The legal battle over Trump's use of the National Guard moves to a California courtroom
In June, as hundreds of people gathered in Los Angeles to protest a string of immigration raids that targeted workplaces and left dozens of people detained or deported, the president federalized and deployed 4,000 National Guard members over the objection of Newsom and local officials, who said the deployment would only cause further chaos. Trump invoked a rarely used law that allows the president to federalize the National Guard during times of actual or threatened rebellion or invasion, or when regular forces can't enforce US laws.
The president's lawyers said in a court filing that the duties of the National Guard troops and a handful of Marines also dispatched were narrowly circumscribed: They were dispatched only to protect federal property and personnel, and they didn't engage in any law enforcement activities.
Newsom filed a lawsuit June 9 against Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, saying they violated the Posse Comitatus Act and the 10th Amendment. Trump's lawyers say the act, which prevents the use of the military for enforcing laws, doesn't provide a mechanism for a civil lawsuit.
But Newsom's lawyers have argued the president illegally made an 'unprecedented power grab' – and even violated the Constitution – by overruling local authorities to send in the military.
The president and Hegseth 'have overstepped the bounds of law and are intent on going as far as they can to use the military in unprecedented, unlawful ways,' Newsom's lawyers say in a complaint.
The trial represents a crucial moment for determining how much power a US president can lawfully exercise over the military on domestic soil. During his first term, Trump had often speculated openly about the possibility of deploying the military on American soil, whether to suppress protests or combat crime. Now he's talking about deploying the National Guard to the nation's capital over recent high-profile crimes.
The trial also represents an escalation of the feud between Trump and Newsom, which saw the president threaten to have the Democratic governor arrested during the Los Angeles protests. Newsom described the comment as 'an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism.'
The judge set to preside over the bench trial, Charles R. Breyer, previously granted a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration, ruling that the president unlawfully federalized the National Guard and that the protests didn't amount to an insurrection. But just hours later, an appeals court paused his ruling, allowing the deployment to continue.
Here's more on what to know about the upcoming trial – and the three laws Newsom's team says Trump and Hegseth violated. The trial is taking place in San Francisco, presided over by Breyer, who sits on the US District Court for the Northern District of California, with proceedings scheduled from Monday to Wednesday.
At the center of the legal proceedings is the Posse Comitatus Act, which largely prevents the president from using the military as a domestic police force, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, an independent law and policy organization.
'Posse Comitatus' is a Latin term used in American and British law to describe 'a group of people who are mobilized by the sheriff to suppress lawlessness in the county,' according to the Brennan Center.
The act, signed into law by President Rutherford B. Hayes in 1878, consists of just one sentence: 'Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.'
Newsom's lawyers say the deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles was a violation of the act since it bars 'the military from engaging in civil law enforcement unless explicitly authorized by law,' according to the complaint.
But Trump's lawyers insist the National Guard and Marines didn't engage in any civil law enforcement – and therefore didn't violate the act.
Moreover, they say the act itself doesn't provide any mechanisms for its enforcement in a private civil lawsuit.
Newsom's lawyers also argue that by overriding California officials, Trump violated the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, which governs the sharing of power between the federal government and the 50 states. The amendment says 'the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'
Trump and Hegseth's move to call up the National Guard against the governor's wishes 'infringes on Governor Newsom's role as Commander-in-Chief of the California National Guard and violates the State's sovereign right to control and have available its National Guard in the absence of a lawful invocation of federal power,' Newsom's complaint says.
Policing and crime control are some of the most crucial uses of state power, Newsom's lawyers say.
Additionally, Newsom's lawyers argue Trump and Hegseth violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which says a court must 'hold unlawful and set aside agency action' that is 'arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law,' that is 'contrary to constitutional right (or) power,' or that is 'in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right.'
Hegseth and the Department of Defense 'lack authority to federalize members of the California National Guard without issuing such orders through Governor Newsom, who has not consented to their actions or been afforded the opportunity to consult on any deployment. Such agency actions are unauthorized, unprecedented, and not entitled to deference by this Court,' reads the complaint.
