California’s legal battle against the Trump administration’s decision to deploy military forces on the streets of Los Angeles was back in a federal courtroom in San Francisco for a short hearing after an appeals court provided President Trump with a significant procedural advantage in the matter.
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer delayed making further rulings and instead requested additional briefings from both parties. The focus is on whether the Posse Comitatus Act, which bans troops from engaging in civilian law enforcement on U.S. ground, is being broken in Los Angeles.
In his lawsuit, Newsom argued that a “violation of the Posse Comitatus Act is imminent, if not already happening,” though last week Breyer delayed addressing this claim.
The hearing comes a day after the 9th Circuit appellate panel allowed the president to keep control of National Guard troops he deployed in response to protests over immigration raids.
The appellate decision halted a temporary restraining order from Breyer, who found Trump acted illegally when he activated the soldiers over opposition from California Gov. Gavin Newsom.
Despite the appellate setback, California’s attorneys are expected to ask Breyer on Friday for a preliminary injunction returning control of the troops in Los Angeles, where protests have calmed down in recent days, to Newsom.
Trump, a Republican, argued that the troops have been necessary to restore order. Newsom, a Democrat, said their presence on the streets of a U.S. city inflamed tensions, usurped local authority and wasted resources.
The demonstrations have appeared to be winding down, although dozens of protesters showed up Thursday at Dodger Stadium, where a group of federal agents in SUVs and cargo vans had gathered with their faces covered a parking lot. The Los Angeles Dodgers organization asked them to leave, and they did.
On Tuesday, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass lifted a curfew in downtown Los Angeles that was first imposed in response to vandalism and clashes with police after crowds gathered in opposition to agents taking migrants into detention.
Breyer found that Trump had overstepped his legal authority, which he said allows presidents to control state National Guard troops only during times of “rebellion or danger of a rebellion.”
“The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of ‘rebellion,’” wrote Breyer, a Watergate prosecutor who was appointed by President Bill Clinton and is the brother of retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer.
The Trump administration argued that courts can’t second-guess the president’s decisions. The appellate panel ruled otherwise, saying presidents don’t have unfettered power to seize control of a state’s guard, but said that by citing violent acts by protesters in this case, the Trump administration had presented enough evidence to show it had a defensible rationale for federalizing the troops.
For now, the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as the lawsuit proceeds. It’s the first deployment by a president of a state National Guard without the governor’s permission since troops were sent to protect Civil Rights Movement marchers in 1965.
Trump celebrated the appellate ruling in a social media post, calling it a “BIG WIN” and hinting at more potential deployments. “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.
Newsom, for his part, has also warned that California won’t be the last state to see troops in the streets if Trump gets his way. “The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump’s authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens,” Newsom said.
Meanwhile, Vice President JD Vance was traveling to Los Angeles on Friday to meet with U.S. Marines who also have been deployed to protect federal buildings, his office announced.
