A U.S. appeals court let Donald Trump retain control on Thursday of California’s National Guard while the state’s Democratic governor proceeds with a lawsuit challenging the Republican president’s use of the troops to quell protests in Los Angeles.
Trump’s decision to send troops into Los Angeles prompted a national debate about the use of the military on U.S. soil and inflamed political tension in the country’s second-most-populous city.
On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals extended its pause on U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer’s June 12 ruling that Trump had unlawfully called the National Guard into federal service. The 9th Circuit panel is comprised of two judges appointed by Trump during his first term and one appointee of Democratic former president Joe Biden.
Trump probably acted within his authority, the panel said, adding that his administration probably complied with the requirement to co-ordinate with Governor Gavin Newsom, and even if it did not, he had no authority to veto Trump’s directive.
“And although we hold that the president likely has authority to federalize the National Guard, nothing in our decision addresses the nature of the activities in which the federalized National Guard may engage,” it wrote in its opinion.
Trump hailed the decision in a post on Truth Social as a win and said, “If our cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should state and local police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done.”
Description: U.S. President Donald Trump deployed the National Guard to respond to immigration protests in California with a rarely used law invoked when the government believes a rebellion is underway. Andrew Chang breaks down how Trump’s framing of these protests as an emergency — along with everything from trade deficits to fentanyl — exists as part of a larger pattern of governing by executive order with unchecked power.
California to continue legal challenges, Newsom says
Newsom could still challenge the use of the National Guard and U.S. Marines under other laws, including the bar on using troops in domestic law enforcement, it added.
“The president is not a king and is not above the law,” said Newsom on X. “We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump’s authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against our citizens.”
Amid protests and turmoil in Los Angeles over Trump’s immigration raids, the president on June 7 took control of California’s National Guard and deployed 4,000 troops against Newsom’s wishes.
The protests in Los Angeles ran for more than a week before they ebbed, leading Mayor Karen Bass earlier this week to lift a curfew she had imposed.Â
Day 69:17Long-time LA resident says the crackdown on Latino immigrants undermines the city they helped build
This week, the Trump administration called in the National Guard and the U.S. Marines to respond to protests against immigration raids and detentions targeting the Latino community in Los Angeles. Alvaro Huerta is an associate professor at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona and says the crackdown on Latino immigrants undermines the city they helped build.
Appeals court cites property damage
At a court hearing on Tuesday on whether to extend the pause on Breyer’s decision, members of the 9th Circuit panel questioned lawyers for California and the Trump administration on what role, if any, courts should have in reviewing Trump’s authority to deploy the troops.
The law sets out three conditions by which a president can federalize state National Guard forces, including an invasion, a “rebellion or danger of a rebellion” against the government or a situation in which the U.S. government is unable with regular forces to execute the country’s laws.
The appeals court said the final condition had probably been met because protesters hurled items at immigration authorities’ vehicles, used trash dumpster as battering rams, threw Molotov cocktails and vandalized property, frustrating law enforcement.
The Justice Department has said once the president determines that an emergency exists that warrants the use of the National Guard, no court or state governor can review that decision. The appeals court rejected that argument.
In its June 9 lawsuit, California said Trump’s deployment of the National Guard and the Marines violated the state’s sovereignty and U.S. laws that forbid federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement.
The Trump administration has denied that troops are engaging in law enforcement, saying they are instead protecting federal buildings and personnel, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers.
Trump also ordered 700 U.S. Marines to the city after sending in the National Guard. Breyer has not yet ruled on the legality of the Marine Corps mobilization.
