Judge says Trump acted illegally in dispatching National Guard in California
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge on Thursday agreed to block the Trump administration from deploying the California National Guard, granting a request by Gov. Gavin Newsom and saying the president acted illegally in dispatching the troops amid immigration protests that have spread from Los Angeles to other cities in the state.
U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer ruled that President Donald Trump acted improperly, 'both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith.'
Though Breyer stayed his order until noon Friday, the government immediately filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
The ruling came in response to a lawsuit California filed this week against Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Defense Department, seeking to restrict what the Guard and Marines can do in Los Angeles and to allow them only to protect federal facilities and personnel. The state asked the judge to temporarily curb the troops' actions and has questioned Trump's right to deploy the National Guard and Marines in California 'without input from or consent of' Newsom.
The administration called out 4,100 National Guard members and Marines in response to the protests, and 2,100 of the Guard members are working in the L.A. area. All are part of Task Force 51, whose mission is to protect federal functions and property, according to the U.S. Northern Command.
Newsom, a Democrat who has sparred frequently with Trump, argued that he was not seeking to prevent the military from carrying out that mission but rather seeking 'narrow relief tailored to avoid irreparable harm to our communities and the rule of law that is likely to result if Defendants are allowed to proceed with their plans to use Marines and federalized National Guard to enforce immigration laws and other civil laws on the streets of our cities.'
The Trump administration called Newsom's request for the temporary restraining order 'legally meritless' and said it 'would jeopardize the safety of Department of Homeland Security personnel and interfere with the Federal Government's ability to carry out operations.'
'Today was really about a test of democracy,' Newsom told reporters immediately after the ruling. He said Trump has continually tested the limits of democracy. The order 'makes clear that he is not above or beyond constitutional constraints.'
In a motion filed hours before Thursday's hearing, California reiterated that it was seeking only limited relief while the court case unfolds. It asked Breyer to block the Guard troops and Marines 'from patrolling the streets of Los Angeles and engaging in activities that pervasively entangle military forces with civilian law enforcement,' saying this was necessary to avoid inflaming tensions in the area.
At the same time, the state's attorney general contended the Trump administration was offering 'a breathtaking vision of unlimited, unreviewable executive power.'
Breyer opened the hourlong hearing with 45 minutes of questions about Trump's decision to order the National Guard into Los Angeles. He questioned whether the president had followed the appropriate statute, including whether he had appropriately made the order through Newsom rather than acting unilaterally.
At one point, Breyer brandished a paper copy of the U.S. Constitution, reading aloud from Article II, which describes the powers of the executive branch.
Brett Shumate, a lawyer with the U.S. Attorney's office, defended Trump's actions, arguing that as governor, Newsom was 'merely a conduit' for the president's orders.
'The president doesn't have to call up the governor and invite him to Camp David and have a summit and negotiate for a week, on what are the terms, we're going to call up the National Guard in your state and what are the terms of deployment — no,' he said. 'There's one commander in chief and the states are subservient to the president.'
Shumate later argued that the state's demand for a restraining order was inappropriate because the federalized troops in Los Angeles were only there to protect federal personnel and property, not to engage in law enforcement or participate in immigration raids.
The judge emphasized the importance of the protections and limitations on executive power in the Constitution.
'We're talking about the president exercising his authority. And the president is of course limited to his authority. That's the difference between a constitutional government and King George,' said Breyer, a former Watergate prosecutor and younger brother of retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. 'It's not that a leader can simply say something and it becomes it. It's a question of a leader — a president or a governor — following the law as set forth in both the Constitution and statutes.'
The state attorney general's office concurred, with lawyer Nicholas Green calling Trump's attempt to expand his powers 'breathtaking in scope.'
'They are saying the President can federalize the National Guard and deploy it in the streets of a civilian city whenever he perceives that there is disobedience to an order,' Green said. 'That is an expansive and dangerous conception of the federal executive power.'
Some of the protests that have taken place in Los Angeles since the first immigration raids last Friday have included clashes between protesters and police, sporadic looting and vehicles being set on fire. The Trump administration has portrayed the metropolis as being overwhelmed — despite much of the city and county being completely unaffected — and in need of federal assistance to maintain order.
