Trump administration blocked from deploying National Guard to LA
A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration's deployment of California's National Guard to Los Angeles and called the move illegal.
The judge's order to return control of the troops to California Governor Gavin Newsom will not go into effect immediately and the administration has filed an appeal.
The state sued President Donald Trump on Monday over his order to deploy the troops without Newsom's consent.
Trump said he was sending the troops - who are typically under the governor's authority - to stop LA from "burning down" in protests against his immigration crackdown. Local authorities have argued they have the situation in hand and do not need troops.
US District Judge Charles Breyer said the question presented by California's request was whether Trump followed the law set by Congress on the deployment of a state's National Guard.
"He did not," the judge wrote in his decision. "His actions were illegal... He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith."
But the judge stayed the order until Friday afternoon to give the Trump administration time to appeal against it. The administration did so almost immediately after the order was issued.
Newsom posted on social media on Thursday afternoon that "the court just confirmed what we all know — the military belongs on the battlefield, not on our city streets".
The Trump administration has said it took over California's National Guard to restore order and to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents as they swept up people in Los Angeles who were believed to be in the country illegally.
Despite Newsom's objections, Trump ordered a total of 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to help quell the unrest. Some of the Guard troops are now authorised to detain people until police can arrest them.
A president last deployed the National Guard without a governor's consent more than 50 years ago - during the civil rights era. It is more common for a governor to activate troops to deal with natural disasters and other emergencies, and then ask for federal assistance.
Before a packed courtroom on Thursday, a justice department attorney told Judge Breyer that Newsom did not need to be consulted when Trump issued his order.
"Governor Newsom was fully aware of this order…he objected to it," Attorney Brett Shumate said. "There is one commander-in-chief of the US armed forces."
"No," Judge Breyer, the younger brother of former Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, responded.
"The president isn't the commander -in-chief of the National Guard," he said but added there were times and situations where the president could become the head of the troops.
Breyer, who had donned a light blue bowtie, invoked the Constitution multiple times during the hearing, holding up a booklet copy of the document at one point.
"We're talking about the president exercising his authority. And the president is, of course, limited in his authority," he said. "That's the difference between a constitutional government and King George.".
The Trump administration used a law that allows the president to call the National Guard into federal service when a "rebellion" is happening.
But California said in its lawsuit that the protests that have spanned nearly a week in LA - and included more than 300 arrests and the shutting down of a major freeway - did not rise to that level.
"At no point in the past three days has there been a rebellion or an insurrection. Nor have these protests risen to the level of protests or riots that Los Angeles and other major cities have seen at points in the past, including in recent years," the lawsuit read.
Additional reporting by Ana Faguy in Washington, DC
Trump has long called for using the military to quash protests. Los Angeles gave him an opening
Newsom v Trump holds promise and peril for California governor
Downtown LA under curfew for second night after days of protests
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Celebrates Temporary Ruling Allowing Troop Deployment: ‘We Saved L.A.'
President Donald Trump celebrated after an appeals court signed off on his deployment of 4,000 National Guard troops against protestors in Los Angeles. 'The Appeals Court ruled last night that I can use the National Guard to keep our cities, in this case Los Angeles, safe,' the president wrote on Truth Social. 'If I didn't send the Military into Los Angeles, that city would be burning to the ground right now. We saved L.A. Thank you for the Decision!!!' On Thursday, a federal judge had sided against Trump, ordering him to relinquish control of California's National Guard to Governor Gavin Newsom. Newsom, a Democrat who has sparred with Trump over the handling of protests over Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in L.A., was quick to take a victory lap of his own—even as the federal government appealed the decision. 'This win is not just for California, but the nation,' Newsom wrote on X. 'It's a check on a man whose authoritarian tendencies are increasing by the day.' But just hours later, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals intervened and paused the ruling in a one-page order, meaning that Trump can keep the troops in L.A. for the time being. The court set a hearing for Tuesday. It is still possible that Newsom could prevail over Trump once the court considers the case on its merits. The San Francisco judge who originally sided with the governor—Charles Breyer, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton—was vehement in rejecting Trump's justification for deploying the guard. 'His actions were illegal,' the judge wrote, 'both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.' Trump has also moved 700 Marines to L.A., but the judge's order didn't address these troops because they have not yet been actively involved in the protests. Typically, a state's governor must sign off before the National Guard is mobilized. However, Trump invoked a law that allows the president to do so in cases where there is a rebellion. Over the last week, as protests have raged in L.A.—at times becoming violent—Newsom and Trump have traded barbs. Newsom has likened Trump to 'failed dictators,' calling his deployment of troops a 'brazen abuse of power.' The president, meanwhile, has called Newsom 'grossly incompetent,' suggesting that he could be arrested for his handling of the protests.
