Court lets Trump keep National Guard troops in LA
An appeals court has allowed US President Donald Trump to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed to Los Angeles following protests over immigration raids.
The decision halts a ruling from a lower court judge who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Governor Gavin Newsom.
The deployment was the first by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since 1965.
In its decision, the court concluded that "it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority" in federalising control of the guard.
It also found that even if the federal government failed to notify the governor of California before federalising the National Guard as required by law, Newsom had no power to veto the president's order.
In a post on X, the Californian governor vowed to press forward with the state's legal challenge.
The court case could have wider implications on the president's power to deploy soldiers within the United States after Trump directed immigration officials to prioritise deportations from other Democratic-run cities.
Trump, a Republican, argued the troops were necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said the move inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The protests have since appeared to be winding down.
The ruling comes from a panel of three judges on the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, two of whom were appointed by Trump during his first term. All three judges suggested that presidents have wide latitude under the federal law at issue and that courts should be reluctant to step in.
The case started when Newsom sued to block Trump's command, and he won an early victory from US District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco.
Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which only allows presidents to take control during times of "rebellion or danger of a rebellion."
"The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'" wrote Breyer, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton.
The Trump administration, though, argued that courts can't second guess the president's decisions and quickly secured a temporary halt from the appeals court.
The ruling means control of the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit continues to unfold.
An appeals court has allowed US President Donald Trump to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed to Los Angeles following protests over immigration raids.
The decision halts a ruling from a lower court judge who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Governor Gavin Newsom.
The deployment was the first by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since 1965.
In its decision, the court concluded that "it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority" in federalising control of the guard.
It also found that even if the federal government failed to notify the governor of California before federalising the National Guard as required by law, Newsom had no power to veto the president's order.
In a post on X, the Californian governor vowed to press forward with the state's legal challenge.
The court case could have wider implications on the president's power to deploy soldiers within the United States after Trump directed immigration officials to prioritise deportations from other Democratic-run cities.
Trump, a Republican, argued the troops were necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said the move inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The protests have since appeared to be winding down.
The ruling comes from a panel of three judges on the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, two of whom were appointed by Trump during his first term. All three judges suggested that presidents have wide latitude under the federal law at issue and that courts should be reluctant to step in.
The case started when Newsom sued to block Trump's command, and he won an early victory from US District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco.
Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which only allows presidents to take control during times of "rebellion or danger of a rebellion."
"The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'" wrote Breyer, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton.
The Trump administration, though, argued that courts can't second guess the president's decisions and quickly secured a temporary halt from the appeals court.
The ruling means control of the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit continues to unfold.
An appeals court has allowed US President Donald Trump to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed to Los Angeles following protests over immigration raids.
The decision halts a ruling from a lower court judge who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Governor Gavin Newsom.
The deployment was the first by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since 1965.
In its decision, the court concluded that "it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority" in federalising control of the guard.
It also found that even if the federal government failed to notify the governor of California before federalising the National Guard as required by law, Newsom had no power to veto the president's order.
In a post on X, the Californian governor vowed to press forward with the state's legal challenge.
The court case could have wider implications on the president's power to deploy soldiers within the United States after Trump directed immigration officials to prioritise deportations from other Democratic-run cities.
Trump, a Republican, argued the troops were necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said the move inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The protests have since appeared to be winding down.
The ruling comes from a panel of three judges on the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, two of whom were appointed by Trump during his first term. All three judges suggested that presidents have wide latitude under the federal law at issue and that courts should be reluctant to step in.
The case started when Newsom sued to block Trump's command, and he won an early victory from US District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco.
Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which only allows presidents to take control during times of "rebellion or danger of a rebellion."
"The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'" wrote Breyer, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton.
The Trump administration, though, argued that courts can't second guess the president's decisions and quickly secured a temporary halt from the appeals court.
The ruling means control of the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit continues to unfold.
An appeals court has allowed US President Donald Trump to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed to Los Angeles following protests over immigration raids.
The decision halts a ruling from a lower court judge who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Governor Gavin Newsom.
The deployment was the first by a president of a state National Guard without the governor's permission since 1965.
In its decision, the court concluded that "it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority" in federalising control of the guard.
It also found that even if the federal government failed to notify the governor of California before federalising the National Guard as required by law, Newsom had no power to veto the president's order.
In a post on X, the Californian governor vowed to press forward with the state's legal challenge.
The court case could have wider implications on the president's power to deploy soldiers within the United States after Trump directed immigration officials to prioritise deportations from other Democratic-run cities.
Trump, a Republican, argued the troops were necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said the move inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources. The protests have since appeared to be winding down.
The ruling comes from a panel of three judges on the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, two of whom were appointed by Trump during his first term. All three judges suggested that presidents have wide latitude under the federal law at issue and that courts should be reluctant to step in.
The case started when Newsom sued to block Trump's command, and he won an early victory from US District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco.
Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which only allows presidents to take control during times of "rebellion or danger of a rebellion."
"The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of 'rebellion,'" wrote Breyer, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton.
The Trump administration, though, argued that courts can't second guess the president's decisions and quickly secured a temporary halt from the appeals court.
