deploy the military domestically. And here's what he said. I do it if it was necessary. So far it hasn't been necessary. But we have an insurrection act for a reason.

If I had to enact it, I'd do that. If people were being killed and courts were holding us up or governors or mayors were holding us up, sure, I'd do that. So, Jack, can give us a little bit of a kind of a history lesson here. What kind of power does the president have to send troops? into American cities. Basically, the Interaction Act gives the President authority to use federal troops to calm civil unrest in a crisis and to take part in law enforcement-like activities, which can include

searches and arrests. But Trump has not used the Insurrection Act. Under normal circumstances, the National Guard is under a state command, that is, unless the President calls them into federal service. Here in the U.S., the National Guard has been used as a force to calm civil disturbances at the request of local officials. Retired Major General William N. Yardt led the Illinois National Guard from 2007 to 2012. It's an appropriate use of the Guard to use them for civil disturbances,

but these aren't civil disturbances. We're not talking about civil disturbances. And so he's saying what Trump is doing now is not an appropriate use of that power. Do we have any clarity as to why the president hasn't invoked the Insurrection Act? Like we heard earlier, Trump says if he wanted to, essentially he would. But the Insurrection Act has not been invoked since the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles more than 30 years ago. I asked Stephen Vlodick, a law professor at George Schaunt, about what he makes of that. For better or for worse, I think the Insurrection Act has

been a third rail politically for much of its history. And so instead of invoking the Interaction Act, the White House is actually instead using an obscure provision of federal law to claim authority to bring in those National Guard troops. It's Section 12406 of Title X. So this law goes back to 1903, and it allows the president to call up the National Guard if there's a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the federal government, or if there's a danger of a foreign invasion. As I think you've been telling us, using that law as the federal government's legal basis for sending in troops has gotten mixed results so far. Yeah, that's right. In Portland, the judge wasn't convinced by the Trump administration's claim that authorities there are unable to calm

anti-ice protests and that the federal government has to step in. The administration is now appealing that decision. And officials in Chicago tried to use the same legal argument. And like we said, the judge in that case decided not to block the National Guard deployment. That was NPR's Jacqueline Diaz. Jacqueline, thank you. Thank you. Today marks two full years since the Hamas-led attack on Israel of October 7, 2023. Two years. Across the country last weekend, people attended events to remember more than 1,200 people killed in those attacks. And in Gaza, the anniversary marks the start of a third year of the deadliest and most destructive war the enclave has ever been subjected to. NPRES, Emily Fang, is in Tel Aviv, and she's with us this morning to talk about what this date means.

Emily, hello, thanks for joining us. Morning, Michelle. How are Israelis remembering October 7th? Well, they're holding these ceremonies and they tell me they have not been able to move on. They still have 48 hostages that remain in Gaza. About 20 of these people are still believed to be alive. And yesterday I went to one of these events in the caboots of near Oz. This is one of the communities that was hardest impacted on October 7th because about one fourth of its members were killed or kidnapped and nine of their members remain hostages. So the caboots people there are telling me they're grieving. and they're still angry that the Israeli military they felt left them undefended on October 7th.

Rotam Cooper is one of those who has remained angry. His father helped found the kibbutz. His father was also among those kidnapped by Hamas and who died later in captivity. And Rotam says his community feels betrayed twice over. Obviously the people from that community feel that the government kind of deserted them not just once by twice. deserted and that he feels they've been ignored by their own government, who they feel has not done all it can to get the hostages back. And so two years on, this war has left Israel very divided. And why about the people of Gaza, the war there, entering its third year?

So this is what the night and into the dawn of October 7th, two years later, sounded like for people in Gaza. NPR's reporter in Gaza, Anas Baba, recorded that and also several others. other big airstrikes and shelling and bombs throughout the night. The war that Israel has unleashed in Gaza nearly immediately after October 7th has resulted in just staggering levels of destruction and death and now famine. Gaza's Ministry of Health this week said more than 67,000 people have been killed as a result of that war. 30% of those are children.

And the latest United Nations estimate is about 78% of structures in Gaza are destroyed or damaged. Now, Anas has been talking to people in Gaza City for the last few days under intense bombardment. And one of them is this man, 22-year-old Ahmed Abou Saif, who says for him, daily life over the last two years from once being a university student and going to the gym to suddenly finding shelter, having to find water, being displaced all the time, and worrying about the lives of his family. And Saif says the world has let this happen by being silent and cowardice.