State and local officials have repeatedly said they can manage the situation and accused the federal government of inflaming tensions by dispatching the military.
'We have a very good relationship with our governor,' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said Thursday afternoon, repeating her point that Trump's intervention was unnecessary. 'If the National Guard is needed, I could have picked up the phone, called the police chief, called the sheriff, and said please make the request, and it would not have been denied.'
And the governor said that when he again assumes control of the deployed Guard members, some would return to working on 'border security' and working on counter drug enforcement. Two years ago, Newsom doubled the number of California National Guard troops deployed at the U.S.-Mexico border to help intercept fentanyl and other illicit drugs.
Breyer set another hearing for June 20 and ordered the government to show why he should not issue a preliminary injunction in the case.
Jon Michaels, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, will be watching what comes next. The order may not deter Trump, Michaels said: He might ignore it, or he could invoke the Insurrection Act, as administration officials have suggested in recent days. Another possibility, Michaels added, would be sharply stepping up immigration raids that trigger more protests, changing the situation on the ground and providing more justification for military involvement.
'They're not really looking to deescalate,' he said of the administration. 'This has now become, for better or worse, a signature standoff for Newsom, and I don't think Trump wants to lose to Gavin Newsom.'
Brulliard reported from Boulder and Berman from Washington. Maeve Reston and Molly Hennessy-Fiske in Los Angeles contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
15 minutes ago
- CNN
Vance refers to Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla as ‘José' while defending Trump's use of National Guard in LA
Vice President JD Vance on Friday took a swipe at Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla, whom he incorrectly called 'José Padilla,' and defended the Trump administration's controversial use of the California National Guard in Los Angeles. 'I was hoping José Padilla would be here to ask a question, but unfortunately, guess he decided not to show up because there wasn't the theater, and that's all it is,' Vance told reporters, speaking from an FBI mobile command center that Immigration and Customs Enforcement is currently using in Los Angeles. Vance dismissed Padilla's appearance last week at Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's press conference as 'pure political theater.' Padilla was forcefully removed, ordered to the ground by law enforcement and placed in handcuffs after attempting to ask Noem a question. Padilla, California's first Latino elected to the US Senate, had interrupted Noem as she was giving remarks in the Los Angeles FBI headquarters on the Trump administration's response to protests in that city against Noem's department and its immigration-enforcement efforts. When asked about the vice president calling the senator by the wrong first name, Vance's spokesperson Taylor Van Kirk brushed it off, telling CNN, 'He must have mixed up two people who have broken the law.' Padilla's communications director Tess Oswald wrote on X, 'As a former colleague of Senator Padilla, the Vice President knows better. He should be more focused on demilitarizing our city than taking cheap shots. Another unserious comment from an unserious administration.' California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom also called Vance out on X, saying it was 'not an accident.' On Friday, Vance also reacted to a federal appeals court allowing President Donald Trump to maintain control over thousands of California National Guardsmen. 'That determination was legitimate, and the president's going to do it again if he has to, but hopefully it won't be necessary,' Vance said. The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals late Thursday granted a request from Trump to lift, for now, a lower-court ruling that had required the president to relinquish control of roughly 4,000 guardsmen from the Golden State that he had federalized to beef up security in Los Angeles amid unrest over immigration enforcement. 'And I think what the Ninth Circuit said very clearly is when the president makes a determination, you've got to send in certain federal officials to protect people,' Vance said, while lashing out at California's Democratic leadership for their handling of the unrest. The vice president also defended the administration's immigration policy, saying Trump wants to prioritize deportations of violent offenders or 'really bad guys,' but that no one who's undocumented should feel immune from enforcement. When asked whether the administration's deportation tactics had gone too far, Vance argued that he didn't think 'we've been too aggressive.' 'Anytime we make a mistake we correct that very quickly,' Vance said.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Trump has targeted Harvard's international students — and what the latest court ruling means
