{"id":137087,"date":"2025-08-11T13:57:09","date_gmt":"2025-08-11T13:57:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/137087\/"},"modified":"2025-08-11T13:57:09","modified_gmt":"2025-08-11T13:57:09","slug":"5-things-to-know-as-newsom-and-trump-go-back-to-court-over-the-national-guard-in-la-long-beach-post-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/137087\/","title":{"rendered":"5 things to know as Newsom and Trump go back to court over the National Guard in LA \u2022 Long Beach Post News"},"content":{"rendered":"

This story was originally published by\u00a0CalMatters<\/a>.\u00a0Sign up<\/a>\u00a0for their newsletters.<\/p>\n

Did the U.S. military illegally engage in civilian law enforcement when they were deployed to Los Angeles in June under the orders of President\u00a0Donald Trump<\/a>\u00a0and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth?<\/p>\n

California Gov.\u00a0Gavin Newsom<\/a>\u00a0and Attorney General Rob Bonta say yes. Trump\u2019s Department of Justice says no. The three-day trial to answer this question is scheduled to\u00a0commence today at 10 a.m<\/a>. in a California federal district court, with implications for the country as Trump continues to signal a desire to deploy troops to patrol domestic city streets.<\/p>\n

The president has appointed himself chair of a task force on the 2028 Olympic Games in Los Angeles,\u00a0telling reporters<\/a>\u00a0that \u201cwe\u2019ll do anything necessary to keep the Olympics safe, including using our National Guard or military, OK?\u201d<\/p>\n

Relatedly, the Department of Defense issued a\u00a0new activation order<\/a>\u00a0to deploy troops in California for another 90 days on Aug. 5, California lawyers told the court in a filing. That came two weeks after the Marines\u00a0deployed to Los Angeles left<\/a>\u00a0and a week after the Trump administration\u00a0demobilized most of the National Guard<\/a>.<\/p>\n

California\u2019s lawyers assert evidence in their briefs, often redacted\u00a0because of a court order<\/a>, that the military took part in law enforcement in violation of 19th Century law called the Posse Comitatus Act. They want a judge to order the Trump administration to permanently halt those actions<\/a>. The Trump Department of Justice counters that those engagements don\u2019t count as law enforcement, but rather fall under the category of supporting immigration law enforcement agents or protecting federal buildings.<\/p>\n

Trump has not invoked the\u00a0Insurrection Act<\/a>, a law that would allow the military to engage in\u00a0law enforcement activity<\/a>.<\/p>\n

How did we get here?<\/strong><\/p>\n

This trial is an extension of the\u00a0June lawsuit<\/a>\u00a0that Newsom filed against Trump after the president took over California\u2019s National Guard. Trump did that in response to protests that broke out in the Los Angeles area after immigration law enforcement agents began workforce raids\u00a0to apprehend individuals<\/a>\u00a0allegedly in the U.S. without proper authorization.<\/p>\n

Ultimately, about 4,000 troops from the California National Guard and 700 U.S. Marines were deployed to Los Angeles.<\/p>\n

That month marked a new nadir in the relations between Newsom and Trump. The governor likened the president to\u00a0failed dictators.<\/a>\u00a0Trump\u00a0endorsed the idea of arresting Newsom<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Charles Breyer, the judge in Monday\u2019s case and oversaw the June hearings, initially sided with Newsom, ordering that Trump return the National Guard to the governor. A three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals\u00a0blocked that move<\/a>. They found that the Trump administration legitimately called up troops to protect federal buildings and federal employees\u00a0from some protesters<\/a>\u00a0who tossed chunks of concrete and used trash dumpsters as battering rams.\u00a0California lawyers said the troops\u2019 presence inflamed the protests.<\/p>\n

The June protests lasted about a week and were largely isolated to a handful of city blocks in the downtown area; Los Angeles is roughly 500 square miles.<\/p>\n

Breyer then allowed California\u2019s lawyers\u00a0to depose Trump officials<\/a>\u00a0and gather documents to argue California\u2019s case that the Trump administration was violating the law barring the military from acting as a police force. Trump\u2019s Department of Justice lawyers\u00a0tried to cancel the trial but failed<\/a>.<\/p>\n

What is California\u2019s latest allegation?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

That Los Angeles residents were \u201csubjected to a form of military occupation<\/a>\u201d as federal troops worked alongside federal immigration agents, \u201coften indistinguishable from each other.\u201d<\/p>\n

The lawyers\u00a0say that<\/a>\u00a0\u201cnever before, in the history of the Nation, has the federal government utilized the military for domestic law enforcement in this manner.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Trump administration\u2019s \u201cinsistence that perimeters, blockades, and other security functions are permissible makes clear they will continue to engage in these activities,\u201d California lawyers with the state attorney general\u2019s office\u00a0wrote to Breyer<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The lawyers argued that if military forces can accompany U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in their raids and arrests, as had been unfolding in Los Angeles, \u201cthere would be no logical basis to preclude members of the Armed Forces from accompanying other law enforcement agents when performing their duties,\u201d\u00a0the California lawyers wrote<\/a>. Military personnel could accompany federal food safety inspectors, medical fraud investigators or accompany federal voting rights officials to \u201cmonitor\u201d election polling places, they wrote.<\/p>\n

What are California\u2019s examples of the military acting as police?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Attorneys representing the state pointed to several instances in which they allege troops went too far and violated the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, which limits the use of the military in civilian settings:<\/p>\n