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Minnesota Title IX investigation escalates after Champlin Park softball championship
The Brief The U.S. Department of Education is escalating its Title IX investigation into Minnesota after the Champlin Park girls softball team won a state championship with a transgender pitcher. Law professor David Schultz says Minnesota and the Trump Administration have very different interpretations of Title IX when it comes to transgender athletes. Attorney General Keith Ellison is suing the Trump Administration, challenging the executive order that MINNEAPOLIS (FOX 9) - The U.S. Department of Education is raising the stakes in its Title IX investigations against the State of Minnesota. What we know The federal government announced an investigation into Minnesota earlier this year. A few weeks ago, they launched a second investigation into the Minnesota Department of Education and the Minnesota State High School League for allowing transgender athletes to play in women's sports. Thursday, officials announced they were accelerating the investigation. Why you should care This, after the Champlin Park girls softball team garnered national attention. The Rebels just won the Class 4A state championship, led by a star pitcher who is transgender. The U.S. Department of Education and Department of Justice announced Thursday they were elevating their investigations into the Minnesota Department of Education. Federal officials say it's because Champlin Park won the state softball title with a male athlete. "If we start to look at the state of interpretation of Title IX, it's not completely clear," said David Schultz with the Mitchell Hamline School of Law. Dig deeper Schultz says Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination and education, is being interpreted very differently by the Trump Administration and the State of Minnesota when it comes to transgender athletes. "It comes down to the federal courts, including possibly the Supreme Court, to render the final interpretation of what Title IX actually requires or what it means," Schultz said. The Minnesota State High School League and Department of Education's position is that Minnesota human rights laws ban discrimination based on gender identity, and that it does not conflict with Title IX. The Trump Administration believes Title IX protects women athletes, and transgender athletes violate that protection. "They're going to have to eventually show that the interpretation of the word sex isn't broad enough to include transgender, and if transgender athletes participate in high school or college sports, their participation actually hurts women, and therefore violates Title IX," Schultz said. What's next So where does this go from here? It's now an expedited investigation, with a resolution expected soon. Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison has an ongoing lawsuit against the Trump Administration, challenging President Trump's executive order banning transgender athletes in women's sports and threatening to pull federal funding to states. The federal government's response is due by June 26.
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Americans say Trump ‘has gone too far' with immigrant roundups and sending Marines and National Guard to LA
A new survey — conducted after President Donald Trump deployed National Guard and Marine troops to Los Angeles to quell protests against ramped-up immigration enforcement — reveals more Americans do not approve of either move. The Reuters/Ipsos poll surveyed 1,136 American adults on Wednesday and Thursday of this week. And while it found broad support for increasing the pace of deportations for people not in the United States legally, when respondents were asked whether Trump has gone too far with recent efforts to carry out mass arrests of migrants in urban centers, 49 percent agreed that the recent arrests have gone too far, while 40 percent said they had not. Americans surveyed also had a largely negative view of how Trump has responded to the protests with sending in military troops to Los Angeles, the nation's second-largest city, since the stepped-up Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids began last week. The poll showed that 50 percent of American adults do not approve of the administration's response compared with just 35 percent saying they approved. Similarly, 49 percent of respondents said Trump should not push for arrests of local officials who push back against federal immigration enforcement, while 35 percent said the administration should arrest defiant officials. At the same time, the survey revealed that Americans have a dim view of the protests that have spread from Los Angeles to other major cities in response to the anti-immigrant raids, with some degenerating into violence that has seen people injured and property damaged, When asked if the protests have gone too far, 46 percent said yes, compared with just 38 percent who said the protests have not gone too far and 16 percent who offered no opinion either way. But Americans also supported Trump's use of the military to bring order to violent protests by a margin of 48 percent agreeing to 41 percent disagreeing, with 11 percent saying they were unsure. The survey results come just as the first 200 U.S. Marines out of a battalion of 700 arrived in Los Angeles, joining National Guard troops already deployed to the city by the Trump administration. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has sued the administration to block Trump's use of the National Guard, and on Thursday a federal judge in San Francisco ruled that the president had broken the law by bypassing Newsom when calling the guard into federal service. But that ruling is on hold after an appeals court ruled that Donald Trump can retain temporary control of the Guard pending a more comprehensive hearing on the matter this Tuesday. The late-night decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals came swiftly after U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ruled that Trump's action was 'illegal' and violated the Tenth Amendment, stating that the president must return control of 4,000 troops to Newsom. Additional protests against the ongoing workplace raids have occurred across the nation and are expected to continue through the weekend as part of the 'No Kings' movement, coinciding with the president's birthday parade in Washington, D.C., which celebrates the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army.