Trump's lawyers, meanwhile, have focused in their filing on a little-used law they cited to federalize the National Guard.
Section 12406(3) of the US Code says the president can federalize the National Guard of any state in three circumstances: if the US is being invaded or faces danger of invasion; if there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion; or if the president is unable 'with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.'
The law, however, stipulates the orders should be issued 'through the governors.' Newsom's lawyers say Trump didn't consult with the governor before issuing the order. Breyer previously pointed out Trump's memo directed Hegseth to consult the governor before federalizing the National Guard – but that he didn't.
The Los Angeles deployment was only the second time in US history that a president has used the 'exclusive authority' of this law to federalize the National Guard, according to Newsom's lawyers. The first was when President Richard Nixon called on the National Guard to deliver the mail during the 1970 Postal Service strike.
And it's the second time since 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators, that a president activated a state's national guard without a request from the governor – though he used a different law to do so.
Trump's lawyers say the president was unable to enforce federal immigration law 'as well as laws forbidding interference with federal functions or assaults on federal officers and property' with 'the regular forces' – so the deployment falls within the limits of Section 12406(3).
With only 300 National Guard troops still deployed in Los Angeles, Newsom's lawyers are looking mostly for symbolic relief: a declaration the memorandum used to federalize the National Guard and Hegseth's orders were unauthorized and illegal. The remaining troops are stationed at Joint Forces Training Base – Los Alamitos, Newsom says, 'without a clear mission, direction, or a timeline for returning to their communities.'
Newsom's team is also asking for 'injunctive relief' prohibiting Hegseth and the Department of Defense from federalizing and deploying the California National Guard and military without meeting legal requirements, including the cooperation of the governor.
Finally, they ask to recoup the state of California's costs and attorneys' fees and 'such additional relief as the court deems proper and the interests of justice may require.'
Trump's lawyers indicated in a court filing they plan to call as a witness Maj. Gen. Scott M. Sherman, deputy commanding general of the National Guard. Sherman is expected to discuss the National Guard's deployment to Los Angeles and their compliance with the Posse Comitatus Act.
Newsom's lawyers also plan to call Sherman, as well as US Army official William B. Harrington to testify about the activities of Task Force 51, the command post activated to coordinate deployment of National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles. Ernesto Santacruz Jr. of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement is also expected to testify about the federalized National Guard's activities in support of federal law enforcement officials during immigration enforcement operations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
9 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump's friendly-to-frustrated relationship with Putin takes the spotlight at the Alaska summit
WASHINGTON (AP) — Donald Trump's summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday could be a decisive moment for both the war in Ukraine and the U.S. leader's anomalous relationship with his Russian counterpart. Trump has long boasted that he's gotten along well with Putin and spoken admiringly of him, even praising him as 'pretty smart' for invading Ukraine. But in recent months, he's expressed frustrations with Putin and threatened more sanctions on his country. At the same time, Trump has offered conflicting messages about his expectations for the summit. He has called it 'really a feel-out meeting' to gauge Putin's openness to a ceasefire but also warned of 'very severe consequences' if Putin doesn't agree to end the war. For Putin, Friday's meeting is a chance to repair his relationship with Trump and unlace the West's isolation of his country following its invasion of Ukraine 3 1/2 years ago. He's been open about his desire to rebuild U.S.-Russia relations now that Trump is back in the White House. The White House has dismissed any suggestion that Trump's agreeing to sit down with Putin is a win for the Russian leader. But critics have suggested that the meeting gives Putin an opportunity to get in Trump's ear to the detriment of Ukraine, whose leader was excluded from the summit. 'I think this is a colossal mistake. You don't need to invite Putin onto U.S. soil to hear what we already know he wants," said Ian Kelly, a retired career foreign service officer who served as the U.S. ambassador to Georgia during the Obama and first Trump administrations. Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a longtime Russia hawk and close ally of Trump's, expressed optimism for the summit. 