[maddog55]

The lawsuit filed in 1997 cited Article 4 of the Constitution, which says that the United States “shall protect each of [the states] against invasion.” But U.S. District Judge Judith Keep in San Diego and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco threw out the lawsuit on grounds that California and Arizona are not being “invaded” by a hostile, foreign power.

My guess is the same thing would happen again.

[OneWingedShark]

The lawsuit filed in 1997 cited Article 4 of the Constitution, which says that the United States “shall protect each of [the states] against invasion.” But U.S. District Judge Judith Keep in San Diego and the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco threw out the lawsuit on grounds that California and Arizona are not being “invaded” by a hostile, foreign power.

My guess is the same thing would happen again.

Invasion doesn't require armament, or even hostility, see definitions #2, #3, and #4:

invasion

noun
1. an act or instance of invading or entering as an enemy, especially by an army.
2. the entrance or advent of anything troublesome or harmful, as disease.
3. entrance as if to take possession or overrun: the annual invasion of the resort by tourists.
4. infringement by intrusion.

If a governor had the balls to declare a state of invasion, then I'd think he'd have the balls to issue warrants for arrest/trial of Treason to such judicial pronouncements.