President Donald Trump and his administration have tried several tactics to block Harvard University's enrollment of international students, part of the White House's effort to secure policy changes at the private, Ivy League college. Targeting foreign students has become the administration's cornerstone effort to crack down on the nation's oldest and wealthiest college. The block on international enrollment, which accounts for a quarter of Harvard's students and much of its global allure, strikes at the core of Harvard's identity. Courts have stopped some of the government's actions, at least for now — but not all. In the latest court order, a federal judge on Friday put one of those efforts on hold until a lawsuit is resolved. But the fate of Harvard's international students — and its broader standoff with the Trump administration — remain in limbo. Here are all the ways the Trump administration has moved to block Harvard's foreign enrollment — and where each effort stands. Homeland Security tries to revoke Harvard's certification to host foreign students In May, the Trump administration tried to ban foreign students at Harvard, citing the Department of Homeland Security's authority to oversee which colleges are part of the Student Exchange and Visitor Program. The program allows colleges to issue documents that foreign students need to study in the United States. Harvard filed a lawsuit, arguing the administration violated the government's own regulations for withdrawing a school's certification. Within hours, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston put the administration's ban on hold temporarily — an order that had an expiration date. On Friday, she issued a preliminary injunction, blocking Homeland Security's move until the case is decided. That could take months or longer. The government can and does remove colleges from the Student Exchange and Visitor Program, making them ineligible to host foreign students on their campus. However, it's usually for administrative reasons outlined in law, such as failing to maintain accreditation, lacking proper facilities for classes, failing to employ qualified professional personnel — even failing to 'operate as a bona fide institution of learning.' Other colleges are removed when they close. Notably, Burroughs' order Friday said the federal government still has authority to review Harvard's ability to host international students through normal processes outlined in law. After Burroughs' emergency block in May, DHS issued a more typical 'Notice of Intent to Withdraw' Harvard's participation in the international student visa program. 'Today's order does not affect the DHS's ongoing administrative review,' Harvard said Friday in a message to its international students. 'Harvard is fully committed to compliance with the applicable F-1 (student visa) regulations and strongly opposes any effort to withdraw the University's certification.' Trump has sought to ban U.S. entry for incoming Harvard students Earlier this month, Trump himself moved to block entry to the United States for incoming Harvard students, issuing a proclamation that invoked a different legal authority. Harvard filed a court challenge attacking Trump's legal justification for the action — a federal law allowing him to block a 'class of aliens' deemed detrimental to the nation's interests. Targeting only those who are coming to the U.S. to study at Harvard doesn't qualify as a 'class of aliens,' Harvard said in its filing. Harvard's lawyers asked the court to block the action. Burroughs agreed to pause the entry ban temporarily, without giving an expiration date. She has not yet ruled on Harvard's request for another preliminary injunction, which would pause the ban until the court case is decided. 'We expect the judge to issue a more enduring decision in the coming days,' Harvard told international students Friday. At the center of Trump's pressure campaign against Harvard are his assertions that the school has tolerated anti-Jewish harassment, especially during pro-Palestinian protests. In seeking to keep Harvard students from coming to the U.S., he said Harvard is not a suitable destination. Harvard President Alan Garber has said the university has made changes to combat antisemitism and will not submit to the administration's demands for further changes. The administration has stepped up scrutiny of Harvard scholars' and students' visas In late May, Secretary of State Marco Rubio directed U.S. embassies and consulates to start reviewing social media accounts of visa applicants who plan to attend, work at or visit Harvard University for any signs of antisemitism. On Wednesday, the State Department said it was launching new vetting of social media accounts for foreigners applying for student visas, and not just those seeking to attend Harvard. Consular officers will be on the lookout for posts and messages that could be deemed hostile to the United States, its government, culture, institutions or founding principles, the department said, telling visa applicants to set their social media accounts to 'public.' In reopening the visa process, the State Department also told consulates to prioritize students hoping to enroll at colleges where foreigners make up less than 15% of the student body, a U.S. official familiar with the matter said. