Latest news with #U.S.Code
The Onion
10 hours ago
- Politics
- The Onion
Congress Passes Blank Bill For Trump To Write Whatever Law He Wants
WASHINGTON—After weeks of eliminating what many lawmakers called 'frivolous' and 'unnecessary' provisions, Congress reportedly passed a blank bill Thursday in which President Donald Trump can simply write whatever law he wants. 'Today we are sending to the president's desk 200 completely clean sheets of paper that are hereby codified such that anything he chooses to fill those pages with will have the full force of law,' House Speaker Mike Johnson said as he ushered the bill through his chamber, overcoming minor pushback to ultimately win bipartisan support for the measure, which gives Trump the power to enact federal statutes, declare war, or spend the entirety of the U.S. Treasury without a single check or balance. 'With this bill, the president will finally be able to take any thought that crosses his mind, write it down, and have it instantly become an enforceable part of the U.S. Code,' Johnson added. 'Americans have spoken, and they want Donald Trump to have carte blanche to do whatever he wants. It's our job as members of Congress to simply get out of the way.' Just hours after the bill's passage, President Trump took to Truth Social and sharply criticized Congress for making him write down anything at all.
Time Magazine
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Time Magazine
Trump Maintains Control of National Guard in L.A.: What the Appeals Court Said About His Authority
President Donald Trump can maintain control of the California National Guard, a federal appeals court has ruled, overturning an earlier decision that found the President's mobilization of the troops was 'illegal.' The ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is temporary, but allows the President to continue directing the thousands of National Guard members he has deployed to Los Angeles to quell multi-day protests over the Administration's immigration policy. Their deployment was subject to a lawsuit filed by California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who argued the President violated the Tenth Amendment, which lays out the powers of state and the federal government. Seven hundred Marines have also been sent to L.A. The unanimous opinion, delivered by a three-panel judge panel made up of two Trump appointees and another appointed by President Joe Biden, reversed a lower court decision that found Trump did not satisfy the requirements necessary for the President to call in the National Guard under the law he invoked. Trump celebrated the appeals court's ruling on his social media platform, Truth Social. 'The Judges obviously realized that Gavin Newscum is incompetent and ill prepared, but 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,' Trump wrote late Thursday. Though it ruled in Trump's favor, the court also rejected an argument from the Administration that the National Guard deployment could not be reviewed, however. Newsom applauded that part of the decision, and noted that litigation regarding the matter will continue. '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,' Newsom said in a post on X. 'We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens.' Here's what the appeals court said about Trump's power to deploy the National Guard. Trump "likely acted within his authority" The Ninth Circuit's ruling found that the President likely 'lawfully exercised his statutory authority' in invoking Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code. Under that statute, the President has the power to invoke the National Guard if he cannot execute laws with 'regular forces,' or if an invasion or rebellion is underway or at risk. The Trump Administration claimed in court filings that there was 'a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the United States.' The judges, however, said that the 'protests in Los Angeles fall short of rebellion,' though they pointed to the unrest in Los Angeles and risk to federal officials and property. They called Newsom's concerns about how the presence of the National Guard could escalate tensions between protesters and law enforcement 'too speculative.' The judges also responded to Newsom's assertion that his lack of involvement in the deployment of the troops made Trump's actions illegal. The court found that the Secretary of Defense's 'transmittal of the order' to the Adjutant General of the California National Guard, who can issue orders in name of the Governor, satisfied the procedural requirements necessary to send in the National Guard. The President's decisions to deploy the National Guard are not above review The federal government argued that Trump's decision to deploy the National Guard was 'unreviewable' by the court system because the statute the President used empowered him to mobilize it in 'such numbers as he considers necessary.' In the ruling, the judges said that they should be 'highly deferential' to the President, but also denied the assertion that the federalization of the National Guard is 'completely insulated from judicial review.'
Miami Herald
a day ago
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Appellate court sides with Trump over Newsom in dispute over LA Guard deployment
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that President Donald Trump likely acted within his authority when he federalized California's National Guard during recent immigration protests in Los Angeles — despite opposition from Gov. Gavin Newsom. The unanimous decision from the three-judge panel keeps a pause on a lower court's temporary restraining order a week before that had directed the federal government to return control of Guard troops to Newsom. The appellate panel found Trump likely satisfied the legal threshold under Section 10 of the U.S. Code, and sided with the administration's argument that local law enforcement had failed to contain violent attacks on federal agents and property. The ruling represents the latest legal setback for Newsom, who warned that the June 8 deployment would inflame tensions and escalate unrest. A lower court had agreed with the governor, finding that the protests did not rise to the level of a rebellion and concluding Trump had exceeded his statutory and constitutional authority. This case marks the most significant judicial review of presidential power to override a governor's control of the National Guard since the Civil Rights era. Judges Eric Miller and Mark Bennett, both Trump appointees, and Jennifer Sung, a Biden appointee, issued the 38-page ruling after hearing arguments Tuesday. The panel emphasized judicial deference to the president's discretion during national emergencies. Still, the court rejected Trump's assertion that his actions were immune from judicial review. While acknowledging the 'extraordinary' nature of the override, the judges concluded it was likely lawful under existing precedent granting the president broad discretion to determine when regular federal forces are insufficient to execute federal law. 'The authority to control the militia remains with the states absent a proper invocation of federal authority under the Constitution or federal statutes,' the panel wrote. The court also criticized the process used to issue the deployment order. Although federal law requires such orders to be issued 'through' a state's governor, the White House transmitted the order via California's adjutant general, Maj. Gen. Matthew P. Beevers. The judges said this method likely met the statutory requirement under California law but noted it 'blurred the lines of command and accountability in a manner inconsistent with both the Constitution and established military structure.' Trump celebrated the ruling online, writing on Truth Social: 'BIG WIN in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on the President's core power to call in the National Guard! ... Congratulations to the Ninth Circuit, America is proud of you tonight!' Newsom, however, emphasized the limits of the appellate decision. 'Donald Trump is not a king and not above the law,' he said in a statement on X. 'Tonight, 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.' California Attorney General Rob Bonta called the decision disappointing but vowed to press on. 'The Trump Administration far overreached its authority with its unprecedented and unlawful federalization of the California National Guard,' Bonta said. 'While the court did not provide immediate relief for Angelenos today, we remain confident in our arguments and will continue the fight.' The deployment of 4,000 Guard members — along with 700 Marines from Twentynine Palms — marked the first time since 1965 that a president had federalized a state's National Guard without the governor's consent. The case returns to U.S. Senior District Judge Charles R. Breyer's court in San Francisco on Friday for a preliminary injunction hearing.
