Latest news with #JudgeBreyer
ABC News
2 hours ago
- Politics
- ABC News
Trump can keep control of National Guard in LA, appeals court rules
A US appeals court has let Donald Trump retain control on Thursday of California's National Guard while the state's Democratic governor proceeds with a lawsuit challenging the Republican president's use of the troops to quell protests in Los Angeles. Mr Trump's decision to send troops into Los Angeles prompted a national debate about the use of the military on US soil and inflamed political tension in the country's second most populous city. On Thursday (local time), a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals extended its pause on US District Judge Charles Breyer's June 12 ruling that Mr Trump had unlawfully called the National Guard into federal service. Mr Trump probably acted within his authority, the panel said, adding his administration probably complied with the requirement to coordinate with Governor Gavin Newsom, and even if it did not, he had no authority to veto Mr Trump's directive. "And although we hold that the president likely has authority to federalise the National Guard, nothing in our decision addresses the nature of the activities in which the federalised National Guard may engage," it wrote in its opinion. Mr Newsom could still challenge the use of the National Guard and US Marines under other laws, including the bar on using troops in domestic law enforcement, it added. The governor could raise those issues at a court hearing on Friday in front of Judge Breyer, it said. In a post on X after the decision, Mr Newsom vowed to pursue his challenge. "The president is not a king and is not above the law," he said. "We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of US military soldiers against our citizens." Mr Trump hailed the decision in a post on Truth Social. "This is a great decision for our country and we will continue to protect and defend law-abiding Americans," he said. "This is much bigger than Gavin, because all over the United States, if our cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should state and local police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done." Judge Breyer's ruling was issued in a lawsuit against Mr Trump's action brought by Mr Newsom, where he ruled that Mr Trump violated a US law governing a president's ability to take control of a state's National Guard by failing to coordinate with the governor. It also found that the conditions set out under the statute to allow this move, such as a rebellion against federal authority, did not exist. Judge Breyer ordered Mr Trump to return control of California's National Guard to Mr Newsom. Hours after Judge Breyer acted, the 9th Circuit panel had put the judge's move on hold temporarily. Amid protests and turmoil in Los Angeles over Mr Trump's immigration raids, the president on June 7 took control of California's National Guard and deployed 4,000 troops against Mr Newsom's wishes. Mr Trump also ordered 700 US Marines to the city after sending in the National Guard. Judge Breyer has not yet ruled on the legality of the Marine Corps mobilisation. At a court hearing on Tuesday on whether to extend the pause on Judge Breyer's decision, members of the 9th Circuit panel questioned lawyers for California and the Trump administration on what role, if any, courts should have in reviewing Mr Trump's authority to deploy the troops. The law sets out three conditions by which a president can federalise state National Guard forces, including an invasion, a "rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the government or a situation in which the US government is unable with regular forces to execute the country's laws. The appeals court said the final condition had probably been met because protesters hurled items at immigration authorities' vehicles, used a trash dumpster as battering rams, threw Molotov cocktails and vandalised property, frustrating law enforcement. The Justice Department has said once the president determines an emergency exists that warrants the use of the National Guard, no court or state governor can review that decision. The appeals court rejected that argument. The protests in Los Angeles ran for more than a week before they ebbed, leading Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass to lift a curfew she had imposed. In its June 9 lawsuit, California said Mr Trump's deployment of the National Guard and the Marines violated the state's sovereignty and US laws that forbid federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement. The Trump administration has denied that troops are engaging in law enforcement, saying they are instead protecting federal buildings and personnel, including US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. The 9th Circuit panel is comprised of two judges appointed by Mr Trump during his first term and one appointee of Democratic former President Joe Biden. Reuters
BBC News
4 hours ago
- Politics
- BBC News
US court allows Trump to keep control of National Guard in LA
A US appeals court has ruled that President Donald Trump can keep control of National Guard troops he deployed to Los Angeles, despite objections from city leaders and California Governor Gavin deployed the troops in response to widespread protests against his immigration crackdown. Local officials called it an unnecessary provocation.A three-judge panel on Thursday said he was within his rights to order the troops into service to "protect federal personnel... [and] property". Trump called it a "big win".The decision halts a ruling from a lower court judge who found Trump acted illegally when mobilising the troops. In that earlier ruling, Judge Charles Breyer said Trump "did not" follow the law set by Congress on the deployment of a state's National Guard."His actions were illegal... He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith," he wrote in his judge however stayed the order until 13 June to give the Trump administration time to appeal against it, which it did almost immediately unanimous ruling said Trump's "failure to issue the federalisation order directly 'through' the Governor of California does not limit his otherwise lawful authority to call up the National Guard"."This is much bigger than Gavin [Newsom], because all over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done," Trump wrote on social media after the also congratulated the court, adding: "America is proud of you tonight!" The 38-page ruling, however, said the judges disagreed with the president on the merits of the legal challenge against his use of the National Guard. It said his decision to use the troops was not "completely insulated from judicial review".Newsom responded to the decision, saying the court "rightly rejected Trump's claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court."We will not let this authoritarian use of military soldiers against citizens go unchecked", he wrote on X, adding: "Donald Trump is not a king and not above the law."The court's decision allows for the continued deployment of around 4,000 troops to Los Angeles. The Trump administration says they have been protecting federal immigration agents and federal property during said it took over California's National Guard to restore order and to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents as they conducted raids across Los Angeles to detain people they believed were in the country also ordered 700 Marines to the city, despite Newsom's objections. The National Guard was last deployed by a president without a governor's consent during the civil rights era more than 50 years ago.
