Appeals Court Allows Trump to Maintain Control Over National Guard in Los Angeles

The appeals court's decision permits Trump's administration to keep National Guard troops in Los Angeles amid ongoing protests against immigration crackdowns. California officials, including Governor Gavin Newsom, oppose the move, arguing it is an unneeded provocation.

An appeals court has stepped in to allow the Trump administration to maintain control over the National Guard troops stationed in Los Angeles, rejecting a federal judge's earlier ruling which deemed their deployment illegal. This decision follows a ruling by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who had stated that the administration acted without following legal guidelines pertaining to a state's National Guard deployment. The context for this controversial action stems from Trump's assertion that he needed to prevent the city from "burning down” due to protests surrounding his immigration enforcement policies.

Governor Gavin Newsom and other California leaders have voiced strong disapproval, labeling the move as an unnecessary and provocative escalation. The appeals court indicated it would hold a hearing next Tuesday to further discuss the matter, while Judge Breyer's original decision required the administration to return the control of the National Guard to state authorities. He referenced the requirement under federal law, emphasizing that Trump's actions were illegal. The ruling was temporarily stayed until Friday to allow the Trump administration time to appeal—which they promptly did.

In a post on social media, Newsom welcomed the judge's findings, underscoring that military forces should be on battlefields rather than city streets. Meanwhile, the Trump administration justified its actions by stating the need to restore order during ongoing protests and safeguard Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from potential risks during operations targeting individuals believed to be undocumented immigrants.

Legal history reveals that such federal deployment of the National Guard without a state's consent has been infrequent, last occurring over half a century ago during the civil rights movement. Typically, the National Guard is used in California for emergency situations like natural disasters at the governor's request, reinforcing the unusual nature of this current deployment.

During a court session, attorneys representing the Trump administration argued that Newsom did not require prior consultation for the deployment order. Judge Breyer, however, countered this perspective, invoking the Constitution to highlight the limitations of presidential authority. He stated that while the president can occasionally lead military forces, they are not inherently the commander-in-chief of the National Guard.

Amid these legal disputes, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth withheld commitment to Judge Breyer's ruling, suggesting that local judges should not dictate national security policies. The appeals court's ruling on Thursday now allows the National Guard to remain stationed in Los Angeles as both parties navigate through the legal challenges ahead. California's lawsuit against the deployment argues that the ongoing protests, despite their intensity and the number of arrests, do not constitute a "rebellion," and thus fail to warrant federal intervention under current laws.