'I have every confidence in the world that the President is going to go to meet Putin from a position of strength, that he's going to look out for Europe and Ukrainian needs to end this war honorably,' Graham wrote on social media. A look back at the ups and downs of Trump and Putin's relationship: Russia questions during the 2016 campaign Months before he was first elected president, Trump cast doubt on findings from U.S. intelligence agencies that Russian government hackers had stolen emails from Democrats, including his opponent Hillary Clinton, and released them in an effort to hurt her campaign and boost Trump's. In one 2016 appearance, he shockingly called on Russian hackers to find emails that Clinton had reportedly deleted. 'Russia, if you're listening,' Trump said, 'I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.' Questions about his connections to Russia dogged much of his first term, touching off investigations by the Justice Department and Congress and leading to the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller, who secured multiple convictions against Trump aides and allies but did not establish proof of a criminal conspiracy between Moscow and the Trump campaign. These days, Trump describes the Russia investigation as an affinity he and Putin shared. 'Putin went through a hell of a lot with me,' Trump said earlier this year. 'He went through a phony witch hunt where they used him and Russia. Russia, Russia, Russia, ever hear of that deal?' Putin in 2019 mocked the investigation and its ultimate findings, saying, "A mountain gave birth to a mouse.' 'He just said it's not Russia' Trump met with Putin six times during his first term, including a 2018 summit in Helsinki, when Trump stunned the world by appearing to side with an American adversary on the question of whether Russia meddled in the 2016 election. 'I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today," Trump said. 'He just said it's not Russia. I will say this: I don't see any reason why it would be." Facing intense blowback, Trump tried to walk back the comment a full 24 hours later. But he raised doubt on that reversal by saying other countries could have also interfered. Putin referred to Helsinki summit as 'the beginning of the path' back from Western efforts to isolate Russia. He also made clear that he had wanted Trump to win in 2016. 'Yes, I wanted him to win because he spoke of normalization of Russian-U.S. ties,' Putin said. 'Isn't it natural to feel sympathy to a person who wanted to develop relations with our country?" Trump calls Putin 'pretty smart' after invasion of Ukraine The two leaders kept up their friendly relationship after Trump left the White House under protest in 2021. After Putin invaded Ukraine in 2022, Trump described the Russian leader in positive terms. 'I mean, he's taking over a country for $2 worth of sanctions. I'd say that's pretty smart,' Trump said at his Mar-a-Lago resort. In a radio interview that week, he suggested that Putin was going into Ukraine to 'be a peacekeeper.' Trump repeatedly said the invasion of Ukraine would never have happened if he had been in the White House — a claim Putin endorsed while lending his support to Trump's false claims of election fraud. 'I couldn't disagree with him that if he had been president, if they hadn't stolen victory from him in 2020, the crisis that emerged in Ukraine in 2022 could have been avoided,' he said. Trump also repeatedly boasted that he could have the fighting 'settled' within 24 hours. Through much of his campaign, Trump criticized U.S. support for Ukraine and derided Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy as a 'salesman' for persuading Washington to provide weapons and funding to his country. Revisiting the relationship Once he became president, Trump stopped claiming he'd solve the war in Ukraine in 24 hours. In March, he said he was "being a little bit sarcastic' when he said that. Since the early days of Trump's second term, Putin has pushed for a summit while trying to pivot from the Ukrainian conflict by emphasizing the prospect of launching joint U.S.-Russian economic projects, among other issues. 'We'd better meet and have a calm conversation on all issues of interest to both the United States and Russia based on today's realities,' Putin said in January. In February, things looked favorable for Putin when Trump had a blowup with Zelenskyy at the White House, berating him as 'disrespectful." In late March, Trump still spoke of trusting Putin when it came to hopes for a ceasefire, saying, 'I don't think he's going to go back on his word." But a month later, as Russian strikes escalated, Trump posted a public and personal plea on his social media account: 'Vladimir, STOP!' He began voicing more frustration with the Russian leader, saying he was 'Just tapping me along.' In May, he wrote on social media that Putin 'has gone absolutely CRAZY!' Earlier this month, Trump ordered the repositioning of two U.S. nuclear submarines 'based on the highly provocative statements' of the country's former president, Dmitry Medvedev. Trump's vocal protests about Putin have tempered somewhat since he announced their meeting, but so have his predictions for what he might accomplish. Speaking to reporters Monday, Trump described their upcoming summit not as the occasion in which he'd finally get the conflict 'settled' but instead as 'really a feel-out meeting, a little bit.' 'I think it'll be good,' Trump said. 'But it might be bad.'
