Scan: Will Trump invoke the Insurrection Act during his Presidency? — Before 2027

date	predicted	market price	confidence
2026-09-07	16%	18%	63%
2026-08-30	16%	17%	65%
2026-08-22	16%	18%	62%

1. Planner Fable 5.1 · Fermi decomposition + tool plan

Tools chosen: kalshi_direct kalshi_related polymarket_related article_search claude_news gdelt_news wikipedia code_execution

Sub-questions (Fermi decomposition)

What is the current Kalshi YES price for KXINSURRECTION-29-27 and how has it trended over the past 90 days?
Has Trump or any senior official (Hegseth, Miller, Vance, Noem) explicitly stated in the last 30-60 days that the Insurrection Act will or may be invoked, and in what context (immigration enforcement, Portland/Chicago protests, election-related)?
Which legal authority has the administration used for recent domestic Guard/military deployments (10 U.S.C. §12406, Title 32, DC Home Rule), and have federal courts (e.g., Ninth Circuit, Judge Immergut, Judge Breyer) blocked those alternatives in ways that would make the Insurrection Act the remaining path?
What is the historical base rate of Insurrection Act invocations (roughly 30 times since 1807, last in 1992) and how often have presidents who publicly threatened invocation actually followed through?
What does Polymarket price for the same or similar question (Insurrection Act invocation in 2025/2026), and do the two venues disagree?
Are there scheduled triggers before Jan 2027 (2026 midterms, mass deportation operations, sanctuary-city standoffs) that materially raise the probability of an invocation in the remaining window?

Planner reasoning

This is a Kalshi political-legal question about whether Trump formally invokes the Insurrection Act before 2027. The key drivers are: how often Trump has threatened it, whether recent National Guard deployments (LA, DC, Chicago, Portland, Memphis) have relied on other authorities (Title 10 §12406, Title 32) instead, court rulings constraining those alternatives that might push toward invocation, and the historical base rate of invocations. The Kalshi price is the primary anchor, with Polymarket as an independent crowd check.

2. Research Parallel tool calls

tool	status	time	items	summary
kalshi_direct	OK	0.2s	1	## This Market's Kalshi Data Before 2027 (KXINSURRECTION-29-27) - Current price (probability): 17.00% - 7-day price change: -1.00% - 30-day price change: -5.00% - Average daily volume: 898 contracts - Price range: 15.00% - 27.00% - Data points: 90 days
kalshi_related	OK	4.4s	3	3 related markets / summaries. series KXINSURRECTION: 0 markets (skipped 2 no-signal) \| keyword 'Insurrection Act': ok \| keyword 'National Guard deployment': ok \| keyword 'martial law': ok
polymarket_related	OK	4.4s	0	Scanned 100 active Polymarket markets, kept 0 matches. keyword 'Insurrection Act': 0 markets \| keyword 'Trump invoke Insurrection': 0 markets \| keyword 'National Guard': 0 markets \| keyword 'martial law': 0 markets
article_search	OK	5.1s	20	Fetched 20 unique articles across 4 queries (lookback=45d). 'Trump Insurrection Act invoke': 10 articles \| 'Insurrection Act National Guard Portland Chicago court ruling': 10 articles \| 'Trump says he would invoke Insurrection Act if needed': 10 articles \| 'Title 10 12406 National Guard federalizati
claude_news	OK	26.7s	17	## Findings - No formal invocation to date: As of the latest reporting (September 2026), Trump has not formally invoked the Insurrection Act despite repeated threats. He has instead relied on Secretary Hegseth invoking 10 U.S.C. § 12406 to federalize National Guard members from Illinois and Te
gdelt_news	OK	69.1s	20	GDELT: 20 articles across 2 queries (lookback=30d). 'Insurrection Act Trump': 10 hits \| 'Insurrection Act invoke National Guard': 10 hits
wikipedia	OK	4.4s	2	Fetched 2 Wikipedia entries (0 missing pages).
code_execution	OK	34.4s	0	## Base-Rate Hazard Model — Insurrection Act Invocation Before Jan 1, 2027 Historical base rates: - Naive long-run rate: 30 invocations / 218 years = 13.8%/year. Applied to the 1.95-year window (Jan 20, 2025 → Jan 1, 2027) via Poisson: P ≈ 23.5%. - Recency-adjusted rate (last invocation