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to detail information that has not been made public. Foreign students make up more than 15% of the total student body at almost 200 U.S. universities — including Harvard and the other Ivy League schools, according to an Associated Press analysis of federal education data from 2023. Most are private universities, including all eight Ivy League schools. Some Harvard students are also caught up in the government's recent ban against travel to the U.S. by citizens of 12 nations, mostly in Africa and the Middle East. The Trump administration last weekend called for 36 additional countries to commit to improving vetting of travelers or face a ban on their citizens visiting the United States. International students make up half the students at some Harvard programs Harvard sponsors more than 7,000 people on a combination of F-1 and J-1 visas, which are issued to students and to foreigners visiting the U.S. on exchange programs such as fellowships. Across all the schools that make up the university, about 26% of the student body is from outside the U.S. But some schools and programs, by nature of their subject matter, have significantly more international students. At the Harvard Kennedy School, which covers public policy and public administration, 49% of students are on F-1 visas. In the business school, one-third of students come from abroad. And within the law school, 94% of the students in the master's program in comparative law are international students. The administration has imposed a range of sanctions on Harvard since it rejected the government's demands for policy reforms related to campus protests, admissions, hiring and more. Conservatives say the demands are merited, decrying Harvard as a hotbed of liberalism and antisemitism. Harvard says the administration is illegally retaliating against the university. ____ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find the AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US updates: Trump admin slashes jobs at Voice of America
US President Donald Trump's administration lays off 639 employees at Voice of America and its parent organization, the US Agency for Global Media Trump says US doesn't need to meet 5% defense spending target ahead of NATO summit Columbia University activist Mahmoud Khalil released after more than 3 months in custody Below is a roundup the latest developments in the US on Saturday June 21, 2025: Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist who played a role in the Columbia University protests against Israel's war in Gaza, has been released from federal immigration jail in Louisiana. He spent 104 days in US custody. "Justice prevailed, but it's very long overdue," he said outside the facility. "This shouldn't have taken three months." Khalil was born in Syria and holds Algerian citizenship. He is not a US national but is a permanent resident. US District Judge Michael Farbiarz ordered Khalil's release earlier on Friday. Farbiarz said the US government made no attempt to rebut evidence from Khalil's attorneys that he is not a flight risk nor a danger to the public. The Trump administration has targeted Khalil, saying he played a role in antisemitic protests. Khalil's legal team have argued that he is not antisemtitic or anti-US. The Trump administration had detained Khalil on foreign policy grounds, but Fabiarz had earlier ruled that the foreign policy reasons did not justify his detention. Khalil's green card will be returned to him, and he is permitted to limited travel within the US. At the same time, the Trump administration is still attempting to deport Khalil based on allegations that he lied to obtain his green card. This means that Khalil's legal battle to stay in the US is still not over. Khalil is married to US citizen Noor Abdalla, who gave birth to their son while he was in immigration detention. Abdalla celebrated Khalil's release in a statement: "We know this ruling does not begin to address the injustices the Trump administration has brought upon our family, and so many others." "But today we are celebrating Mahmoud coming back to New York to be reunited with our little family." The latest cuts to VOA were met with fierce criticism from employees of the outlet and congressional Democrats. VOA employees Jessica Jerreat, Kate Neeper and Patsy Widakuswara are involved in a legal battle against Trump's cuts to the news outlet and US-funded public media. Jerreat, Neeper and Widakuswara were among those laid off on Friday. "It spells the death of 83 years of independent journalism that upholds US ideals of democracy and freedom around the world," Jerreat, Neeper and Widakuswara said in a statement in response to the latest cuts. In a post on X, Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire strongly condemned the cuts. Jeanne Shaheen is the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Shaheen said the "decimation of US broadcasting leaves authoritarian propaganda unchecked by US backed independent media and is a perversion of hte law and congressional intent." "It is a dark day for the truth," Shaheen said. The Trump administration on Friday laid off 639 employees at US public broadcaster Voice of America (VoA) and its parent organization, the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM). VoA was established in World War II and aims much of its programming at countries under authoritarian regimes such as North Korea and Iran. Kari Lake, a former television anchor and Trump ally who serves as the senior advisor to the USAGM, said the cuts are part of a "long overdue effort to dismantle a bloated, unaccountable bureaucracy." Some 1,400 people have been fired at VoA and USAGM since March, Lake said. Many VOA staff have been on administrative leave since March 15 amid legal proceedings. Trump has attacked publicly-funded news outlets such as VoA and National Public Radio (NPR), claiming without concrete evidence that their programming is biased toward conservatives. Welcome to DW's coverage of current affairs in the US and the second term of President Donald Trump. In addition to the latest news on the US, this blog will also bring you multimedia content, analysis and on-the-ground reporting from DW correspondents. Stay tuned for more!