San Francisco Chronicle
9 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
DC Mayor Bowser walks delicate line with Trump, reflecting the city's precarious position
NEW YORK (AP) — As National Guard troops deploy across her city as part of President Donald Trump's efforts to clamp down on crime, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser is responding with relative restraint. She's called Trump's takeover of the city's police department and his decision to activate 800 members of the guard ' unsettling and unprecedented ' and gone as far as to cast his efforts as part of an 'authoritarian push.' But Bowser has so far avoided the kind of biting rhetoric and personal attacks typical of other high-profile Democratic leaders, despite the unprecedented incursion into her city. 'While this action today is unsettling and unprecedented, I can't say that, given some of the rhetoric of the past, that we're totally surprised,' Bowser told reporters at a press conference responding to the efforts. She even suggested the surge in resources might benefit the city and noted that limited home rule allows the federal government 'to intrude on our autonomy in many ways.' 'My tenor will be appropriate for what I think is important for the District," said Bowser, who is in her third term as mayor. "And what's important for the District is that we can take care of our citizens.' The approach underscores the reality of Washington, D.C.'s precarious position under the thumb of the federal government. Trump has repeatedly threatened an outright takeover of the overwhelmingly Democratic city, which is granted autonomy through a limited home rule agreement passed in 1973 that could be repealed by Congress. Republicans, who control both chambers, have already frozen more than a $1 billion in local spending, slashing the city's budget. That puts her in a very different position than figures like California Gov. Gavin Newsom or Illinois Gov. B Pritzker, Democrats whose states depend on the federal government for disaster relief and other funding, but who have nonetheless relentlessly attacked the current administration as they lay the groundwork for potential 2028 presidential runs. Those efforts come amid deep frustrations from Democratic voters that their party has not been nearly aggressive enough in its efforts to counter Trump's actions. 'Unfortunately she is in a very vulnerable position,' said Democratic strategist Nina Smith. 'This is the sort of thing that can happen when you don't have the powers that come with being a state. So that's what we're seeing right now, the mayor trying to navigate a very tough administration. Because this administration has shown no restraint when it comes to any kind of constitutional barriers or norms." A change from Trump's first term Bowser's approach marks a departure from Trump's first term, when she was far more antagonistic toward the president. Then she routinely clashed with the administration, including having city workers paint giant yellow letters spelling out 'Black Lives Matter' on a street near the White House during the George Floyd protests in 2020. This time around, Bowser took a different tact from the start. She flew to Florida to meet with Trump at Mar-a-Lago after he won the election and has worked to avoid conflict and downplay points of contention, including tearing up the 'Black Lives Matter' letters after he returned to Washington in response to pressure from Republicans in Congress. The change reflects the new political dynamics at play, with Republicans in control of Congress and an emboldened Trump who has made clear he is willing to exert maximum power and push boundaries in unprecedented ways. D.C. Councilmember Christina Henderson said she understands Bowser's position, and largely agrees with her conclusion that a legal challenge to Trump's moves would be a long shot. Trump invoked Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act in his executive order, declaring a 'crime emergency' so his administration could take over the city's police force. The statue limits that control to 30 days unless he gets approval from Congress. 'The challenge would be on the question of 'Is this actually an emergency?'' said Henderson, a former congressional staffer. 'That's really the only part you could challenge.' Henderson believes the city would face dim prospects in a court fight, but thinks the D.C. government should challenge anyway, 'just on the basis of precedent.' Trump told reporters Wednesday that he believes he can extend the 30-day deadline by declaring a national emergency, but said "we expect to be before Congress very quickly.' 