3. Evidence Brief Sonnet 5 · 7468 chars

# Current state Trump has never formally invoked the Insurrection Act as of the latest reporting (Sept 2026); domestic Guard/troop deployments (LA, DC, Memphis, Portland, Chicago) have instead relied on 10 U.S.C. §12406 federalization or Article II "protect federal property" authority. Courts (including SCOTUS, Dec 2025) have narrowed the §12406 pathway, and rather than escalate to the Insurrection Act, Trump withdrew Guard troops from Chicago, LA, and Portland in Jan 2026 — while repeated internal (Vance/Miller) and public (Truth Social) threats to invoke it have not converted into action. # Timeline of key events - 2025-06: National Guard deployment to Los Angeles begins under Title 10/regular federalization (confirmed, Wikipedia). - 2025-08: DC Guard deployment begins as part of "anti-crime task force" (confirmed). - 2025-09: Deployments expand — Memphis and Portland authorized; Trump tells military leaders to treat deployments as "training grounds," calls US under "invasion" (confirmed, Wikipedia). - 2025-09-02: Federal judge rules LA deployment violated Posse Comitatus Act (confirmed). - 2025-10: Chicago deployment authorized under Operation Midway Blitz; Hegseth federalizes Illinois/Texas Guard via §12406 (confirmed, SCOTUS brief). - 2025-11-07: Federal judge permanently blocks Portland deployment, calling it "unlawful," finding no evidence of insurrection-level unrest (confirmed, Oregon Capital Chronicle). - 2025-12: Supreme Court rules 6-3 to narrow §12406 authority ("regular forces" = US military, not federalized Guard), sharply limiting the Title 10 deployment path (confirmed, Vladeck/HSToday). - 2025-12-31: Trump announces ending Guard deployment efforts in LA, Portland, Chicago (confirmed, Wikipedia). - 2026-01: Troops withdrawn from Chicago, LA, Portland; DC deployment extended to end of 2026; NYT reports Vance/Miller pushed internally for Insurrection Act invocation re: Minnesota protests but no consensus reached (reported, Common Dreams/Jurist). - 2026-01: Trump threatens on Truth Social to "institute the INSURRECTION ACT" against Minnesota "insurrectionists" — most explicit threat to date (reported, The Hill). - 2026-09-01: DHS memo reported showing administration explored using National Guard (not Insurrection Act specifically) for immigration enforcement (reported, multiple outlets via GDELT). - 2026-09 (current): No formal Insurrection Act invocation; pattern of threat-without-follow-through continues (Claude News synthesis). # Event Will Trump invoke the Insurrection Act (deploying military/federalized Guard domestically) before Jan 1, 2027? # Outcomes to forecast Yes / No # Kalshi market anchor **17% YES** (current). 7-day: -1pt; 30-day: -5pt (declining trend). 90-day range 15–27%, avg daily volume ~898 contracts — moderately liquid, trending down from a January 2026 peak (~27%) coincident with Trump's Minnesota threat, now cooling as courts/withdrawals reduce near-term urgency. # Sub-question answers 1. **Kalshi price/trend**: 17% YES, down from ~22-27% a month ago; steady decline over 90 days as administration pulled back from confrontation (Kalshi direct). 2. **Recent official statements**: Yes — Trump threatened via Truth Social (Jan 2026) to invoke it against Minnesota "insurrectionists"; Vance internally pushed for invocation during Minnesota anti-ICE protests but faced pushback ("nobody had a good answer" on added value); Miller has repeatedly called protests an "insurrection against the sovereignty of the United States" (Common Dreams, The Hill). 