US appeals court rules Trump can keep control of California National Guard
A United States appeals court has ruled the administration of President Donald Trump could keep control of National Guard troops in Los Angeles, over the objections of California Governor Gavin Newsom.
The decision on Thursday comes against a backdrop of heightened tensions in California's largest city, which has become ground zero of Trump's immigration crackdown across the US.
In a 38-page unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel said Trump was within his rights earlier this month when he ordered 4,000 members of the National Guard into service for 60 days to 'protect federal personnel performing federal functions and to protect federal property'.
'Affording appropriate deference to the President's determination, we conclude that he likely acted within his authority in federalising the National Guard,' the panel of the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeal said.
Trump, a Republican, had appointed two of the judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit panel while his Democratic predecessor, Joe Biden, had named the third, according to US media reports.
Last week, a lower court judge had ordered Trump to return control of the California National Guard to Newsom, saying the president's decision to deploy them during protests over federal immigration detentions in Los Angeles was 'illegal'. That decision by US District Judge Charles Breyer on June 12 prompted the appeal.
On Thursday night, Trump hailed the appeal court's decision in a post on his Truth Social social media platform, calling it a 'BIG WIN'.
'All over the United States, 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,' Trump wrote.
The state of California had argued that Trump's order was illegal because it did not follow the procedure of being issued through the governor.
It was the first time since 1965 that a US president deployed the National Guard over the wishes of a state governor.
The judges said Trump's 'failure to issue the federalisation order directly 'through' the Governor of California does not limit his otherwise lawful authority to call up the National Guard'.
But they said the panel disagreed with the defendant's primary argument that the president's decision to federalise members of the California National Guard 'is completely insulated from judicial review'.
'Nothing in our decision addresses the nature of the activities in which the federalized National Guard may engage,' it wrote in its opinion.
Newsom could still challenge the use of the National Guard and Marines under other laws, including the bar on using troops in domestic law enforcement, it added.
The governor could raise those issues at a court hearing on Friday in front of Breyer, it also said.
In a social media post after the decision, Newsom promised to pursue his challenge.
'Donald Trump is not a king and not above the law,' he wrote.
'Tonight, the court rightly rejected Trump's claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court.
'We will not let this authoritarian use of military soldiers against citizens go unchecked.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
an hour ago
- Al Jazeera
Project 2025: Governance reform or Culture War battle plan?
Project 2025 became a flashpoint during the 2024 presidential campaign. The sweeping conservative policy blueprint aims to overhaul the federal government and reshape United States society. How closely is President Donald Trump following its direction? And how much does it test the limits of the Constitution? Marc Lamont Hill talks to Paul Dans, the former director of Project 2025 at the Heritage Foundation.
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Is Trump planning an ‘Africa visa ban'?
United States President Donald Trump could significantly expand his travel ban list in the next few weeks to include 36 more countries, 26 of which are in Africa, US media reports say, citing internal government documents. With 10 countries already included on Trump's initial list, citizens of 36 of Africa's 54 nations could now be banned, fully or partially, from entering the US if the new list takes effect. This would make Africa the most-banned region of the world when it comes to travelling to the US. The visa bans are part of Trump's promised immigration crackdown, which has been in motion since he took office in January, and which has already seen citizens of 19 countries in Africa and the Middle East banned or severely restricted from entering the US. In a memorandum sent to US representatives in the affected countries on June 14, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the governments of those countries had been given 60 days to meet standards dictated by the Department of State. The memo also requested that those countries provide an initial action plan in line with meeting those measures by June 18. That deadline has now passed. It is unclear if any of those countries have submitted the requested plans of action. Here's what we know about the possible Africa travel bans and who could be affected: Of the 36 new countries mentioned in the reported memo, 26 are in Africa: Angola; Benin; Burkina Faso; Cabo Verde; Cambodia; Cameroon; the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC); Djibouti; Ethiopia; Egypt; Gabon; The Gambia; Ghana; Ivory Coast; Liberia; Malawi; Mauritania; Niger; Nigeria; Sao Tome and Principe; Senegal; South Sudan; Tanzania; Uganda; Zambia; and Zimbabwe. Others on the list are in the Caribbean, Asia, the Pacific and the Middle East: Antigua and Barbuda, Bhutan, Cambodia, Dominica, Kyrgyzstan, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Syria, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu. Countries which fail to address concerns raised by