'We're gonna be asking for extensions on that, long-term extensions, because you can't have 30 days," he said. 'We're gonna do this very quickly. But we're gonna want extensions. I don't want to call a national emergency. If I have to, I will.' Limited legal options Bowser's response is a reflection of the reality of the situation, according to a person familiar with her thinking. As mayor of the District of Columbia, Bowser has a very different relationship with the president and federal government than other mayors or governors. The city is home to thousands of federal workers, and the mass layoffs under DOGE have already had a major impact on the city's economy. Her strategy has been to focus on finding areas where she and the new administration can work together on shared priorities. For now, Bowser appears set to stick with her approach, saying Wednesday that she is focused on 'making sure the federal surge is useful to us.' During a morning interview with Fox 5, she and the city's police chief argued an influx of federal agents linked to Trump's takeover would improve public safety, with more officers on patrol. Police chief Pamela Smith said the city's police department is short almost 800 officers, so the extra police presence 'is clearly going to impact us in a positive way.' But Nina Smith, the Democratic strategist, said she believes Bowser needs a course correction. 'How many times is it going to take before she realizes this is not someone who has got the best interests of the city at heart?" she asked. 'I think there may need to be time for her to get tough and push back.' Despite Trump's rhetoric, statistics published by Washington's Metropolitan Police show violent crime has dropped in Washington since a post-pandemic peak in 2023. A recent Department of Justice report shows that violent crime is down 35% since 2023, reaching its lowest rate in 30 years.
CNN
10 minutes ago
- CNN
Analysis: How Sly Stallone and Gloria Gaynor explain Trump and his presidency
President Donald Trump would love cultural elites to sniff at his Kennedy Center honorees. He relished unveiling the stars he'll fete at the iconic arts center's annual gala later this year, after motorcading to the complex Wednesday through streets now patrolled, on his orders, by federal agents and army reservists. The line-up explains a lot about him, his power and why he's president. 'Rocky' star Sylvester Stallone, Broadway legend Michael Crawford, disco icon Gloria Gaynor, country crooner George Strait and glam rock band KISS are more populist than 'high' culture. That's not to say that they are unworthy. Who could argue that Stallone didn't leave an 'indelible' mark on his art form? That's one of the criteria for selecting nominees. And Kennedy Center honorees have been trending toward the popular arts for decades, under presidents of both parties. As always, Trump was setting a trap for his political foes. Any criticism of his choices as too lowbrow or undeserving will only bolster his claims to be a scourge of the establishment and endear him more to supporters who lionize him as the ultimate outsider. Trump's critics see his takeover of the Kennedy Center and his efforts to destroy progressive values in the arts, the universities and elsewhere as cultural warfare. He pretty much agrees, proclaiming that he'd scrubbed his list for 'wokesters.' He admitted he'd even considered using his newly seized power over the citadel of American cultural life to honor himself. No wonder critics — including, no doubt, many liberal Kennedy Center subscribers, given the capital region's progressive lean — perceive a would-be authoritarian who wants to dominate and dictate every aspect of American life. Presidents don't generally select honorees. You'd think the world's most powerful man would have bigger fish to fry. Most commanders in chief just throw a White House reception and turn up for the show. But Trump is a ravenous consumer of pop culture and is unusually skilled at leveraging it for political gain. He's the executive producer of his own life and political career. So there was no chance he'd pass up a chance to stage-manage this show — and even plans to host the televised gala himself. He professed to have been press-ganged into it by White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. She probably didn't have to twist his arm for too long. More seriously, Trump's Kennedy Center Honors will also represent another important victory for his 'Make America Great Again' movement and his hostile takeover of Washington institutions. 