Appeals court allows Trump to keep control of California National Guard
A US federal appeals court on Thursday ruled that President Donald Trump may retain authority over California's National Guard, at least temporarily, as a legal challenge by Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom continues.
The decision, handed down by a three-judge panel from the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, extends a freeze on a lower court ruling that found Trump had overstepped his legal authority when he federalized the state's National Guard to respond to unrest in Los Angeles.
The legal dispute began after US District Judge Charles Breyer ruled on June 12 that Trump's June 7, 2020, decision to deploy 4,000 National Guard troops in Los Angeles violated federal law. Breyer found that Trump failed to coordinate with the state governor and did not meet the legal criteria that allow a president to assume control over state troops, such as an invasion or rebellion.
'The conditions set out under the statute to allow this move… did not exist,' Breyer concluded in his ruling, ordering Trump to relinquish command back to Newsom. However, within hours, the appeals court temporarily blocked that order and has now extended the pause.
The case stems from a June 9 lawsuit filed by California, which argued that Trump's decision infringed on state sovereignty and contradicted laws prohibiting federal military involvement in civilian law enforcement. The state emphasized that while the protests in Los Angeles included scattered violence, they did not amount to a 'rebellion,' and local authorities were capable of managing the situation.
The deployment of federal troops, including 700 US Marines sent after the National Guard, sparked a nationwide debate about the domestic use of the military. While the Trump administration insists the troops are not involved in law enforcement, California officials argue otherwise, especially in the context of immigration raids that inflamed tensions.
At a recent hearing, the 9th Circuit panel, which includes two Trump appointees and one appointed by former President Biden, questioned the extent to which courts should intervene in presidential decisions related to military deployments.
The Department of Justice has maintained that a president's decision to federalize the National Guard in an emergency is not subject to judicial or gubernatorial review.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Roya News
3 hours ago
- Roya News
Trump says 'two weeks maximum' for Iran decision
President Donald Trump said Friday that Iran had a "maximum" of two weeks to avoid possible US air strikes, indicating he could take a decision before the fortnight deadline he set a day earlier. Trump added that Iran "doesn't want to talk to Europe," dismissing the chance of success in talks between European powers and Iran in Geneva on resolving the conflict between 'Israel' and Iran. Trump also played down the possibility of asking 'Israel' to halt its attacks, after Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran would not resume talks with the United States until 'Israel' relented. "I'm giving them a period of time, and I would say two weeks would be the maximum," Trump told reporters when asked if he could decide to strike Iran before that. He added that the aim was to "see whether or not people come to their senses." Trump had said in a statement on Thursday that he would "make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks" because there was a "substantial chance of negotiations" with Iran. Those comments had been widely seen as opening a two-week window for negotiations to end the war between 'Israel' and Iran, with the European powers rushing to talks with Tehran. But his latest remarks indicated that Trump could still make his decision before that if he feels that there has been no progress towards dismantling Iran's nuclear program. Trump dismissed the chances of Europe making a difference, saying the talks between Britain, France, Germany and EU diplomats and Tehran's foreign minister "didn't help." "Iran doesn't want to speak to Europe. They want to speak to us. Europe is not going to be able to help in this," Trump told reporters as he arrived in Morristown, New Jersey. Asked if he would ask 'Israel' to stop its attacks as Iran had asked, Trump said it was "very hard to make that request right now."
Al Bawaba
12 hours ago
- Al Bawaba
Tactical US Nuclear strike on Iran's Fordow nuclear facility reportedly highly expected
Published June 20th, 2025 - 12:26 GMT ALBAWABA - According to a new story by Fox News reporter Jacqui Heinrich, the idea of using a mobile nuclear bomb to attack Iran's Fordow nuclear plant is still being thought about by U.S. military officials. The comment goes against what The Guardian said earlier, which said that going nuclear was no longer a says that a White House official denied what The Guardian said, saying that the U.S. military is still sure that conventional bunker-busting bombs will work to destroy the heavily fortified Fordow site, but that "all options, including tactical nuclear weapons," are still on the to an earlier article in The Guardian, former President Donald Trump had thought about using military action against Iran and had even planned to target the Fordow nuclear site. The news source did say, though, that any attack would only use conventional weapons and not nuclear are new talks because people in U.S. politics and defense are getting more worried about the chance of an impending attack on Iran. Several news sources have given different stories about what Trump wants to said that the strike plans are still being looked over, and The Wall Street Journal said that Trump has said he supports the operation but hasn't given the go-ahead yet because he wants Iran to stop working on its nuclear program on its own. Also Read Iran targets key Microsoft research building The New York Times:Senior US intelligence officials said Tehran would likely move to develop nuclear weapons if the US military attacked Iran's uranium enrichment facility at Fordow or if Israel killed Iran's supreme leader. Entertainment is ramping up... — SlavicFreeSpirit (@SlavFreeSpirit) June 20, 2025 Meanwhile, CBS News reported that Trump thinks a strike on Fordow is vital to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons. The story did say, though, that the former president might put off the operation in order to try to find a peaceful highly protected Fordow site, which is hidden deep in a mountain, has been a point of disagreement in nuclear talks for a long time. It is thought to be one of Iran's safest nuclear sites and is said to have advanced uranium processing facilities. The White House hasn't said for sure what the final choice is, but on Thursday they said that a decision about whether to use military action against Iran should be made within the next two weeks. There are higher pressures in the area and more attention is being paid to Iran's nuclear plans since the stories came out. © 2000 - 2025 Al Bawaba (
Roya News
16 hours ago
- Roya News
Appeals court allows Trump to keep control of California National Guard
A US federal appeals court on Thursday ruled that President Donald Trump may retain authority over California's National Guard, at least temporarily, as a legal challenge by Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom continues. The decision, handed down by a three-judge panel from the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, extends a freeze on a lower court ruling that found Trump had overstepped his legal authority when he federalized the state's National Guard to respond to unrest in Los Angeles. The legal dispute began after US District Judge Charles Breyer ruled on June 12 that Trump's June 7, 2020, decision to deploy 4,000 National Guard troops in Los Angeles violated federal law. Breyer found that Trump failed to coordinate with the state governor and did not meet the legal criteria that allow a president to assume control over state troops, such as an invasion or rebellion. 'The conditions set out under the statute to allow this move… did not exist,' Breyer concluded in his ruling, ordering Trump to relinquish command back to Newsom. However, within hours, the appeals court temporarily blocked that order and has now extended the pause. The case stems from a June 9 lawsuit filed by California, which argued that Trump's decision infringed on state sovereignty and contradicted laws prohibiting federal military involvement in civilian law enforcement. The state emphasized that while the protests in Los Angeles included scattered violence, they did not amount to a 'rebellion,' and local authorities were capable of managing the situation. The deployment of federal troops, including 700 US Marines sent after the National Guard, sparked a nationwide debate about the domestic use of the military. While the Trump administration insists the troops are not involved in law enforcement, California officials argue otherwise, especially in the context of immigration raids that inflamed tensions. At a recent hearing, the 9th Circuit panel, which includes two Trump appointees and one appointed by former President Biden, questioned the extent to which courts should intervene in presidential decisions related to military deployments. The Department of Justice has maintained that a president's decision to federalize the National Guard in an emergency is not subject to judicial or gubernatorial review.
