[Al Norris]

Now, while the Guard, in this case, the Army National Guard, does indeed trace it's history back to the Mass. Bay Colony in 1636 (182nd Infantry Regiment, 101st Engineer Battalion and 181st Infantry Regiment of the Massachusetts Army National Guard are directly descended from Massachusetts Bay Colony regiments formed over 370 years ago), it was not what we today would consider the Guard. It was at that time a citizen-militia of the kind and type exemplified by the founders in the Federalists Papers.

However....

Shortly before the civil war, 2nd Battalion, 11th New York Artillery renamed itself as the "National Guard" in honor of the Marquis de Lafayette (who commanded the "Garde Nationale de Paris" in the early days of the French Revolution). New York renamed its entire militia as the New York National Guard shortly after the outbreak of the civil war.

After the civil war, several States began to follow the lead of New York in renaming their militia.

It wasn't until 1903 that the title, "National Guard," was used by the federal government when many of the States Militias were federalized. In 1916, all State militias were federalized as the National Guard. The Guard is therefore a federally created select militia.

Finally, in 1990, the State Governors lost all control of "their" Guard in Perpich v. Dept of Defense, 496 U.S. 334. The writing was on the wall, long before this, however.

I could go on, for some length, but Tennessee the argument is not whether the militia is useful or its time is past, the argument is that the National Guard is not the citizen-militia of the States. Regardless of what the Supremes have said (obiter dicta), the history is explicit.

None of the above is meant to detract from what the Guard is or does. It is merely to set the documented and historical record straight.