Appeals court clears Trump to keep National Guard in Los Angeles


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Court ruling

A federal appeals court ruled Trump likely acted within his authority to federalize California's National Guard amid immigration protests. The Ninth Circuit extended a stay blocking a lower court’s order to return control to Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Legal battle

Newsom sued, arguing the federalization violated state sovereignty and federal law. The legal dispute remains active, with further hearings scheduled to review limits on troop activity.

Protest response

Trump deployed 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles after protests escalated following immigration raids. Demonstrators used Molotov cocktails, dumpsters, and other methods to disrupt law enforcement efforts.


Full story

A federal appeals court ruled Thursday, June 19, that President Donald Trump can keep control of California’s National Guard. The decision comes as legal challenges continue after he deployed the troops to Los Angeles in response to protests over immigration raids.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a unanimous decision extending its stay of a lower court ruling that had ordered Trump to return command of the Guard to California Governor Gavin Newsom. The appeals panel found that Trump likely acted within his authority by determining that federal forces were insufficient to enforce U.S. laws. 

However, the court stopped short of ruling on the broader legality of how the Guard is being used in Los Angeles, leaving that question for future proceedings.

Why did Trump federalize the National Guard?

Trump took control of the California National Guard on June 7, sending 4,000 Guard members and 700 U.S. Marines to Los Angeles following protests that escalated after federal immigration workplace raids. Demonstrators clashed with law enforcement. They threw objects at immigration vehicles, rammed barriers with dumpsters, launched Molotov cocktails and damaged property.

Citing these conditions, the appeals court concluded that Trump met the threshold requiring federal action when existing federal forces are insufficient to enforce U.S. law.

Newsom sued Trump, arguing the deployment violated state sovereignty and federal law, including the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally bars military involvement in civilian law enforcement. 

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer initially ruled in Newsom’s favor, saying the conditions did not meet the statute’s requirements and that Trump failed to properly coordinate with the governor.

However, the appeals court disagreed, stating that even if procedural violations occurred, they did not justify stripping Trump of command authority. The court also rejected arguments from the Trump administration that presidential decisions to federalize the Guard should be entirely shielded from judicial review.

What’s next?

The legal battle continues. On Friday, June 20, Breyer will hold further hearings to consider additional limits on how federalized troops may be used in Los Angeles, including whether they can accompany Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents during operations. 

Trump defended his actions, calling the court ruling “a great decision for our country.” Newsom responded that “the president is not a king and is not above the law,” vowing to keep fighting the deployments in court.

Alexandria Nohalty (Production Specialist), Devan Markham (Morning Digital Producer), and Kaleb Gillespie (Video Editor) contributed to this report.
Tags: , , , ,

Why this story matters

A federal appeals court decision regarding President Donald Trump's authority over the California National Guard during protests addresses the balance of federal and state power, raising ongoing questions about the legal limits on the use of military force in domestic situations.

Federal and state authority

The case highlights tensions between federal and state governments, with legal debates over Trump's power to take control of the California National Guard and Newsom's challenge citing concerns about state sovereignty.

Legal limits on military deployment

The story examines how laws like the Posse Comitatus Act and procedural requirements restrict or permit military involvement in civilian law enforcement, as argued by both Newsom and the Trump administration.

Judicial oversight

Courts play a critical role in reviewing and potentially setting boundaries on presidential decisions to federalize the National Guard, as demonstrated by the appeals court's refusal to exempt such actions from judicial scrutiny.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 176 media outlets

Behind the numbers

According to several reports, approximately 4,000 California National Guard troops and 700 U.S. Marines were deployed to Los Angeles in response to protests following federal immigration raids. The court decisions reference violent incidents cited by administration attorneys, including injuries to officers and damage to federal property, as justification for the scale of the deployment.

Context corner

Historically, the president’s federalization of state National Guards without gubernatorial consent is rare, last occurring in 1965 when President Johnson intervened in Alabama during the civil rights movement. The legal authority in this case comes from Title 10, which allows the president to federalize the Guard under specific circumstances, such as rebellion or inability to enforce federal law.

Debunking

Some claims suggested that California state officials could veto or override the president’s deployment of the National Guard. However, as established by the appeals court decision and clarified in multiple articles, the law does not grant governors veto authority over such federal actions, though procedural notification is required.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

