Appeals court blocks Newsom's bid to reclaim control of National Guard from Trump
A federal appeals court has indefinitely blocked an effort by California Gov. Gavin Newsom to reclaim control of the National Guard troops President Donald Trump deployed to Los Angeles following unrest related to immigration enforcement.
The three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously that Trump appeared to have acted within his authority when he took control of 4,000 California National Guard troops under a law that has never been invoked without the consent of a state governor.
Despite a debate over the level of violence accompanying the protests, the judges — two appointed by Trump and one by President Joe Biden — concluded that the law gives Trump enormous latitude to determine that the protests and related violence were interfering with execution of federal law. The judges said there are limits to the president's ability to call up the Guard, but there was enough evidence of civil unrest and danger to federal officials to justify Trump's actions.
The ruling indefinitely sets aside a decision by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who last week issued a temporary restraining order against Trump's deployment of the Guard. Breyer is scheduled to hold another hearing in the case on Friday to consider Newsom's request for a longer-term block of both the Guard deployment and Trump's subsequent deployment of 700 Marines.
The three judges on the panel were Trump appointees Mark Bennett and Eric Miller and Biden appointee Jennifer Sung. All three appeared skeptical of Newsom's position during oral arguments on Tuesday. Their Thursday night order was issued on a 'per curiam' basis, which means no judge was identified as the author of the opinion.
Newsom, a Democrat, could ask a larger, 11-judge panel of the appeals court to take up the issue or seek emergency relief from the Supreme Court.
Despite ultimately ruling for Trump, all three judges flatly rejected his administration's claim that the courts had no role in reviewing his call-up of the military to Los Angeles.
Had Trump's call-up been 'obviously absurd or made in bad faith,' they said, courts would clearly have a role in assessing it. However, the appeals court said a line of legal precedents dating to the early 19th century indicated that the court's review of Trump's decision should be 'especially deferential' and that the president's orders should be upheld if they reflect 'a colorable assessment of the facts and law within a 'range of honest judgment.''
Newsom and his attorneys argued that Trump's involvement of the National Guard was likely to fuel more anger from protesters and inflame an already tense situation on the streets of L.A.
But the appeals judges said those concerns were too remote to entitle the state to an order reversing Trump's action.
'California's concerns about escalation and interference with local law enforcement, at present, are too speculative. We do not know whether future protests will grow due to the deployment of the National Guard,' the court wrote. 'And we do not know what emergencies may occur in California while the National Guard is deployed.'
There are signs that the protests and altercations with authorities have actually diminished in the days since the deployment. After imposing a curfew in downtown L.A last week, Mayor Karen Bass eased the curfew Monday and lifted it on Tuesday.
The 9th Circuit judges also concluded that a technical aspect of the law — a requirement that Trump issue his order to call up the Guard 'through' Newsom — was not violated, even though the order was delivered to Newsom's subordinate. Even if it were a violation, they added, it wouldn't justify Breyer's ruling to rescind the order altogether.
The appeals court panel had put a temporary hold on Breyer's ruling shortly after he issued it — an administrative measure to give the panel time to hear arguments. The decision Thursday grants the Trump administration's request to keep the hold in place as litigation proceeds. While it's not a final ruling on the legality of Trump's deployment order, by the time those issues are resolved by another panel of the appeals court, the Guard deployment could be over and the dispute could be moot.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
35 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
With Zohran Mamdani's win in New York, voters spoke. Is the Democratic establishment listening?