'I would say I was about 98 percent involved,' Trump said, of the selection process. 'No, they all went through me … I turned down plenty. They were too woke. I turned them — I had a couple of wokesters.' There's an important political dimension to this. Trump's base voters, and many other conservatives, believe that liberal elites spent decades cementing an ideological takeover of multiple areas of US life — in the arts, the media, academia, and even in sports — and dragged them to the left. The anger of millions of Americans about this pulsated from Trump's rallies in three consecutive campaigns. Voters gravitated toward a candidate who was mocked for his brassy ways by sophisticated Manhattanites. This is why Hillary Clinton's ill-judged insult of Trump supporters in 2016 as 'deplorables' became a badge of honor and a source of power for the president. When Trump's critics bemoan what they see as a takeover of top political and cultural institutions, his fans think he's taking those entities back. On conservative media, hosts lash out at movie stars for demeaning Hollywood with progressive views, or socially conscious NFL or NBA stars for 'ruining sports.' Previously, Kennedy Center honorees were chosen by a nominally bipartisan panel of arts and entertainment industry luminaries. But try convincing a conservative that these judges were free of bias, since they were drawn from the liberal arts milieu that Trump is seeking to destroy by taking over the Kennedy Center. Trump celebrated his dominance of yet another liberal bastion by admitting he was politicizing it — in another show of his unchecked power. 'I shouldn't make this political because they made the Academy Awards political, and they went down the tubes,' he said. The president went on, 'So they'll say, 'Trump made it political,' but I think if we make it our kind of political, we'll go up, OK?' But while Trump aimed for levity, his actions are threatening. On its own, his takeover of the Kennedy Center would be unusual, even a little bizarre. Taken against the backdrop of everything else he's doing, it's more worrying. He's weaponized the Justice Department against his political enemies, including members of the Obama administration. Trump's federalizing of the Washington, DC, police and deployment of the National Guard on the capital's streets and endless offensives against judges mirror the tactics of authoritarian rulers. The administration plans to scrub exhibits at the Smithsonian so they don't conflict with Trump's hardline views ahead of America's 250th birthday next year. His attempts to control the curricula of elite universities and his attacks on the media along with his dominance of the Kennedy Center make it feel like he's trying to control what Americans see, learn and even do in their leisure time. It's easy to believe that Trump chose the honorees himself because they all reflect aspects of his own character and experience. Stallone plays rough guys like John J. Rambo and Rocky Balboa, who trampled political correctness. It's not hard to see that Trump sees himself in them. 'He's a little bit tough, a little bit different, I will tell you. He's a little, tough guy,' Trump said, noting that Stallone, too, has his star in cement in Hollywood. 'In fact, the only way that's a bigger name on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, they say, is a guy named Donald Trump.' Strait is a massive recording star known as the 'King of Country' and a titan of rural America whose traditional sound evokes the kind of down-home appeal that Trump seeks to emulate. Crawford, who starred in the original London and Broadway productions of 'Phantom of the Opera,' shows the president's affinity for musicals. Like Trump, the show was big in New York in the 1980s. And the score, composed by Andrew Lloyd Webber, was considered mass market by trendy elites, while being widely popular among the masses. Crawford is also famous for another role — PT Barnum, a 19th-century showman, impresario, businessman and ring master whose carnival-barker style foretold Trump's. 'Barnum's' most famous number is 'There's a sucker born ev'ry minute' and sums up the business philosophy of a hero remembered for publicity stunts and hoaxes that blurred truth and reality. Sound familiar? KISS, a band with a catalogue of platinum albums, is also known for over-the-top stagecraft. And there's no better anthem for Trump's life of personal, business and political scandals that almost but never quite destroy him than Gaynor's biggest hit: 'I Will Survive.'