The Guardian
11 hours ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
LA protests: US court allows Trump to keep control of California national guard while lawsuit proceeds
A US appeals court has let Donald Trump retain control over California's national guard while the state's Democratic governor proceeds with a lawsuit challenging the legality of the Republican president's use of the troops to quell protests and unrest in Los Angeles. A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th US circuit court of appeals on Thursday extended a pause it had placed on US district Judge Charles Breyer's 12 June ruling that Trump had called the national guard into federal service unlawfully. Breyer's ruling was issued in a lawsuit against Trump's action brought by governor Gavin Newsom. Breyer ruled that Trump had violated the US law governing a president's ability to take control of a state's National Guard by failing to coordinate with the governor, and also found that the conditions set out under the statute to allow this move, such as a rebellion against federal authority, did not exist. Breyer ordered Trump to return control of California's national guard to Newsom. Hours after Breyer acted, the 9th circuit panel put the judge's move on hold temporarily. Amid protests and turmoil in Los Angeles over Trump's immigration raids, the president on June 7 took control of California's national guard and deployed 4,000 troops against the wishes of Newsom. Trump also ordered 700 US marines to the city after sending in the national guard. Breyer has not yet ruled on the legality of the Marine Corps mobilization. At a court hearing on Tuesday on whether to extend the pause on Breyer's decision, members of the 9th circuit panel questioned lawyers for California and the Trump administration on what role, if any, courts should have in reviewing Trump's authority to deploy the troops. The law sets out three conditions under which a president can federalize state national guard forces, including an invasion, a 'rebellion or danger of a rebellion' against the government or a situation in which the US government is unable with regular forces to execute the country's laws. The justice department has said that once the president determines that an emergency that warrants the use of the National Guard exists, no court or state governor can review that decision. Trump's decision to send troops into Los Angeles prompted a national debate about the use of the military on US soil and inflamed political tensions in the second most-populous US city. The protests in Los Angeles lasted for more than a week, but subsequently ebbed, leading Los Angeles mayor Karen Bass to lift a curfew she had imposed. California argued in its June 9 lawsuit that Trump's deployment of the national guard and the marines violated the state's sovereignty and US laws that forbid federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement. The lawsuit stated the situation in Los Angeles was nothing like a 'rebellion.' The protests involved sporadic acts of violence that state and local law enforcement were capable of handling without military involvement, according to the lawsuit. The Trump administration has denied that troops are engaging in law enforcement, saying that they are instead protecting federal buildings and personnel, including US immigration and customs enforcement officers. The 9th circuit panel is comprised of two judges appointed by Trump during his first term and one appointee of Democratic former president Joe Biden.
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Appeals court extends order allowing Trump to deploy National Guard to L.A.