Int'l Business Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Int'l Business Times
Trump's DOJ Argues Decision to Deploy National Guard for LA Protests is 'Unreviewable' for Judges
The Department of Justice has argued that courts cannot deny the president's ability to federally enlist militia in an attempt to justify President Donald Trump's mobilization of the National Guard against protestors in Los Angeles, California. During a hearing at the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Tuesday, DOJ representatives attempted to convince a three-judge panel to approve an emergency stay of a lower court order, hence permitting Trump's deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles, CBS News reported. The hearing was presided over by two Trump-appointed judges, Mark Bennett and Eric Miller, and one Biden-appointed judge, Jennifer Sung. During the hearing, DOJ Assistant Attorney General Brett Shumate argued that the constitutional violation found with Trump's deployment of the National Guard by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer "interferes with the president's commander-in-chief powers based on an erroneous interpretation of the applicable statute." He was largely referencing 10 U.S. Code § 12406. According to the statute, the United States "may call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State in such numbers as he considers necessary" under threats of a foreign invasion, a rebellion or when the president is "unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States." According to Shumate, Breyer's order "upends the military chain of command," would allow governors to veto military orders from the president and sets judges on a path to come into conflict with the commander-in-chief. Shumate argued that local authorities are "either unable or unwilling to protect federal personnel and property from the mob violence ongoing in Los Angeles." He added that the president was within his discretion to call in the National Guard, claiming that the "violent riots in Los Angeles constitute a rebellion against the authority of the United States" and left him unable to execute federal laws. This assertion caused Bennett to question if Shumate believed that a president invoking the statute with "no support" meant that the court had no role at all in determining whether the president correctly invoked it. "That's correct," Shumate replied, "because if the statute is unreviewable, it's unreviewable." Originally published on Latin Times Donald trump Department of justice Los Angeles California
The Hill
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Hill
700 military personnel mobilized to support ICE in 3 states
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth last week authorized the mobilization of up to 700 troops to assist federal immigration officials in Florida, Louisiana and Texas in processing detainees at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities, the Pentagon said Tuesday. 'These service members, drawn from all components and operating in a Title 10 duty status, will provide logistical support, and conduct administrative and clerical functions associated with the processing of illegal aliens at ICE detention facilities,' officials wrote in the press release. 'They will not directly participate in law enforcement activities,' It added. Title 10 of the U.S. Code outlines the structure and scope of the Armed Forces, including the president's power to federalize state National Guard units in certain situations, such as rebellion. President Trump and Hegseth have cited the same power in mobilizing up to 700 Marines to support ICE agents in California, where thousands protested against the Trump administration's workplace immigration raids and many were arrested. The Defense secretary was repeatedly questioned during congressional hearings last week on the necessity of deploying troops in Los Angeles. 'Threatening to use our own troops on our own citizens at such scale is unprecedented, it is unconstitutional, and it is downright un-American,' Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) told Hegseth. He repeatedly said the troops were fulfilling a constitutionally allowed role of protecting federal law enforcement agents. California has sued the administration over what it calls federal overreach, while Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) has warned the precedent could quickly expand to other states. A group of retired generals and former civilian heads of military branches submitted an amicus brief on Sunday as the legal fight plays out in federal court. 'While the President is entitled to criticize his opponents in political terms, involving the military in domestic political controversies risks harming the military's ability to recruit and retain servicemembers and garner broad public support for its budgets and programs, therefore undermining its ability to achieve its core mission of protecting the nation,' said the brief, from six former military generals and admirals and two former branch secretaries. 'It is precisely for this reason that the military should be kept out of domestic law enforcement whenever possible,' the group added. The Hill has asked the Pentagon for additional details about its latest order. 'In maintaining the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security of the United States, the Department of Defense works alongside with the Department of Homeland Security, the lead federal agency in this critical effort,' the Pentagon said in Tuesday's press release. 'This support provides critical resources to support ICE's mission, freeing up law enforcement personnel to focus on law enforcement tasks and missions,' it added. 'The Department remains committed to securing 100% operational control of the border.' The news comes after Texas Gov. Gregg Abbott (R) said the state's National Guard was also prepared to 'ensure peace & order' as protests against Trump's immigration crackdown spread beyond California.