the Trump administration adequately could be recommended for a ban as early as August, the memo says. Seven African countries were included on Trump's first list of 12 countries completely banned from entering the US from June 4. They are Somalia, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Libya, Eritrea, Equatorial Guinea and Sudan. Three others – Sierra Leone, Burundi and Togo – were named on a separate list of seven countries which now face partial restrictions on their citizens, meaning some limited US visa categories are still open to them. This brings the total to 36 of Africa's 54 countries on a potential ban list for travel to the US. Saturday's memo gave a wide range of reasons for a potential ban on the countries affected. It did not provide justifications specific to each country, but cautioned that countries had been flagged for separate reasons. Some of the countries are designated as 'sponsors of terrorism' or have citizens who were 'involved with acts of terrorism in the United States', according to one reason given. Others, as per the memo, do not have a credible 'government authority to produce reliable identity documents', have unreliable criminal records, or sell citizenship to people who do not live in their countries. High rates of visa overstays by citizens of some countries were also cited as reasons to curb travellers, as well as a lack of cooperation by states when it comes to taking back citizens who have been deported from the US. Affected countries could address US concerns by agreeing to accept back deportees – even those originating from other countries – or agreeing to become a 'safe third country' that will take in people seeking asylum in the US, the memo stated. Mineral-rich DRC proposed such a deal to the White House in March. In early June, when the first travel ban list was released, Trump stated in a video message released by the White House that a recent attack on a pro-Israel rally in Boulder, Colorado, 'underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted'. Suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman, an Egyptian national who has also lived in Kuwait, has since been arrested and charged with a federal hate crime and several other state charges. His wife and five children are presently detained by US immigration officials. Egypt is now being considered for a ban, although Kuwait is not on either list of countries facing visa bans. This is not the first time Trump has banned citizens of other countries, which critics point out tend to be non-white and low-income nations. During his first presidential term, a controversial and highly-challenged policy, which came to be known as the 'Muslim ban', saw seven Muslim-majority countries on a red list that later expanded to include some low-income African nations. Former President Joe Biden rescinded the ban when he took office in 2021. About two million of the US's 44 million immigrant population come from African nations, according to data from the US-based Migration Policy Institute. Nearly half of African immigrants migrated to the US after 2010, according to the US Census Bureau, and represent the fastest-growing immigrant bloc in recent years. Many African immigrants are highly educated with one or more degrees, and represent the largest immigrant group in the labour force, the bureau reported. About 61 percent are naturalised US citizens. Here's a breakdown of immigrant numbers by country between 1960 and 2023, according to data from the Migration Policy Institute: Trump's travel bans are likely to cause a great deal of uncertainty for people who already live in the US, experts say. Michelle Mittelstadt, director of communications at the Migration Policy Institute, told Al Jazeera at the time of the first travel ban announcement: 'For citizens of these countries living in the US who are not naturalised citizens, the travel ban most likely will freeze them in place, as many will be fearful that they might not be permitted re-entry if they leave the US temporarily.' Mittelstadt added that the travel ban could split families, 'given the inability to travel legally to the US or apply for a permanent or temporary visa, as well as the immobility this will confer on many citizens of these countries who are already in the US'. According to Statista, about 588,177 visitors from Africa travelled to the US in 2024. A historical breakdown by country is not available. This year, no African country is on the list of the top 20 countries visiting the US, according to data from the US Department of Commerce. About 100,000 visitors have been recorded so far, from the African continent, mostly from: Nigeria's Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar warned this week that the US could miss out on essential and rare earth mineral deals if it bans citizens of West African countries. 'This would be most unfortunate if it comes to pass because we are a region of opportunities ready to do deals,' Tuggar, who currently chairs the regional bloc Economic Community of West Africa's (ECOWAS) council of foreign ministers, said in a meeting with his counterparts. He cited Nigeria's reserves of oil and gas. The country is also rich in tantalite and uranium. Sarang Shidore, director of the Global South programme at US think tank Quincy Institute, told Al Jazeera that visa bans were akin to 'building walls' between the US and targeted regions. 'Africa, particularly, is important to the United States as it is a site of natural resources, a growing market, and a talented population,' Shidore said. 