Washington — A federal appeals court on Thursday extended its block of a judge's order that directed President Trump to return control of California's National Guard to Gov. Gavin Newsom. The unanimous order from a three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit is a victory for the president and allows for the continued deployment of roughly 4,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles, where they have been protecting federal property and U.S. immigration agents during enforcement operations. Mr. Trump invoked a law known as Title 10 to call the Guard into federal service earlier this month in response to demonstrations against immigration raids conducted across Los Angeles. Since then, a total of roughly 4,100 National Guard troops and 700 active-duty U.S. Marines have deployed to Los Angeles. Newsom, a Democrat, objects to the use of troops in California's largest city and sued the president over his decision to federalize the California Guard. A federal judge, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, concluded last week that Mr. Trump's actions were illegal and exceeded the scope of his authority. The judge blocked the administration from deploying members of the California National Guard in Los Angeles and directed the president to return control of the troops to Newsom. His decision applied only to Mr. Trump's deployment of the National Guard, and not the Marines. The Trump administration swiftly appealed the decision and won a temporary stay of Breyer's order from the 9th Circuit. It held a hearing Tuesday to consider a Justice Department request to halt the judge's decision while the case proceeds. The Justice Department argued that Mr. Trump properly invoked the authorities laid out in Title 10 when he federalized National Guard troops in response to the protests in Los Angeles. The law gives the president the power to call the Guard into federal service whenever "there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion," or when the president is unable to "execute the laws" of the U.S. In his June 7 memorandum deploying members of the National Guard, Mr. Trump said the protests constituted a "form of rebellion" against the U.S. The Justice Department further argued that courts had no role to play in reviewing the president's directive, as the law leaves decisions of whether to call forth the National Guard to the president's discretion. Courts, administration lawyers said, should not second-guess the commander-in-chief's military judgments. During arguments before the 9th Circuit, Brett Shumate, a Justice Department lawyer, warned that Breyer's order, if left intact, risked putting federal judges "on a collision course with the commander in chief" and would put "lives and property at risk." But California officials argued that the Trump administration should have considered more "modest measures" to quell the demonstrations in Los Angeles before taking the "extraordinary step" of deploying the National Guard. Sam Harbourt, a deputy solicitor general for the state, warned that the continued presence of troops on California streets would only escalate tensions and the risk of violence. Plus, he said Mr. Trump failed to adhere to the requirements of Title 10 by not consulting with Newsom before calling forth members of the California National Guard. In his memo, Mr. Trump had directed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to effectuate the federalization of the Guard. The secretary then issued memoranda to the adjutant general of the California National Guard to transfer authority over the Guard from the state to the federal government. It had been 60 years since a president last sent in the National Guard without a request from a state's government, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. President Lyndon B. Johnson deployed the guard to Alabama in 1965 to protect a voting rights march. Mr. Trump said in his memo that the protests in Los Angeles threatened the security of a federal immigration detention facility in the city, as well as other government property. The demonstrations broke out earlier this month in response to the immigration raids across Los Angeles, conducted as part of Mr. Trump's promise of mass deportations of people in the country illegally. Protests against the president's immigration crackdown have spread to other cities. Mr. Trump has continued to step up immigration enforcement and announced Sunday on social media that federal immigration authorities should "do all in their power to achieve the very important goal of delivering the single largest mass deportation program in history." He said operations aimed at detailing and deporting migrants in the country unlawfully will expand to major cities like Chicago and New York, which are led by Democrats. This is a breaking story; it will be updated. SpaceX Starship upper stage blows up Hurricane Erick approaches Mexico with destructive winds, major storm surge Biden to speak at Juneteenth event in Texas
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Federal Appeals Court Hearing Held Today Over President Trump's Control of the National Guard
Federal Appeals Court Hearing Held Today Over President Trump's Control of the National Guard originally appeared on L.A. Mag. A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will meet remotely at noon on Tuesday to discuss the ongoing dispute between President Trump and California Governor Gavin Newsom over the deployment of the National Guard amid protests over immigration enforcement in Downtown Los June 7, the Trump administration issued a memo that called for 2,000 California National Guard troops to be sent to Los Angeles in response to immigration protests. The memo stated the troops would 'temporarily protect' federal government employees, including Immigration and Customs and Enforcement officers, and federal property. This marked the first time since the 1960s that the federal government deployed National Guard troops without a governor's consent. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer granted a temporary restraining order to Newsom against Trump on June 12. This restraining order was meant to block Trump's deployment of the National Guard and return power to Newsom. Breyer's order against Trump read, "His actions were illegal -- 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."The Trump administration appealed this ruling, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals quickly suspended the ruling. Today, the federal appeals court is scheduled to meet again in order to further discuss the matter. The panel is made up of two judges nominated by Trump and one nominated by the former U.S. President Joe Biden. Newsom argued that the deployment of the National Guard exceeded the authority of the President. '[If] Donald Trump can unilaterally decide to militarize the streets of America — it happens to be in L.A., now, it will be in your city next,' Newsom stated on his Substack shortly before the hearing began. The ruling could be decided at any point today, and the Trump administration has requested that the deployment remains intact until they have an opportunity to file an emergency appeal at the Supreme Court. This story was originally reported by L.A. Mag on Jun 17, 2025, where it first appeared.