3. **Legal authority used / court blocking**: Administration has used 10 U.S.C. §12406 (Title 10) for Chicago/Portland/LA and Article II inherent authority for DC/federal property protection — not the Insurrection Act. Federal judges (Portland, Nov 2025) and SCOTUS (6-3, Dec 2025) have blocked/narrowed the §12406 path, arguably leaving Insurrection Act as one of few remaining expansive legal options — but administration responded by withdrawing troops rather than invoking it (Vladeck, Jurist, Oregon Capital Chronicle). 4. **Historical base rate**: ~30 invocations since 1807, last in 1992 (LA riots) — naive rate ~13.8%/yr (Poisson over 1.95yr window ≈23.5%), but recency-adjusted (33 years since last use) rate is far lower (~1.5%/yr, ≈2.8% over window). Threat-then-restraint is the dominant modern pattern (code_execution model, Wikipedia). 5. **Polymarket comparison**: No matching Polymarket market found (0 hits across 4 keyword searches) — no cross-market signal available. 6. **Scheduled triggers**: 2026 midterms (Sept 2026 GOP convention activity, socialism resolution fights) and ongoing DHS immigration enforcement memo (Sept 2026) could reignite tensions, but no concrete dated trigger events identified before close (article_search/GDELT). # Key facts (high-confidence, factual) 1. [Kalshi] Current YES = 17%, declining 30-day trend. 2. [Wikipedia/Claude News] All 2025-2026 domestic deployments used Title 10 §12406 or Article II, not the Insurrection Act. 3. [SCOTUS brief/Vladeck] SCOTU narrowed §12406 in Dec 2025, 6-3. 4. [Jurist] Trump withdrew Guard from Chicago/LA/Portland Jan 2026 instead of escalating. 5. [The Hill] Trump's explicit Insurrection Act threat re: Minnesota, Jan 2026. 6. [Common Dreams] Vance/Miller internally advocated invocation but lacked consensus. # Cross-market signals - Kalshi related: "Martial law before Jan 20, 2029" priced at 30% (longer window, broader trigger) — suggests market sees modest-but-real tail risk continuing past 2027. - Polymarket: No comparable market found; no cross-check available. - Sportsbook implied: N/A (not applicable to this event type). # Analyst opinions and speculation - Steve Vladeck: legal barrier to Insurrection Act was never really the constraint — SCOTUS's Title 10 ruling doesn't change the weak factual predicate for invocation; suggests political/factual restraint, not legal necessity, explains non-invocation. - Daily Beast/Common Dreams: Miller cast as chief internal advocate for invocation; framed as "brinkmanship without action." - Base-rate model (code_execution): blended estimate suggests fair value ~25-35%, arguably above current Kalshi 17% given Trump's demonstrated willingness to threaten and already-elevated deployment posture. # Directional lean per outcome - **Yes**: Explicit repeated threats (Jan 2026, Minnesota), internal advocacy by Vance/Miller, SCOTUS closing off Title 10 alternative, 15 months remaining with midterms/immigration flashpoints ahead. - **No**: Consistent pattern of threat-without-follow-through across entire term to date; administration chose withdrawal over escalation after SCOTUS loss; 33-year historical non-use streak; internal advisers found no operational need beyond existing authorities; declining Kalshi trend reflects de-escalation, not escalation. # Gaps / unknowns - No Polymarket cross-check available. - Unclear how 2026 midterm unrest or a major deportation operation could suddenly change calculus before close. - No visibility into classified/internal DOJ legal drafting timeline for potential invocation. # Calibration anchors - Kalshi current YES price: 17% (anchor, declining trend). - Related Kalshi "martial law" market (broader/longer window): 30%. - Base-rate model central estimate: ~25-35%, above current market price — flags possible mild underpricing but Kalshi trend (declining) reflects most recent de-escalatory signal (Jan 2026 withdrawal).