The ruling means control of the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit continues to unfold.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
18 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
Global Islamic politics expert says Israel's claims about Iranian nuclear weapon 'at odds' with intelligence reports as Netanyahu 'desperate' to involve Trump in war
An Australian global Islamic politics expert has urged the world to be "sceptical" of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims after numerous intelligence reports concluded that Iran is not "close at all" to building a nuclear weapon. Professor Greg Barton from Deakin University told Sky News Netanyahu's strategy to close down Iran's nuclear program may not be as "clear cut and simple", as he would present it to be to President Donald Trump, in an attempt to persuade the US to join the Israeli assault. "I think that the way that Benjamin Netanyahu will sell it to Trump is that you just send in a couple of B2s over Fordow and it's done," Mr Barton told Sky News host Steve Price. "You've closed down the nuclear program and we're good. "But of course, it is not likely to be so clear cut and so simple." According to Axios, President Trump believes the US has leverage over Iran due to its bunker buster munitions – which Israel does not have – that are capable of destroying the Fordow nuclear enrichment facility that sits deep under a mountain. Mr Barton added the bunker buster bombs are unlikely to demolish Iran's nuclear program and could instead result in dangerous escalation of war in the Middle East. 'First of all, those B2 strikes with massive ordnance, penetrator bombs over Fordow, 90 metres underground, that likely wouldn't finish Iran's nuclear program,' he said. 'They'd probably scramble to take what they have left and actually move towards nuclear weapons. 'In the meantime, they're likely to strike out against US targets all around the Middle East and use their proxies to do so. 'So a very dangerous risk of escalation and a prolonged conflict.' When questioned about the validity of Netanyahu's claims about Iran's existential threat to Israel, Mr Barton said they were 'at odds' with other publicly available intelligence reports have said, including what Trump was briefed on by his own security adviser. Mr Barton highlighted Israel's remarkable capabilities at penetrating Iranian society and its defence apparatus, but noted other intelligence reports suggest 'Iran is some way off, it's not close at all' to building a nuclear weapon. 'It is possible they know something that no one else knows, but what all the other intelligence reports are saying is that Iran is some way off, it's not close at all,' he said. 'We can't know, we're sort of making a claim from Netanyahu who is desperate to involve Trump and America in this programme, and on balance you sort of want to be a bit sceptical about what he's saying for that reason.' Israel has been trading missiles with Iran since last Friday in an attempt to shut down any efforts of Tehran building an atomic weapon to wipe out the existence of the Jewish state. Netanyahu said the operations were to "strike the head of Iran's nuclear weaponisation program". White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told a media briefing on Thursday, local time, she had been asked to pass on a 'direct quote' from President Trump on the possibility of US intervention in the Israel-Iran war. 'Based on the fact that there is a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,' she said, quoting the President. Ms Leavitt also urged sceptics of US involvement to 'trust' in President Trump's judgement, before emphasising his 'top priority' was to prevent Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Sky News AU
an hour ago
- Sky News AU
‘Knuckleheads' Tucker Carlson and Ted Cruz roasted for being ‘clueless' on Iran
Attorney Elica Le Bon claims the debate between conservative commentator Tucker Carlson and US Republican Senator Ted Cruz on Iran was 'comedic relief'. 'You have two knuckleheads debating each other about a country that none of them knows anything about,' Ms Le Bon told Sky News Senior Reporter Caroline Marcus. 'The most clueless people are claiming to represent what Iranian people want, and neither of them are even interested in listening to what Iranian people want. 'They just have absolutely no knowledge or interest in what's really going on in Iran.'
Perth Now
2 hours ago
- Perth Now
Trump's granddaughter works drive-thru at donut shop
First there was Donald at McDonald's, and now his teenage granddaughter Kai Trump has tried her hand as an honorary fast food worker by manning the drive-thru at her local Dunkin' Donuts. The 18-year-old, whose cumulative social media following pushes six million, ventured to her local doughnut store to taste-test menu items, and take some orders. All in the name of content, of course. The approachable youngster shared a TikTok of herself learning to use the cash register and greeting customers. 'Hi, how are you? Just a medium iced coffee... perfect,' she says in the clip, greeting a customer at the drive-thru while dressed in a pink tank top and orange skirt to match the shop's branding. She was joined at the venue buy her younger brother Tristan, and best friend Emma. While some fans of the teen were supportive of her attempt to connect with the general population, others joked her financial safety net was far from relatable. 'Love Her!!! ♥️Future President,' one said. Another quipped, 'Kai works for $12 an hour while her bank account has 7 figures at least 😂😂😂'. The name Trump has long been associated with hotels and golf courses, but during the US president's race to return the Oval Office last year, he ventured into a Philadelphia McDonald's to trump his rival Kamala Harris who claimed to have once enjoyed employment at the global chain. 'I love McDonald's,' Trump said. 'I like to see good jobs, and I think it's inappropriate when somebody puts down all over the place that she worked at McDonald's.' President Donald Trump works behind the counter making french fries during a visit to McDonald's restaurant on October 20, 2024 in Feasterville-Trevose, Pennsylvania. Credit: Pool / Getty Images Donning an apron, the presidential candidate greeted drive-thru customers and scooped fries — proudly exclaiming each product 'never touches the human hand'. According to Politico, Trump would wait in his limousine during his first presidential tenure while an aide would run into the fast food chain to collect Egg McMuffins in the morning, or two Quarter pounders and a large fries later in the day. His granddaughter regularly posts about her consumption adventures, although much of her content is centred on her burgeoning golf career. Kai is the daughter of Donald Trump jr and Vanessa Trump — who are no longer married — with her mother confirming earlier this year she had begun dating golf icon Tiger Woods.
