Last invoked by George H.W. Bush in 1992, the [Insurrection Act of 1807](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807) enables the President to deploy the U.S. military to enforce civil order. According to reporting from the New York Times and Washington Post, Trump intends to invoke the act, possibly as early as his first day in office [1](https://www.nytimes.com/article/trump-2025-second-term.html) [2](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/05/trump-revenge-second-term/) [3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025).
This market resolves N/A if Trump is not inaugurated President as a result of the 2024 election. This market resolves YES if Trump invokes the Insurrection Act to deploy the U.S. military for any purpose prior to April 20th, 2025, and resolves NO otherwise. In an unlikely edge case where it is not clear if the act was legally invoked, I will lean towards resolving based on whether or not troops are actually deployed (see clarification in comments https://manifold.markets/kjz/project-2025-if-elected-will-trump#enho0k5vr2n).
1,000
3.00@MalcolmOcean it was asserted in much of the initial reporting on Project 2025 (see, eg, linked articles), and it lends itself well to a clear resolution. In retrospect, I would say isn't really core to Project 2025 as a document, but it is closely tied to the fears some had expressed about Project 2025 as a blueprint for authoritarianism. So I would say, interpret it more as a proxy for a clear pivot towards authoritarianism, rather than as a proxy for the implementation of the broader policy agenda expressed in the Project 2025 document.
@sesquipedalianThaumaturge an edge case would be something like, Trump claiming to invoke the act but not actually going through the proper steps to do. If for whatever reason there is significant controversy around whether or not the act was actually invoked, I would defer to facts (that is, troops) on the ground. However I fully expect that in almost all cases it should be a clear binary: either there is a signed executive order that invokes the act or there isn't. I wouldn't necessarily require the actual deployment of troops if there is a signed executive invocation of the act such that there is a broad consensus that the act was invoked (eg, in a scenario where the situation motivating the invocation resolves before physical deployment occurs).