Court Showdown Over Trump’s National Guard Move in Los Angeles
Court Showdown Over Trump’s National Guard Move in Los Angeles - A federal appeals court has temporarily put the brakes on a judge's order demanding President Trump hand control of California’s National Guard back to Governor Gavin Newsom.
Earlier that same day, Judge Charles Breyer had ruled that Trump acted outside the law by deploying the Guard to Los Angeles to crack down on immigration protests.
Trump justified the move by claiming he was trying to stop the city from “burning” during unrest linked to his aggressive immigration enforcement.
Governor Newsom and other state officials quickly condemned the decision, calling it an unnecessary escalation that bypassed local authority. The appeals court agreed to hear the case next Tuesday.
In court, Judge Breyer argued the key issue was whether the President respected the legal process outlined by Congress regarding Guard deployment.
According to Breyer, Trump did not follow the rules. “His actions were unlawful,” the judge wrote. “The control of the California National Guard must be restored to the governor without delay.”
However, the judge temporarily paused the ruling until Friday afternoon, giving the administration a window to appeal — which it immediately did.
On Thursday, Newsom took to social media, saying, “The court just confirmed what we all knew: the military doesn’t belong on our streets.”
Trump’s team defended the action, saying they stepped in to maintain order and protect federal immigration agents from backlash during operations in L.A.
Despite Newsom’s strong objections, Trump sent in 4,000 Guard troops and 700 Marines. Some were even granted authority to detain civilians until police arrived.
This marks the first time in over 50 years that a president has deployed the Guard to a state without the governor’s blessing — a move last seen during the civil rights era.
At the hearing, a Justice Department lawyer argued that the President wasn’t obligated to consult Newsom beforehand, noting that the governor had already voiced his opposition.
But Judge Breyer pushed back, saying the President doesn’t automatically serve as commander-in-chief of a state’s Guard — except under specific constitutional circumstances.
Holding up a pocket Constitution, Breyer reminded the courtroom that presidential power is limited. “This is the difference between a constitutional republic and King George,” he said pointedly.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, speaking to Congress the same day, declined to say whether he’d follow Breyer’s order, suggesting only the Supreme Court could compel compliance.
For now, the appellate court’s decision keeps the troops in L.A. while the legal battle continues. California argues that the protests, despite arrests and disruptions, didn’t amount to rebellion or insurrection as defined under federal law.
