{"id":438665,"date":"2025-12-10T21:53:11","date_gmt":"2025-12-10T21:53:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/438665\/"},"modified":"2025-12-10T21:53:11","modified_gmt":"2025-12-10T21:53:11","slug":"judge-orders-trump-to-end-national-guard-deployment-calls-la-mission-profoundly-un-american-long-beach-post-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/438665\/","title":{"rendered":"Judge orders Trump to end National Guard deployment, calls LA mission \u2018profoundly un-American\u2019 \u2022 Long Beach Post News"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

A federal judge has ordered the National Guard to leave Los Angeles and return to Gov. Gavin Newsom\u2019s control in a stern rebuke of the\u00a0Trump administration<\/a>\u2019s contention that it can leave troops in the city indefinitely.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The order handed down today<\/a>\u00a0goes into effect at noon on Monday.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is profoundly un-American to suggest that people peacefully exercising their fundamental right to protest constitute a risk justifying the federalization of military forces,\u201d U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer wrote in the opinion.<\/p>\n

The Los Angeles case is one of several challenging Trump\u2019s deployment of the National Guard in liberal cities, including Chicago and Portland. The\u00a0U.S. Supreme Court is weighing a case<\/a>\u00a0on Trump\u2019s call-up of troops to Chicago, which could further determine whether the domestic mobilizations are constitutional.<\/p>\n

Breyer in June issued a separate decision against Trump\u2019s Los Angeles deployment, but the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals\u00a0blocked the ruling from taking effect<\/a>\u00a0and allowed the troops to stay.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cToday\u2019s ruling is abundantly clear \u2013 the federalization of the National Guard in California is illegal and must end,\u201d Newsom said in a written statement. \u201cThe president deployed these brave men and women against their own communities, removing them from essential public safety operations. We look forward to all National Guard servicemembers being returned to state service.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Trump administration used\u00a0Section 12406 of the U.S. Code<\/a>\u00a0to justify sending National Guard troops to Los Angeles in early June, when aggressive immigration enforcement operations led to protests. The administration issued similar orders in August and again in October, each time citing the clause that permits Trump to federalize National Guard troops if \u201cthe President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

In each case, the Trump administration argued that the conditions in Los Angeles in early June justified sending in the National Guard. Trump mobilized 4,000 of the state\u2019s National Guard troops in response to two days of occasionally volatile protests against federal immigration raids in Southern California. Almost all of them have returned home.<\/p>\n

Before Trump\u2019s federalization of those troops, at no time in U.S. history\u00a0was the law invoked<\/a>\u00a0without the consent of the state governor. Use of the law is exceedingly rare: It was used just once before June by President Richard Nixon to mobilize troops during a postal worker strike in 1970.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt defies the record \u2014 and common sense \u2014 to conclude that risks stemming from protests \u2014 in August, October, or even present day \u2014 could not have been sufficiently managed without resorting to the National Guard,\u201d wrote Breyer, the brother of retired Supreme Court justice Stephen Breyer.<\/p>\n

There are three conditions that presidents can use to invoke Section 12406: If the country is invaded or in danger of invasion; if there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the U.S. government; or if the president cannot enforce the nation\u2019s laws with regular forces.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Trump administration focused on the last one, arguing that previous court rulings found that the president need only be \u201csignificantly impeded\u201d from executing the country\u2019s laws, rather than being completely \u201cunable\u201d to execute them, to comply with Section 12406, and argued that the existing risk of further protests justified the continued presence of the National Guard.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Breyer rejected that argument, saying that the mere threat of protests or uprisings compromising the president\u2019s ability to execute the country\u2019s laws is not enough to justify federalization of the National Guard.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cIf federalization justified federalization, it would become a positive feedback loop that perpetually rationalized federal control of state troops,\u201d Breyer wrote.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Trump administration, in its briefings, argued both that the federal mission had succeeded and conditions in Los Angeles had improved, but said the situation still required the presence of National Guard troops.<\/p>\n

\u201cTheir assertion that \u2018[t]here remains an inability to execute the laws . . . in California\u2019 is not only unsupported, but actually borders on a misrepresentation,\u201d Breyer wrote.<\/p>\n

Breyer also warned that the Trump administration\u2019s justification for federalizing National Guard troops, if allowed to proceed, would set a dangerous precedent.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Trump administration \u201cconfirmed their position that, after an initial federalization, all extensions of federalization orders are utterly unreviewable, forever,\u201d Breyer wrote.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cThat is shocking. Adopting Defendants\u2019 interpretation of Section 12406 would permit a president to create a perpetual police force comprised of state troops, so long as they were first federalized lawfully.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"This story was originally published by\u00a0CalMatters.\u00a0Sign up\u00a0for their newsletters. A federal judge has ordered the National Guard to…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":438666,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5123],"tags":[1582,276,2961,224,5337],"class_list":{"0":"post-438665","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-los-angeles","8":"tag-ca","9":"tag-california","10":"tag-la","11":"tag-los-angeles","12":"tag-losangeles"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115697497273694834","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/438665","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=438665"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/438665\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/438666"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=438665"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=438665"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=438665"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}