Trump Loses Control: Federal Judge Rules National Guard Deployment in California Illegal
Los Angeles' National Guard Deemed Unlawful by Court.
In a surprising turn of events, a judge in San Francisco has declared the deployment of National Guard troops in California under President Trump's command as illegal. According to the ruling, Trump had violated his authority and must relinquish control to the California government. This decision will take effect on Friday afternoon.
The US government has announced its intention to appeal the decision. Governor Gavin Newsom, who had been vocal about his opposition to the deployment, welcomed the ruling. In a tweet, he expressed that "the court has confirmed what we all know: The military shouldn't be patrolling our city streets."
Traditionally, each state governs their National Guard, with the federal government taking command only during times of war or national emergencies. President Trump, however, had attempted to seize control of the California National Guard, citing the need for response to protests in Los Angeles, an action deemed unconstitutional by federal law and the court.
Judge Charles Breyer, who passed this temporary restraining order, explained that the protests against the US government's migration policy were not a rebellion, making Trump's actions unnecessary and unconstitutional. This dispute between the federal government and a state highlights the delicate balance between federal authority and state rights.
The deployment of National Guard troops and Marines infantry had been in response to protests against Trump's hardline immigration stance and ICE immigration raids. Approximately 4,000 National Guard soldiers and 700 Marines had been mobilized, with troops arriving in stages and expected to stay until the threat subsides.
Sources:- ntv.de- ino/dpa
Further Insights:- The legal authority of a US President to deploy the National Guard within a state is strictly defined by federal law and the Constitution. This includes the requirement for the President to obtain the governor's consent and adhere to constitutional and statutory limitations to preserve state sovereignty and rights.- The case underscores the importance of balancing federal authority with state rights. Governors serve as commanders-in-chief of their state's National Guard, and their consent is crucial for federalization. Violating these principles can lead to legal challenges and potential court intervention, as seen in this case.
Tags:- Politics- Law- USA- California- Donald Trump- Immigration- Protests
The Commission, being consulted on the draft directive relating to the deployment of National Guard troops in California, would likely be interested in the ruling declaring such deployment as illegal, given the challenge to the legality and constitutionality of federal intervention in state affairs.
This dispute, highlighting the delicate balance between federal authority and state rights, is significant political-general news, shedding light on the importance of preserving state sovereignty and the applicable federal laws and Constitutional principles during such controversies.
