Trump's Deployment Defeated: Court Declares National Guard Deployment in Los Angeles Unlawful
Los Angeles' National Guard Presence Ruled Illegitimate by the Court.
In a groundbreaking decision, Judge Charles Breyer of the district court in San Francisco has declared that President Donald Trump's deployment of the National Guard in California is unlawful. This ruling comes in response to an emergency application from the US West Coast state.
Trump had overstepped his boundaries by taking control of the National Guard, where state governments typically hold the reins. The federal government has already signaled its intention to appeal this judgment.
California Governor Gavin Newsom had criticized the deployment of thousands of National Guard soldiers and the planned use of Marine infantry, ordered by Trump, in Los Angeles due to protests against the government's immigration policy. In his words, "The military belongs on the battlefield, not on our city streets."
Normally, a federal state controls the National Guard. However, during war or national emergencies, the US president can take command. The National Guard is a military reserve unit and part of the US armed forces, available for deployment in cases of natural disasters, riots, or internal emergencies.
In this case, the judge considered the deployment against the governor's resistance to be an unusual display of government power. Since 1965, no US president had taken over the National Guard of a state against its declared will [1].
The protests against the US government's immigration policy and ICE immigration raids led to the deployment of 4,000 National Guard soldiers and 700 regular infantry in Los Angeles. The troops are arriving gradually and are expected to stay until the danger subsides, with deployment scheduled for a maximum of 60 days so far.
[1] The judge's decision was based on specific legal grounds related to the scope of federal executive power under U.S. law. The court found that the president lacked statutory and constitutional authority under the cited law to deploy the National Guard, as the conditions required by the law (a genuine rebellion or lawful need to execute federal laws) were absent. The judge emphasized that the unrest did not constitute an organized uprising against the government due to the absence of a "violent, armed, organized, open and avowed uprising against the government as a whole" [1].
Sources: ntv.de, ino/dpa
- California
- Justice
- USA
- Donald Trump
- Military
- Immigration
In light of the Judge's decision, the politics surrounding the deployment of National Guard soldiers in California has gained significant attention in the general-news. This ruling, made by Judge Charles Breyer, suggests a shift in the balance of power between the federal and state governments, particularly as it pertains to the National Guard, a topic of ongoing debate.
