Judge issues a temporary ruling against Trump using the National Guard in LA

A federal judge has ruled against President Trump’s use of the National Guard in Los Angeles, siding with the state of California’s argument that the president erred in how the guard was being activated. The order requires Trump to return control of the National Guard to California Gov. Gavin Newsom by noon Friday (Pacific Time).

The ruling could still be appealed. But it’s a setback for the White House in the dispute over the powers it can assert in cracking down on illegal immigration – and over public opposition to it. It was not immediately clear if or when Guard units would be removed.

In a hearing Thursday, District Judge Charles Breyer rejected an argument by the administration’s lawyer that the courts do not have authority to review a president’s decision on whether the National Guard is needed.

“That’s the difference between a constitutional government and King George. It’s not that the leader can simply say something and then it becomes it,” the judge said.

Starting on Saturday, Trump deployed 4,000 California National Guard and several hundred U.S. Marines to Los Angeles, over the objections of Democratic Gov. Newsom. National Guard units across the country are under the command of governors but can be federalized by presidents.

Breyer said during the hearing that he could not rule on the use of the Marines, though the lawyer for California said they might replace Guard troops.

In his order deploying the guard, Trump said there had been attempts to impede immigration agents in Los Angeles that constituted “a form of rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States.”

It was the first time in 60 years that a president had activated a state’s National Guard over objections of the state’s governor. In 1965 President Lyndon Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators.

California’s Newsom had said that Trump’s use of the military was unlawful.

“The federal government is now turning the military against American citizens,” Newsom said in a statement when his state sued to get control of the Guard back.. “Sending trained warfighters onto the streets is unprecedented and threatens the very core of our democracy.”

California officials said the protests were being handled by local law enforcement, the violence was brief and isolated and the military deployment actually escalated tensions and led to more unrest. No deaths or serious injuries have been reported.

“At no point in the past three days has there been a rebellion or an insurrection. Nor have these protests risen to the level of protests or riots that Los Angeles and other major cities have seen at points in the past,” the state wrote in its lawsuit against the administration.

The White House had argued in court that there had been ongoing interference and “fighting” with immigration agents and that the president has the power to decide when the situation requires using the military. Justice Department lawyers said the military was not conducting law enforcement duties but would be used to protect or accompany federal agents and their operations.

This is a developing story that will be updated as we get more information.

Laura Fitzgerald covers California politics for CapRadio