In a dramatic legal development, an appeals court has temporarily suspended a federal judge’s order requiring President Donald Trump to relinquish control of the California National Guard. This follows the judge’s ruling that Trump’s actions violated the U.S. Constitution.
The appeals court did not weigh in on the specifics of the case nor the judge’s decision, but the move marked an unexpected turn in the ongoing legal battle in northern California. The case is poised to generate significant attention, particularly as it may influence the dynamics of protests in downtown Los Angeles.
California Governor Gavin Newsom had planned to restore the 4,000 Guard members to their routine duties, which include border protection, wildfire prevention, and returning to civilian roles. However, with the appeals court’s ruling, the troops are expected to remain under Trump’s command as they prepare to confront protesters in Los Angeles streets.
On Saturday, President Trump federalized the California National Guard along with 700 U.S. Marines, despite Newsom’s objections. Traditionally, National Guard units are commanded by state governors, but federal law allows the president to federalize them.
In his rationale for deploying the Guard, President Trump cited efforts to obstruct immigration agents in Los Angeles, describing these actions as a possible insurrection against the federal government. His legal team pointed to incidents involving burning vehicles and protests that blocked the movement of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.
This federal activation of a state’s National Guard, against the governor’s wishes, marks the first occurrence in six decades. The last instance was in 1965 when President Lyndon Johnson deployed troops to Alabama to safeguard civil rights demonstrators.
After a hearing on Thursday, District Judge Charles Breyer ruled against Trump, declaring that the Guard’s federalization infringed upon the Constitution’s separation of powers, particularly under the Tenth Amendment. Breyer stated, “His actions were illegal — both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
The judge’s decision appeared to pose a significant setback for the Trump administration amidst rising tensions over immigration control and increasing public dissent against it.
Breyer rebuffed the president’s claims that the opposition to ICE constituted rebellion, clarifying, “The protests in Los Angeles fall far short of rebellion.” He added that even in scenarios where protests escalated into violence, there lacked evidence that protesters aimed to overthrow the government.
In his remarks prior to the ruling, Breyer emphasized the judicial branch’s role in reviewing presidential actions relating to National Guard deployment. He argued, “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 ruling included a temporary injunction against Trump’s mobilization of the Guard and scheduled a June 20 hearing for the administration to explain why the court should not extend the injunction pending a full hearing on the case.
Following this decision, Governor Newsom expressed optimism during a press conference in San Francisco, interpreting the ruling as a potential turning point in opposition to presidential overreach. He announced plans to reassign the National Guard to their previous duties.
“I hope it’s the beginning of a new day in this country where we push back against overreach, we push back against these authoritarian tendencies of a president,” Newsom remarked, underlining the importance of state autonomy against federal encroachment.
Reacting to the judicial ruling, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly condemned it, asserting that an appeal would be forthcoming. She insisted that Judge Breyer was overstepping his authority as he attempted to override the President’s role as Commander in Chief. Kelly maintained that the President was acting within his lawful rights to mobilize the National Guard to safeguard federal properties and personnel amid unrest in Los Angeles.
Despite the stays imposed by the appeals court, Newsom’s office remained resolute. Earlier in the evening, he expressed confidence in the rule of law and the constitutionality of Breyer’s ruling, asserting, “I expect absolutely it will stand.”
While Breyer’s order did not involve the Marines, Newsom indicated uncertainties about their deployment status, noting they might still be engaged in unrelated training exercises. During the Thursday hearing, Breyer stated he could not comment on military deployments as their exact role remained ambiguous.
As the situation unfolds, all eyes are on the forthcoming hearing, where the Trump administration will attempt to regain control over the National Guard and provide justifications for their federal deployment in Los Angeles.
image source from：https://www.npr.org/2025/06/12/nx-s1-5429752/trump-newsom-california-national-guard-ice-immigration
