US court lets Trump control National Guards deployed to LA during protests

Appeals court ruled that even if the federal government did not notify California's governor before taking control of the National Guard, Newsom had no authority to veto the President's order

  

A US appeals court has allowed President Donald Trump to retain control of the National Guard troops he deployed in Los Angeles during protests over immigration raids. Earlier, a lower court judge had ruled that Trump acted illegally by activating the soldiers despite opposition from California Governor Gavin Newsom.

 

In its decision on Thursday, the appeals court concluded that it is likely the President exercised his statutory authority lawfully in taking control of the Guard.

 

The court also ruled that even if the federal government did not notify California’s governor before taking control of the National Guard, Newsom had no authority to veto the President’s order. The deployment marked the first time a president has activated a state’s National Guard without the governor’s consent since 1965.

 

 

The ruling was issued by a three-judge panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, with two judges appointed by Trump during his first term. During oral arguments on June 17, all three judges indicated that presidents hold broad authority under the federal law in question and that courts should exercise caution when considering intervention.

 

The panel stated that while presidents do not have unchecked power to assume control of a state’s Guard, the Trump administration had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate a defensible rationale for its actions, citing violent acts by protesters. 

Impact of the appeals court order

This case could have broader implications for presidential authority to deploy troops within the United States. Trump has already directed immigration officials to prioritise deportations from other Democrat-led cities.

Newsom vs Trump: How events unfolded

The case began after Trump deployed US troops, including the National Guard, to respond to protests in Los Angeles against the immigration crackdown by federal authorities.

 

President Donald Trump, a Republican, maintained that the deployment was necessary to restore order. Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, argued that the move escalated tensions, undermined local authority, and misused resources. However, since the troop deployment, the protests appear to have subsided.

 

The legal battle commenced when Newsom sued to block Trump’s order, initially securing a ruling in his favour from US District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco. Breyer, appointed by former President Bill Clinton, found that Trump had exceeded his legal authority—permissible only during times of rebellion or imminent threat. “The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of rebellion,” Breyer wrote.

 

The Trump administration countered that courts should not second-guess a president’s decisions, prompting the appeals court to temporarily halt Breyer’s ruling. With the latest decision, control of the California National Guard remains in federal hands as the case continues.

 

[With inputs from PTI]