On June 13, a United States appeals court issued a ruling allowing President Donald Trump to keep National Guard troops deployed in Los Angeles.
This decision comes amidst escalating protests against enhanced immigration enforcement.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily paused a lower court ruling that had blocked the troop mobilization, maintaining control of the National Guard with President Trump for the time being.
Earlier on the same day, San Francisco-based U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer found the deployment to be unlawful, ordering that the National Guard return to the control of California Governor Gavin Newsom, who initiated the case.
Governor Newsom’s victory was short-lived, as Judge Breyer’s order was suspended merely two and a half hours later by the appeals court.
In response to the appeals court’s decision, Newsom’s press office reiterated his confidence in the legality of Breyer’s decision, emphasizing that it was merely paused and not reversed.
“I’m confident, on the basis of the review of the 36 pages – absolutely it will stand,” Newsom stated, reflecting his belief in the strength of the district judge’s ruling.
President Trump welcomed the appeals court ruling on social media the following Friday, highlighting his administration’s stance on the issue.
The three-member panel of the appeals court included two judges appointed by Trump during his first term and one appointed by President Joe Biden.
The panel indicated that it would hold a hearing on Tuesday to discuss the merits of Judge Breyer’s order.
In legal terminology, the action taken by the court is known as an administrative stay, which allows the judges additional time to review the Trump administration’s request to block the lower court’s ruling while the litigation progresses.
President Trump had called in the National Guard on a Saturday in response to protests that followed a series of immigration raids.
Subsequently, he ordered the deployment of U.S. Marines to support the Guard, with a battalion of 700 Marines expected to arrive on the following Friday.
This marks an extraordinary application of military forces in support of civilian police operations within the United States.
The troops have mainly been stationed at a federal detention center in downtown Los Angeles, a focal point for the protests advocating for immigrants being detained.
While the majority of the protests have remained peaceful, there have been some instances of violence, and these events have been largely confined to a few blocks in the city.
In addition to their role in guarding the detention center, the National Guard has accompanied Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents during operations to detain immigrants.
Judge Breyer articulated in his ruling that the troop presence was escalating tensions with protesters, a concern echoed by Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and others.
Mayor Bass asserted that the intensified raids by ICE were being detrimental to the local economy, as immigrants were increasingly avoiding work and school out of fear of detention.
“The peace that we need to have happen needs to begin in Washington, and we need to stop the raids,” Bass shared during a press conference accompanied by supporters who chanted, “Stop the raids.”
The mayor emphasized that genuine peace hinged upon ICE withdrawing from Los Angeles, and she has since implemented a nighttime curfew across a one-square-mile area in downtown.
Her statements were made after Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem claimed her aim was to “liberate” Los Angeles, a press conference that was notably interrupted by federal agents dragging Democratic U.S. Senator Alex Padilla from the venue and handcuffing him.
This altercation highlights the deep political division surrounding President Trump’s hardline immigration enforcement methods and extensive presidential powers.
Trump’s actions align with his campaign promises regarding the deportation of immigrants, employing aggressive tactics that are characteristic of his unconventional political approach.
Opponents, particularly Democrats, argue that the military deployment was unwarranted and represented another instance of Trump’s authoritarian tendencies.
Public opinion on Trump’s decision to mobilize military forces is split; a Reuters/Ipsos poll revealed that 48% of respondents supported the president’s decision to deploy military personnel to restore order during violent protests, while 41% opposed it.
In responses surrounding the court rulings, Governor Newsom stated that the National Guard would revert to its original assignments, which include border security, wildfire preparation, and combating drug trafficking.
However, the Trump administration swiftly appealed Judge Breyer’s order, labeling it as an “extraordinary intrusion” on the President’s constitutional authority as Commander in Chief.
In defense of the troop deployment, Trump referred to the protests in Los Angeles as a “rebellion,” a characterization that Judge Breyer contended did not meet the legal threshold for such a claim.
In his temporary restraining order, Breyer expressed concern that the argument put forth by the defendants implied that protest against the federal government— a fundamental civil liberty protected by the First Amendment—could lead to a classification of rebellion.
On Friday, Trump reiterated his belief that without the National Guard, Los Angeles would have descended into chaos, stating, “We saved L.A.”
image source from：https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2025/0613/los-angeles-military-trump