Advertisement Even Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, who pushed for Cuomo's resignation in 2021 after a state investigation concluded that he Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up A majority of voters rejected Cuomo in a primary with a larger than usual turnout on a day that was Advertisement Mamdani's victory — and, to be clear, he still needs to win the November election to become New York's next mayor — shows that Democratic voters are tired of the same old faces in the same old places. They want to vote for, and not just against, someone, and that's what Mamdani represents across a spectrum of voters and communities. His win recalls 2018, when Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, also a democratic socialist, defeated Joe Crowley, a 10-term New York incumbent, to become, at 29, the youngest woman ever elected to Congress. Later that year, Ayanna Pressley, the first Black woman elected to the Boston City Council, was also elected to Congress, besting Michael Capuano, who had represented the Massachusetts 7th Congressional District since 1999. Pressley, who trailed Capuano in the polls right up to the election but That could be what voters want from Mamdani — a different kind of leader who is relatable, engaging, and dynamic. He spoke with people, not to them. And he presented economic policies like rent freezes and free buses that ordinary New Yorkers — not billionaires — could embrace and understand. Meanwhile, Cuomo borrowed the GOP's politics of fear and tried to scare everyone to death. He Advertisement The former governor's dismissive tone had the tinny echo of Maybe voters didn't want a political nepo baby running on familiarity and name recognition. Maybe they rejected a man who left his previous job in disgrace over credible sexual harassment accusations. Or perhaps people needed the light and hope Mamdani offers in these difficult times instead of Cuomo's doom and darkness. In a CNN interview, Democrat Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut said, 'I know that this feels like a shock to a lot of folks but it doesn't seem like rocket science. [Mamdani is] focused on reordering economic power, he's dynamic, and he's a new voice. Check, check, check.' Democrats don't need a wildly popular podcaster, someone who could be their liberal Joe Rogan, to win again. They need candidates who generate passion and stand fast for the values of equity and justice that the Democratic establishment espouses but abandons when elections don't go their way. Related : Mamdani's road to Gracie Mansion — the New York mayor's residence — won't be easy. Cuomo appears likely to run an independent campaign, which is what Eric Adams, the problematic President Trump-appeasing incumbent, already has done. Mamdani will continue to face baseless accusations of antisemitism as well as hostility from bellicose billionaires like Advertisement So far, there's been more noise from Mamdani's detractors than from the leaders of the party he belongs to. They should recognize and replicate how he has connected, especially with young voters. In his Renée Graham is a Globe columnist. She can be reached at
Newsweek
44 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump Urges Israel-Gaza Ceasefire: 'Make the Deal'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump has pressed for Israel and Hamas to clinch a ceasefire and secure the release of the remaining captives held in Gaza. Trump fired off an all-caps demand fire in a Truth Social post at 1:19 a.m. ET Sunday: "MAKE THE DEAL IN GAZA. GET THE HOSTAGES BACK!!! DJT" It follows comments the president made on Friday in the Oval Office, when he told reporters that he believed a ceasefire could come "within the next week." "I think it's close. I just spoke with some of the people involved. It's a terrible situation," Trump said. This is a breaking news situation and will be updated
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Trump threatens to support a primary challenger against GOP senator for opposing 'big, beautiful bill'
President Donald Trump on Saturday said he is looking for a GOP candidate to mount a primary challenge against Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., after the lawmaker announced he would not support the president's "big, beautiful bill." "Numerous people have come forward wanting to run in the Primary against 'Senator Thom' Tillis," Trump wrote on Truth Social. "I will be meeting with them over the coming weeks, looking for someone who will properly represent the Great People of North Carolina and, so importantly, the United States of America," he continued. "Thank you for your attention to this matter!" Tillis, who is up for re-election in 2026, came out against Trump's spending bill earlier on Saturday over concerns about deep cuts to Medicaid. The senator vowed not to support the measure through a procedural hurdle needed to kick off a marathon of debate and amendment voting that would eventually lead to a vote on the measure's final passage. As he was leaving the Senate GOP's closed-door lunch on Saturday, the North Carolina lawmaker said he has a "great relationship" with his colleagues, but that he could not support the colossal bill. "We just have a disagreement," he said. "And, you know, my colleagues have done the analysis, and they're comfortable with the impact on their states. I respect their choice. It's not a good impact in my state, so I'm not going to vote on the motion to proceed." The Senate cleared the hurdle late Saturday to start debate on the bill by a 51-49 vote. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., was another Republican who joined Tillis in voting no. "Did Rand Paul Vote 'NO' again tonight? What's wrong with this guy???" Trump wrote on Truth Social. Senate Republicans hold a slim 53-47 majority and can only afford to lose three votes. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said earlier that she would help advance the bill through the first step, but was leaning against voting to pass the bill's final passage unless the legislation was "further changed." Collins and other initial GOP holdouts, Sens. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Ron Johnson, R-Wis., voted to at least advance the legislation through the first key procedural hurdle. The latest version of the bill pushed back the provider rate crackdown by one year and also added another $25 billion for a rural hospital stabilization fund over the next five years. During a closed-door lunch earlier this week, Tillis reportedly warned that North Carolina could lose as much as $40 billion in Medicaid funding if the changes were codified. He is also planning to unveil further analysis on the impact of Medicaid cuts on his state that he said no one in the "administration or in this building" has been able to refute. "The president and I have talked, and I just told him that, 'Look, if this works for the country, that's great. And if my other colleagues have done extensive research and concluded it's different in their states, I respect that,'" he said. "We just have a disagreement based on the implementation in our respective states."
