Trump and Newsom Prepare for Legal Dispute Over National Guard Deployment
President Donald Trump and California Governor Gavin Newsom are set to face off legally next week. This follows Trump’s decision to deploy the National Guard in response to protests and riots against immigration enforcement in Los Angeles.
This legal conflict gained momentum after Judge Charles Breyer, appointed by Clinton, ruled on Thursday that Trump’s deployment of the National Guard was unlawful, instructing him to pause control over those troops. The ruling was met with some excitement from Democratic circles, suggesting that Trump’s actions stemmed from a desire to “instill fear” rather than genuine concern. However, this victory was temporary. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit swiftly intervened, putting Breyer’s order on hold just hours later.
The stay will persist at least until Tuesday, when discussions involving California’s Attorney General and the Trump administration will determine if the stay can be extended long-term.
The court hearings will feature Trump appointees Mark Bennett and Eric Miller, alongside Biden appointee Jennifer Son. For now, Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegse are allowed to continue sending thousands of National Guard personnel to California, along with hundreds of Marines. According to court documents, the military presence will primarily focus on safeguarding federal employees and buildings amid recent violent demonstrations against immigration enforcement.
Lawyers from the Justice Department argued that halting military actions would undermine the authority of the commander-in-chief. “This is unprecedented… and dangerous,” one DOJ lawyer asserted.
Breyer’s decision drew skepticism from some corners. Ed Whelan, a former DOJ official, mentioned that the ruling was broader than he anticipated. He noted a significant legal battle looming, particularly around the Title 10 provisions that Trump invoked for the National Guard’s deployment. Traditionally, a president utilizes the National Guard only with the governor’s agreement, but Whelan pointed out the ambiguity regarding such consent. He speculated that Trump might leverage another part of Title 10, invoking the Rebellion Act to sidestep any court involvement.
Interestingly, this legal struggle contrasts with Trump’s upcoming plans, including a large military parade in Washington, D.C., set for Saturday. Expected to cost millions, this event will celebrate the Army’s 250th birthday, coincidentally aligning with Trump’s own birthday.
Meanwhile, critics of Trump have organized “No Kings Day” protests across the nation. Notably, dozens of these demonstrations are anticipated in California alone. One organizer indicated that while Trump is in the capital, protesters will be “literally anywhere else,” emphasizing the historical context of the Continental Army’s formation against tyranny.
