In a significant legal development, attorneys general from 21 states, including Kansas, Colorado, and Arizona, have rallied behind California Governor Gavin Newsom’s lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s decision to mobilize the National Guard in response to protests.
The amicus brief filed by these states asserts that Trump’s actions undermine the rule of law and threaten the constitutional rights of Americans.
The brief expresses clear opposition to the president’s deployment of troops, stating: “By calling forth troops when there is no invasion to repel, no rebellion to suppress, and when state and local law enforcement is fully able to execute the laws, the President flouts the vision of our Founders and sets a chilling precedent.”
A spokesperson for the White House referred inquiries to a post made by President Trump on Truth Social, in which he claimed that a recent Appeals Court ruling allowed him to deploy the National Guard to ensure the safety of Los Angeles amidst ongoing protests.
Trump stated, “If I didn’t send the Military into Los Angeles, that city would be burning to the ground right now. We saved L.A. Thank you for the Decision!!!”
The context for this legal dispute lies in President Trump’s mobilization of the National Guard in Los Angeles amid protests erupted against immigration raids, a move that Governor Newsom asserts has aggravated an already sensitive situation.
The legal documents filed by the amicus states characterize the National Guard’s presence as contradictory to the fundamental rights of Americans to assemble and protest.
Furthermore, the brief highlights that deploying military personnel in this manner is not only a deviation from democratic principles but also a violation of protections guaranteed by both state and federal constitutions.
The underlying lawsuit, initiated by Governor Newsom, challenges the president’s authority to deploy state National Guard troops without his explicit authorization.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta emphasized the seriousness of the situation, stating: “The President is looking for any pretense to place military forces on American streets to intimidate and quiet those who disagree with him. It’s not just immoral — It’s illegal and dangerous. Local law enforcement, not the military, enforce the law within our borders.”
In invoking Title 10, President Trump is claiming authority that allows a president to mobilize the National Guard in situations of “a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government.”
A federal judge previously ruled that the deployment of the National Guard was not justified, noting that the majority of protests in Los Angeles were peaceful and did not amount to rebellion.
This ruling has since been temporarily stayed by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is scheduled to hear arguments on June 17.
The amicus brief maintains that local law enforcement has the capacity to manage protests effectively and that the presence of troops can exacerbate tensions, placing public safety at risk.
The brief also conveys the concern of the Amici States regarding the legal governance of National Guard deployments, insisting they should not be dictated by the whims of President Trump or his administration.
This legal action draws on historical precedents, mentioning the American Revolution, where British forces responded to protests with violence, leading to an uprising among the colonists.
Alongside the attorneys general’s brief, additional support for Newsom has come from veterans who expressed concerns about the potential consequences of troop deployment under such circumstances, as articulated in their own amicus brief.
The veterans argued that this type of military engagement poses risks both to the National Guard’s core mission and to the safety of the troops involved.
President Trump’s executive order justifying the deployment states: “To the extent that protests or acts of violence directly inhibit the execution of the laws, they constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.”
In a response filled with urgency, Governor Newsom condemned Trump’s actions as a deliberate attempt to instill fear, calling it a manufactured crisis aimed at leveraging military power over states.
He characterized the president’s actions as an assault on constitutional rights and a dangerous step toward authoritarianism.
In his remarks, Newsom asserted, “Donald Trump is creating fear and terror by failing to adhere to the U.S. Constitution and overstepping his authority. Every governor, red or blue, should reject this outrageous overreach. This is beyond incompetence — this is him intentionally causing chaos.”
As the legal battle continues, the National Guard remains in Los Angeles, anticipated to stay in place ahead of national protests scheduled for June 14.
While incidents of looting and violence have been reported, it is important to note that the overwhelming majority of protests in Los Angeles have remained peaceful as the situation evolves.
image source from：https://www.newsweek.com/map-21-states-protesting-trump-use-california-national-guards-2085107
