Latest news with #§12406

Los Angeles Times

Newsom vs. Trump: What to know about California's lawsuit against the federal government

Even a casual reader of this newsletter knows the Trump administration has deployed nearly 7,000 federal troops to L.A. over the last two weeks. Most also know California officials sued to stop them. (I reported earlier that the line he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed from Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution was first invoked to deploy troops against civilians to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act.) But if your life and your For You Page are anything like mine, you may not have kept up with the details since then. So as your resident legal affairs correspondent, I'm here to tell you what's happening with California's lawsuit against the federal government, and what you should watch for next. California's June 9 suit makes two big legal claims: On June 12, U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer — the bowtie-wearing brother of retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer — agreed with the first set of claims, saying the government hadn't shown evidence of a 'rebellion' in Los Angeles and that civilian efforts to frustrate ICE raids were not disruptive enough to trigger 10 U.S.C. § 12406. He issued an order that would have given control of most troops back to Gov. Gavin Newsom. Trump appealed the order. The 9th Circuit hit pause to review it, leaving the troops in Trump's hands. A week later, the appellate panel tossed out Breyer's order entirely. In the court's Juneteenth ruling, Judge Mark J. Bennett wrote that the Constitution and the U.S. Code gave the president broad authority to interpret the facts as he saw them. But neither court has yet opined on California's second major claim: that by assisting immigration raids, troops under Trump's command violated the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which forbids soldiers from enforcing civilian laws. (That law has an 'ignominious' history. I'll explain more later this week.) On Tuesday, Breyer gave state attorneys the green light to start collecting evidence about troop activities 'on the streets of communities in Southern California', and to depose key officials, including ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Field Office Director Ernesto Santacruz Jr. and Maj. Gen. Niave F. Knell. Meanwhile, DOJ lawyers argued troops aren't enforcing civilian law; and even if they were, that would be allowed under the statute; and even if it wasn't, the Northern District of California has limited authority to say so. (Anyone who listened to Assistant Atty. Gen. Brett Shumate argue before the 9th Circuit last week will instantly recognize this as his signature style.) Trump's June 7 executive order called up troops for 60 days — or at the discretion of the secretary of Defense. Does that mean soldiers could be deployed in Los Angeles indefinitely? That's something California lawyers have sought to clarify through the courts while the PCA claim is heard. In his Tuesday order, Breyer signaled he could weigh in on it. The one thing we can say for sure is, if California wins, the Trump administration will appeal. Today's great photo is from Times photographer Juliana Yamada at the garage of animator-turned-ceramicist Rami Kim, who has been making whimsical character-driven ceramics in Los Angeles for more than a decade. Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editorAndrew Campa, Sunday writerKarim Doumar, head of newsletters How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to essentialcalifornia@ Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on