4. Forecasters Fable 5.1 + GPT-5.6 Sol · in parallel

claude-fable-5-1

62% conf

Yes	14%
No	86%

Kalshi prices YES at 17% with a declining 30-day trend, and the brief's timeline (latest reporting Sept 2026) leaves roughly 3.5 months before close. Every domestic deployment so far has relied on §12406 or Article II rather than the Insurrection Act, and after SCOTUS narrowed §12406 in Dec 2025 the administration withdrew troops from Chicago/LA/Portland rather than escalate—strong evidence that threats (Jan 2026 Minnesota Truth Social post, Vance/Miller internal push) do not convert to action. The 33-year non-use streak and internal finding that invocation adds little operational value further support No, though midterm unrest or a major deportation operation remains a live tail risk. I shade modestly below the market given the short remaining window and consistent threat-without-follow-through pattern.

gpt-5.6-sol

73% conf

Yes	16%
No	84%

The 17% Kalshi YES price is the primary anchor, with its declining trend reflecting recent de-escalation. Although Trump explicitly threatened invocation and Vance and Miller advocated it internally, repeated threats have not produced action. Most importantly, the administration withdrew troops after courts narrowed its alternative authority rather than escalating to the Insurrection Act, and no concrete trigger is identified before the January 2027 close. I therefore place YES slightly below the market at 16%.

5. Devil's Advocate Sonnet 5 · red-team critique

Both forecasters converge tightly around 14-16%, effectively ignoring the base-rate model's explicit flag that fair value is ~25-35% — neither engages with why they're discounting that analysis so heavily beyond citing "threat-without-follow-through," which risks under-weighting the fact that SCOTUS closed off the Title 10 alternative, arguably making Insurrection Act *more* likely to be the remaining tool if tensions escalate.

Forecast 1 misstates the remaining window as "roughly 3.5 months" when the close is Jan 1, 2027 and evidence is dated Sept 2026 — that's actually ~4 months, a minor but avoidable arithmetic slip that could subtly bias toward underestimating tail-risk opportunity.

Neither forecast meaningfully incorporates the cross-market signal that the related "Martial law before Jan 20, 2029" market sits at 30%, which — even adjusting for the longer window — could imply a higher marginal per-year risk than the 17% Kalshi anchor suggests; this comparison is available in the brief but unused in either rationale.

Both forecasters treat the 2026 midterms and DHS immigration enforcement memo (Sept 2026) as vague tail risks without probing whether post-midterm unrest specifically raises invocation odds in Nov/Dec 2026 — a concrete near-term catalyst inside the forecast window that deserved more explicit scenario analysis rather than a passing mention.

Neither forecast addresses Vladeck's key point that "the legal barrier was never really the constraint" — political/factual restraint, not law, is what's held Trump back — which implies the SCOTUS ruling may be a weaker de-escalatory signal than the price decline suggests, since the real constraint (political will) could shift quickly given Vance/Miller's continued internal advocacy.

Both forecasts anchor almost identically to Kalshi (14% and 16% vs 17%) with minimal independent reasoning for the direction/magnitude of their discount, suggesting anchoring bias rather than genuine synthesis of the conflicting evidence (declining trend vs. base-rate model both pointing different directions).

6. Aggregator Fable 5.1 · final calibrated forecast

15% (68% confidence)

Yes: 15% No: 85%

The Kalshi anchor of 17% with a declining trend reflects the dominant evidence: every domestic deployment to date used §12406 or Article II, and when SCOTUS narrowed that path in Dec 2025 the administration withdrew troops rather than escalate to the Insurrection Act, despite explicit Truth Social threats and Vance/Miller internal advocacy. The critique's appeal to the 25-35% base-rate model is weak because that figure is inflated by 19th/20th-century usage; the recency-adjusted rate and 33-year non-use streak point far lower, and the related 'martial law before 2029' market at 30% over a ~2.3-year broader window implies roughly 10-12%/year, consistent with or below the current 17% for a ~4-month window. Vladeck's point that political rather than legal restraint has bound Trump cuts both ways but mostly confirms that the SCOTUS ruling did not create a forcing function toward invocation. Midterm unrest or a major deportation operation remains a genuine tail risk keeping YES in the mid-teens, but with no dated trigger identified and modest longshot bias in the market price, I settle at 15% YES.

Pipeline Timing

Total pipeline time: 167.4s

Per-tool research timings shown in the Research section above.