In his words, and he now wants the U.S. to stop this war. So negotiators began discussing this latest peace proposal in Egypt this week. What can you tell us about the likelihood of some kind of ceasefire? Right. So the second anniversary of October 7th is chased by some hope. That is new. Negotiators are now hashing out details of how to return all remaining hostages in exchange for about 2,000 Palestinian prisoners and detainees. But these talks could take days longer still. However, with Israel and Hamas under pressure from Middle Eastern countries and from the U.S., these Egypt talks are the biggest diplomatic breakthrough yet in this terrible conflict.

That's NPS, Emily Fang, in Tel Aviv. Emily, thank you. Thanks, Michelle. Today, the Supreme Court here's a case on whether the government can regulate what's known as conversion therapy. Conservative Christians want to keep offering the practice and say, banning it violates therapist free speech. Major medical groups say it's substandard care. NPR Legal Affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg is covering it. Nina, good morning. Good morning. What's the case all about? It's about how minors are treated when consulting a licensed

therapist about their sexuality. Conversion therapy, it's generally defined as therapy used to cure a person's attraction to the same sex. In other words, to make a gay person straight and to cure a person's desire to change their gender identity by making them comfortable with their gender at birth. Every major medical association from the American Medical Association to the American Psychological Association has repudiated conversion therapy, finding that it doesn't work and instead leads to deep depression and suicidal thoughts in minors. As a result of these findings, half the states have banned the practice for those under 18. Oh, I guess that's the center of this case, then. Who is challenging that sort of state ban?

The Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal group, is challenging the ban on conversion therapy, contending that it violates the free speech rights of the therapists in talk therapy. The plaintiff in the case is Kaylee Childs, a licensed therapist in Colorado. I want to be able to operate genuinely and create therapeutic relationships that are not hindered by the values and position of our state. And that's what my clients want as well. And currently, I'm having to turn them away.

Representing Childs, lawyer James Campbell, will tell the Supreme Court today that what Childs does is purely talk therapy. And thus, it's protected by the First Amendment guaranteed a free speech and cannot be regulated by the state. The state can determine who is qualified to be a licensed counselor. It can determine that they have the, the right education, that they have sufficient experience. But what the states can't do is come in and say, you can have a conversation about a topic, but not if you're going to talk about it from

this perspective. It's just blatant viewpoint discrimination. Okay, so those are the plaintiffs. What does the state say in response? Colorado Attorney General Philip Weiser says that the state law is in fact narrow. It applies only to treatment for minors. And the law has a carve-out for religious organizations, to counsel minors, or anyone else for that matter, without being subject to state licensing laws. But Wiser also notes that states are entitled

to require licenses for therapists and other medical professionals to abide by the established standard of medical care. What Cauda Law doesn't allow is a discredited and harmful practice, which is now condemned by all the major medical associations. if you take away the ability of states to protect patients from substandard care, then you're opening the door to all sorts of discredited treatments.

I guess when advocates of conversion therapy hear that their treatments are discredited, they just don't believe the medical associations. They note that the American Psychiatric Association actually listed homosexuality as a mental disorder until 1973. Attorney General Wiser says that medical science evolves over time, and there were times when we didn't know that smoking cigarettes, for instance, that they cause cancer. But now we do know that. And it's wrong, he says, for a doctor to tell people to smoke cigarettes three packs a day and tell them don't worry about the health effects.

He says that would be substandard care, just like conversion practices are substandard care. Nina, thanks so much. Thank you, Steve. That's NPR's Nina Totenberg. And that's a first of... First for Tuesday, October 7th. I'm Michelle Martin. And I'm Steve Inskeep.

Independent journalism depends on you. Help keep public radio strong in your community and across this country by giving at donate.npr.org slash upfirst. Today's episode of Up First was edited by Alina Hartunian, Miguel Macias, Krishna Dev Kalimor, Mohamed El Bardisi, and Alice Wolfley. It was produced by Ziet Budge, Nia Dumas, and Christopher Thomas. We get engineering support from Stacey Abbott

and our technical director is Carly Strait. We hope you'll join us again tomorrow.