176 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that troops in Los Angeles will remain under the Trump administration's control during legal proceedings, highlighting the president's authority to deploy military forces in cities.
  • Legal scholars noted that the appellate panel was skeptical of claims made by both California and the federal government during hearings, suggesting a balanced approach.
  • The appellate panel questioned both California and the federal government during the hearing, but avoided ruling on the characterization of the situation in Los Angeles as a rebellion.
  • Residents in Los Angeles will continue to see an increasing presence of federal troops as the legal battle unfolds.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On Thursday, a federal appeals court permitted President Donald Trump to maintain authority over more than 4,000 members of the California National Guard who were sent to Los Angeles amid demonstrations protesting immigration enforcement actions.
  • The deployment, made without Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom's consent, sparked a lawsuit claiming Trump unlawfully federalized the Guard to suppress protests and militarized the situation.
  • The appeals panel held a virtual session that ran for just over an hour, during which Trump administration lawyer Brett Shumate defended the National Guard’s role in protecting federal property amid ongoing unrest. At the same time, Governor Newsom criticized the deployment as escalating tensions and misusing resources.
  • The court found it likely Trump lawfully exercised his statutory authority despite failing to notify Newsom, and the ruling blocks a lower court order that had returned Guard control to the governor.
  • This decision prolongs the constitutional dispute over presidential authority to deploy military forces domestically and leaves federal control over California's National Guard as the lawsuit continues.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

  • An appeals court allowed President Donald Trump to maintain control over National Guard troops in Los Angeles during protests related to immigration raids, halting a previous ruling from a lower court.
  • California Governor Gavin Newsom stated that Trump's actions are unlawful and inflamed tensions, but the Trump administration maintained that the troops were necessary.
  • The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals highlighted a broader debate on the president's authority to deploy troops domestically, extending a pause on U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer's ruling and allowing the legal case to proceed.
  • Control of the National Guard will remain with the federal government as the lawsuit continues, with both sides preparing for further legal battles.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Timeline

  • There are now 4,100 National Guard members and 700 Marines on the ground in Los Angeles as part of President Trump’s order mobilizing them over ICE protests.
    AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes
    U.S.
    Jun 18

    More troops deployed to LA as court weighs Trump’s authority

    As a federal appeals court considers whether President Donald Trump overstepped his authority by deploying the California National Guard, the White House states that 2,000 additional troops are on their way to Los Angeles. U.S. Northern Command clarified on Tuesday, June 17, that the newly announced troops are part of the same Trump-activated forces from…

  • Federal authorities announced the arrest of a man for handing out riot gear to protesters in downtown Los Angeles on Thursday.
    David McNew/Getty Images
    U.S.
    Jun 13

    Federal authorities accuse man of distributing riot gear to LA protesters

    Authorities arrested a man who allegedly handed out riot gear to people protesting the Trump administration’s immigration raids in Los Angeles. Alejandro Theodoro Orellana was charged with suspicion of conspiracy to commit civil disorders. In a social media post on Thursday, June 12, U.S. Attorney Bill Essayi said law enforcement detained Orellana “for distributing face…

  • A federal judge ruled June 12 that the Trump administration illegally seized control of California’s National Guard and ordered troops returned to Governor Gavin Newsom’s command. In a 36-page decision, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer wrote that the administration had bypassed legal procedures required under federal law, violating both statutory limits and the Tenth Amendment.
    David McNew/Getty Images
    U.S.
    Jun 13

    Judge blocks Trump’s Guard seizure, but appeals court hits pause

    A federal judge ruled June 12 that the Trump administration illegally seized control of California’s National Guard and ordered troops returned to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s command. In a 36-page decision, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer wrote that the administration had bypassed legal procedures required under federal law, violating both statutory limits and the Tenth Amendment….

Timeline

  • There are now 4,100 National Guard members and 700 Marines on the ground in Los Angeles as part of President Trump’s order mobilizing them over ICE protests.
    AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes
    U.S.
    Jun 18

    More troops deployed to LA as court weighs Trump’s authority

    As a federal appeals court considers whether President Donald Trump overstepped his authority by deploying the California National Guard, the White House states that 2,000 additional troops are on their way to Los Angeles. U.S. Northern Command clarified on Tuesday, June 17, that the newly announced troops are part of the same Trump-activated forces from…

  • Federal authorities announced the arrest of a man for handing out riot gear to protesters in downtown Los Angeles on Thursday.
    David McNew/Getty Images
    U.S.
    Jun 13

    Federal authorities accuse man of distributing riot gear to LA protesters

    Authorities arrested a man who allegedly handed out riot gear to people protesting the Trump administration’s immigration raids in Los Angeles. Alejandro Theodoro Orellana was charged with suspicion of conspiracy to commit civil disorders. In a social media post on Thursday, June 12, U.S. Attorney Bill Essayi said law enforcement detained Orellana “for distributing face…

  • A federal judge ruled June 12 that the Trump administration illegally seized control of California’s National Guard and ordered troops returned to Governor Gavin Newsom’s command. In a 36-page decision, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer wrote that the administration had bypassed legal procedures required under federal law, violating both statutory limits and the Tenth Amendment.
    David McNew/Getty Images
    U.S.
    Jun 13

    Judge blocks Trump’s Guard seizure, but appeals court hits pause

    A federal judge ruled June 12 that the Trump administration illegally seized control of California’s National Guard and ordered troops returned to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s command. In a 36-page decision, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer wrote that the administration had bypassed legal procedures required under federal law, violating both statutory limits and the Tenth Amendment….