Court backs Trump’s deployment of National Guard to LA, for now

US President Donald Trump can continue deploying National Guard troops in response to protests in Los Angeles, a federal appeals court ruled on June 19, handing a temporary win to the White House amid an ongoing legal fight over presidential authority.

A three-judge panel of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals said the administration may keep using California National Guard forces while the broader legal challenge moves forward. The ruling leaves the current deployment unchanged, with federal troops on the ground in Los Angeles for more than a week, Caliber.Az reports via Bloomberg.

The June 19 decision is not the final word on the case and is expected to face an immediate challenge. California could appeal either to the US Supreme Court or to a larger panel of the 9th Circuit. Meanwhile, the lower court that had initially ordered the federal government to return control of the troops to California is scheduled to hold another hearing on June 20.

The legal clash between the Trump administration and California centers on the federal government’s response to ongoing protests, which have been fueled by opposition to Trump’s immigration policies. Thousands of California National Guard troops, along with hundreds of US Marines, have been deployed under the president’s order.

Governor Gavin Newsom and state officials have sharply criticised the federal deployment, calling it a “power grab” and arguing that it undermines the authority of local officials to manage the protests. Lawyers for California also warned that allowing the president’s actions to go unchecked would set a dangerous precedent.

Lawyers for the state also have said it’s “terrifying” that Justice Department lawyers said the presidents actions can’t be second-guessed by the courts, and argue that the deployment sets a dangerous precedent.

The Trump administration has argued that the president acted within his authority under federal law, which permits him to federalise National Guard troops in cases of “rebellion” or “invasion” when necessary to enforce federal law.

In June 20’s unanimous ruling, the appeals court said Trump likely acted lawfully in invoking this authority, but took issue with the Justice Department’s claim that the president’s decision is beyond judicial review.

“We conclude that it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority,” the panel wrote, adding that the court’s ruling is limited to the legality of the deployment itself and does not address “the nature of the activities in which the federalized National Guard may engage.”

The three-judge panel—made up of two Trump appointees and one Biden appointee—heard arguments earlier this week from both the Justice Department and California state lawyers. Last week, the court had temporarily blocked a U.S. District Court order from Judge Charles Breyer, who ruled that Trump’s deployment of the National Guard without California’s consent was “illegal.”

Trump authorised the deployment in a proclamation issued on June 7, describing the protests against his immigration policies as a form of “rebellion” against federal authority. In court filings, administration lawyers cited reports of violence and threats against federal property and immigration officers.

Breyer said in his June 12 ruling he was troubled by the idea that a protest against the federal government on its own could “justify a finding of rebellion.”

By Sabina Mammadli