Legal Analysts Weigh in on Trump's National Guard Deployment to California

Newsweek

4 hours ago

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Legal experts weighed in about whether President Donald Trump has the legal authority to deploy the National Guard to Los Angeles as California Governor Gavin Newsom announced a lawsuit challenging the administration's latest move.
Why It Matters
Newsom, a Democrat, said on Monday the state will be suing the Trump administration after he ordered the National Guard to Los Angeles, where protests have erupted over U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in the city.
While the raids are following legal directive from federal authorities, protests have erupted amid reports that detainees were being held in the basement of a federal building. ICE denied these allegations, with a spokesperson previously telling Newsweek the agency "categorically refutes the assertions made by immigration activists in Los Angeles."
The clashes highlight deepening conflicts between sanctuary jurisdictions and federal immigration policy, as Trump has implemented sweeping changes through executive orders and utilized the wartime Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to expand deportation authority.
Critics have accused Trump of abusing his power by sending in National Guard troops, with Newsom casting the move as "unlawful" and a "serious breach of state sovereignty."
What to Know
Trump, over the weekend, federalized the California National Guard using Title 10 authority, which allows him to presume the top of the chain of command under certain circumstances. He sent 2,000 National Guard troops into downtown Los Angeles, where protests escalated over the weekend as groups shut down parts of the 101 Freeway and clashed with law enforcement officers who responded with tear gas and flash bangs.
The White House wrote that Trump decided to do so because the protests "directly inhibit the execution of the laws" and "constitute a form of rebellion."
Title 10 authority allows a president to federalize a state's national guard whenever there is a foreign invasion, a rebellion against the authority of the U.S., or when a president is unable to execute the laws of the U.S., former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Newsweek.
California Highway Patrol officers attempt to control crowds in Los Angeles, California on June 7, 2025.
California Highway Patrol officers attempt to control crowds in Los Angeles, California on June 7, 2025.
BENJAMIN HANSON/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images
The administration's case that there is a rebellion preventing ICE from executing law enforcement operations would likely hold up in court, Rahmani said.
"I think it's clearly been met if he's unable to enforce the nation's immigration laws with the agents that he has, he can federalize the National Guard," he said.
He said he "can't see a court wading into this political question" to say that Trump cannot enforce the immigration law and that "even the most liberal judge" would be unlikely to block legitimate law enforcement. He predicted the case could be quickly dismissed by a judge.
There is historical precedence for a president to federalize the National Guard against a governor's wishes, though it is rare. It was used during the Civil Rights Era. The last time this occurred was in 1965 when President Lydon Johnson sent in the National Guard to protect civil rights protesters.
Former federal prosecutor Gene Rossi told Newsweek he agreed that the lawsuit may face an uphill battle, as the president has "broad discretion" to invoke the National Guard. But he said his decision to defy Newsom indicates the move is an "indicator to me that this is more political than anything else."
Still, he felt it was "ironic" because Trump did not call in the National Guard during the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol building, when protests from his supporters over the 2020 presidential election results grew violent.
Michael McAuliffe, a former federal prosecutor and former elected state attorney, told Newsweek it's "too early to speculate" about the outcome of Newsom's lawsuit.
"The president's general statutory authority to command the national guard will not be in dispute, but the circumstances supporting, or not supporting, such an order will almost certainly be challenged. The legal challenge also will likely contain both an immediate component––timely injunctive relief––and the underlying legal issue of whether the record facts support the mobilization. A different, and higher, legal standard applies for immediate injunctive relief," he said.
He said Trump's decision should "give every American chills."
"The mobilization of troops for domestic crowd control should remain the rarest of events and only in the most utterly extreme circumstances. The current protest in California against the ICE/federal immigration arrest spree is not one of those instances. The President's action likely will be counter-productive and actually raise tensions, instead of gaining better control of the situation," he said.
What People Are Saying
California Governor Newsom wrote on X on Sunday: "I have formally requested the Trump Administration rescind their unlawful deployment of troops in Los Angeles county and return them to my command. We didn't have a problem until Trump got involved. This is a serious breach of state sovereignty — inflaming tensions while pulling resources from where they're actually needed. Rescind the order. Return control to California."
President Donald Trump on Truth Social: "If Governor Gavin Newscum, of California, and Mayor Karen Bass, of Los Angeles, can't do their jobs, which everyone knows they can't, then the Federal Government will step in and solve the problem, RIOTS & LOOTERS, the way it should be solved!!!"
Representative Kevin Kiley, a California Republican, told Newsweek on Monday: "The acts of violence, lawlessness, and obstruction we are seeing in Los Angeles pose an ongoing risk to public safety. The President has chosen to protect federal officers and LA citizens because Governor Newsom has refused to do so. I am praying for everyone's safety during this time."
Former federal prosecutor Joyce White Vance wrote in a Substack post: "The role of California Governor Gavin Newsom isn't entirely clear. There is an inside baseball legal dispute over whether the law requires his consent to nationalize the Guard or not. There is little legal guidance on this point, and for now, it's sufficient to say we can expect this to be one of the issues included when California goes to court. The Trump administration is acting under Title 10 USC 12406, which provides that 'orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States.' That language is as clear as mud."
What Happens Next
Although Newsom has called for the National Guard troops to be returned to California control, the Trump administration has not said they plan to do so. It's unclear how long the National Guard will stay in Los Angeles.