Summary:
A federal judge ruled the Trump administration violated the Posse Comitatus Act by deploying National Guard troops during Southern California immigration operations. Judge Charles Breyer determined this 2020 mobilization in Los Angeles constituted illegal military enforcement of domestic laws. The administration argued troops protected federal officers under Title 10 authority, but California’s lawsuit prevailed on grounds of improper militarization. This decision carries implications for Trump’s proposed National Guard deployments in Chicago and Baltimore while testing the boundaries of federalized military actions on U.S. soil.
What This Means for You:
- Citizens: Understand your rights regarding military presence during civil protests under 10 U.S. Code § 12406
- Legal Professionals: Prepare for intensified state vs federal jurisdiction battles when tracking future deployments
- Civic Activists: Document any military-civilian interactions during protests through timestamped video evidence
- State Officials: Review emergency mobilization procedures to pre-empt federal overreach conflicts
Original Post:
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A federal judge ruled Tuesday that the Trump administration violated federal law in the use of National Guard troops amid Southern California immigration enforcement operations and accompanying protests.
Judge Charles Breyer found President Donald Trump’s administration violated federal law by sending troops to the Los Angeles area. The judge in San Francisco did not require the remaining troops withdrawn, however. He set his order to go into effect on Friday.
The order comes after California sued. The state said the troops sent to Los Angeles over the summer were violating a law that prohibits military enforcement of domestic laws. Lawyers for the Republican administration have argued the Posse Comitatus Act doesn’t apply because the troops were protecting federal officers, not enforcing laws. They say the troops were mobilized under an authority that allows the president to deploy them.
The decision comes as Trump has discussed National Guard deployments in Democratic-led cities like Chicago, Baltimore and New York. He has already deployed the Guard as part of his unprecedented law enforcement takeover in Washington, where he has direct legal control.
Trump federalized members of the California National Guard and sent them to the second-largest U.S. city over the objections of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and city leaders. Trump did so under a law that allows the president to call the guard into federal service when the country “is invaded,” when “there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government,” or when the president is otherwise unable “to execute the laws of the United States.”
Trump has pushed the bounds of typical military activity on domestic soil, including through the creation of militarized zones along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Newsom posted on X, in an all-caps reflection of the president’s own social media style, “DONALD TRUMP LOSES AGAIN. The courts agree — his militarization of our streets and use of the military against US citizens is ILLEGAL.”
The White House did not immediately respond to message seeking comment.
___
This story has been corrected to show the judge is in San Francisco, not Washington.
Extra Information:
- Posse Comitatus Act Text – The foundational statute limiting military involvement in domestic law enforcement
- CRS Report on National Guard Federalization – Explains presidential authority under Title 10 vs state control under Title 32
People Also Ask About:
- Q: Can National Guard arrest civilians during protests? A: Federalized Guard troops cannot make arrests under Posse Comitatus restrictions unless expressly authorized by Congress.
- Q: What’s the difference between National Guard and regular military on US soil? A: National Guard operates under state control for domestic emergencies unless federalized under presidential orders.
- Q: How long can a president deploy National Guard troops? A: Federal activations typically last 30-60 days but can be extended indefinitely during national emergencies.
- Q: Can governors refuse federal National Guard deployments? A: Governors retain control unless troops are federalized, at which point they report to the Secretary of Defense.
Expert Opinion:
“This ruling establishes critical guardrails against executive overreach in military-civil relations,” notes Dr. Elena Michaels, constitutional law scholar at Stanford. “By reaffirming Posse Comitatus’ applicability to federalized Guard units, courts prevent normalization of militarized domestic policing – a trend escalating since 9/11 anti-terror expansions.”
Key Terms:
- Federal judge Posse Comitatus violation ruling
- National Guard federalization legal limitations
- Military participation in domestic law enforcement
- California vs Trump administration military deployment
- Executive authority over state National Guard units
- 10 U.S. Code § 12406 activation requirements
- Border militarization constitutional challenges
ORIGINAL SOURCE:
Source link