'If Washington wants to restrict migration and travel from the continent, it should find other, non-militarised ways of demonstrating US commitment to stronger relations with African states.' Trump has indeed appeared to be keen on striking deals for rare earth minerals, crucial for the manufacturing of smartphones and electric vehicle batteries. For example, Washington and Beijing are set to sign an agreement that will see China provide rare earth elements and minerals crucial for manufacturing tech gadgets and weapons, in exchange for continued access to US schools for Chinese students, according to a social media post by Trump last week. Last month, the US also announced an agreement with Ukraine over rare earth minerals in return for assistance in rebuilding the country once the war with Russia is over. When the first travel ban list was announced at the start of June, Chad responded to its inclusion by suspending visas for US citizens. In a Facebook post, President Idriss Deby said: 'I have instructed the government to act in accordance with the principles of reciprocity and suspend the issuance of visas to US citizens.' According to the most recent figures from the US Department of Homeland Security, nationals of Chad had the highest visa overstay rate, at 49.5 percent of those arriving in the country. Other affected African nations have struck a more conciliatory tone. Sierra Leone's Information Minister Chernor Bah said in a statement that his country was ready to cooperate with the US. 'Our attitude to this is, what more can we do? How can we collaborate with our US partners, with whom we have and believe will maintain a very good relationship,' he said. Trump's initial proclamation in early June said Sierra Leone, which is now subject to partial restrictions, 'has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals'. Somalia's ambassador to the US, Dahir Hassan, said the East African country wanted to work with the US. 'Somalia values its longstanding relationship with the United States and stands ready to engage in dialogue to address the concerns raised,' he said. Trump's proclamation described Somalia as 'a terrorist safe haven' and stated: 'Somalia lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.' The African Union, meanwhile, in a statement on June 5, called on the US to adopt a more constructive approach and to dialogue with African nations to maintain what it said were historically strong ties. 'The African Union respectfully calls upon the US Administration to consider adopting a more consultative approach and to engage in constructive dialogue with the countries concerned. The Commission appeals for transparent communication, and where necessary, collaborative efforts to address any underlying issues that may have informed this decision,' the AU statement said.
Al Jazeera
4 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
US appeals court rules Trump can keep control of California National Guard
A United States appeals court has ruled the administration of President Donald Trump could keep control of National Guard troops in Los Angeles, over the objections of California Governor Gavin Newsom. The decision on Thursday comes against a backdrop of heightened tensions in California's largest city, which has become ground zero of Trump's immigration crackdown across the US. In a 38-page unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel said Trump was within his rights earlier this month when he ordered 4,000 members of the National Guard into service for 60 days to 'protect federal personnel performing federal functions and to protect federal property'. 'Affording appropriate deference to the President's determination, we conclude that he likely acted within his authority in federalising the National Guard,' the panel of the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeal said. Trump, a Republican, had appointed two of the judges on the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit panel while his Democratic predecessor, Joe Biden, had named the third, according to US media reports. Last week, a lower court judge had ordered Trump to return control of the California National Guard to Newsom, saying the president's decision to deploy them during protests over federal immigration detentions in Los Angeles was 'illegal'. That decision by US District Judge Charles Breyer on June 12 prompted the appeal. On Thursday night, Trump hailed the appeal court's decision in a post on his Truth Social social media platform, calling it a 'BIG WIN'. 'All over the United States, 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,' Trump wrote. The state of California had argued that Trump's order was illegal because it did not follow the procedure of being issued through the governor. It was the first time since 1965 that a US president deployed the National Guard over the wishes of a state governor. The judges said Trump's 'failure to issue the federalisation order directly 'through' the Governor of California does not limit his otherwise lawful authority to call up the National Guard'. But they said the panel disagreed with the defendant's primary argument that the president's decision to federalise members of the California National Guard 'is completely insulated from judicial review'. 'Nothing in our decision addresses the nature of the activities in which the federalized National Guard may engage,' it wrote in its opinion. Newsom could still challenge the use of the National Guard and Marines under other laws, including the bar on using troops in domestic law enforcement, it added. The governor could raise those issues at a court hearing on Friday in front of Breyer, it also said. In a social media post after the decision, Newsom promised to pursue his challenge. 'Donald Trump is not a king and not above the law,' he wrote. 'Tonight, the court rightly rejected Trump's claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court. 'We will not let this authoritarian use of military soldiers against citizens go unchecked.'
