A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration violated the law by deploying California’s National Guard to Los Angeles without the state’s approval, siding with Governor Gavin Newsom in a high-profile legal battle over executive authority.
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer issued the decision Thursday, declaring that former President Donald Trump acted unlawfully by bypassing the governor’s consent. The order mandates a return of control to California, though it will not take effect until Friday afternoon to allow time for the administration’s appeal, which was filed immediately.
“His actions were illegal,” Breyer wrote in his opinion, adding that Trump must “return control of the California National Guard to the Governor… forthwith.”
The dispute centers on Trump’s decision to send more than 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles amid large-scale protests against his immigration policies. The administration said the deployment was necessary to maintain public order and protect federal immigration agents. However, state officials argued the protests, while disruptive at times, did not warrant federal military involvement.
Governor Newsom welcomed the ruling, stating on social media, “The court just confirmed what we all know — the military belongs on the battlefield, not on our city streets.”
In court, Justice Department attorney Brett Shumate argued that the president had the authority to act without Newsom’s consent, stating, “There is one commander-in-chief of the U.S. armed forces.” Judge Breyer disagreed, noting constitutional limits on presidential power.
“The president isn’t the commander-in-chief of the National Guard,” he said, emphasizing the separation of powers outlined in the Constitution.
This is the first time in over half a century that a president has deployed the Guard without a governor’s approval, recalling tactics last used during the civil rights movement.
California’s lawsuit argued that the conditions in Los Angeles did not meet the threshold of “rebellion” required under the law used by the administration. Over the course of the protests, authorities recorded more than 300 arrests and the closure of major roads but said the unrest remained manageable.
As the legal fight continues, the case raises broader questions about presidential authority, states’ rights, and the role of the military in domestic affairs.
Related Readings:
