A federal judge in the United States has ruled that President Donald Trump\u2019s decision to deploy the military to tamp down protests in California was illegal.<\/p>\n
On Tuesday, Judge Charles Breyer, who serves on the US District Court in Northern California, issued an injunction to block the deployment although the ruling will not take effect until September 12 and no soldiers will be immediately withdrawn.<\/p>\n
Still, Breyer wrote that Trump\u2019s deployment to Southern California was \u201cunprecedented\u201d. He also questioned Trump\u2019s rationale that the protests constituted a \u201crebellion\u201d that needed to be quashed.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere were indeed protests in Los Angeles, and some individuals engaged in violence,\u201d Breyer wrote.<\/p>\n
\u201cYet there was no rebellion, nor was civilian law enforcement unable to respond to the protests and enforce the law.\u201d<\/p>\n
The decision came as the result of a case known as Newsom v Trump, named for California Governor Gavin Newsom, whose administration filed the lawsuit in June.<\/p>\n
A violation of Posse Comitatus Act<\/p>\n
Newsom has emerged as one of Trump\u2019s most prominent critics, and he has been floated as a possible Democratic Party contender in the 2028 presidential election.<\/p>\n
He and California Attorney General Rob Bonta argued that Trump\u2019s decision to send nearly 4,000 National Guard soldiers and 700 US Marines to the Los Angeles area in June violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts the use of the military for civilian law enforcement.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Trump Administration far overreached its authority with its unprecedented and unlawful federalization of the California National Guard and deployment of military troops into our communities,\u201d Bonta wrote<\/a> in June.<\/p>\n In Tuesday\u2019s 52-page decision<\/a>, Breyer largely agreed with that assertion, ruling that Trump had indeed overstepped his presidential authority.<\/p>\n \u201cDefendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act willfully,\u201d Breyer wrote of the Trump administration.<\/p>\n \u201cDefendants knowingly contradicted their own training materials, which listed twelve functions that the Posse Comitatus Act bars the military from performing.\u201d<\/p>\n Breyer also expressed scepticism of the Trump administration\u2019s \u201ctop-down\u201d approach, describing it as a \u201ccomplete sidelining of state and local authorities\u201d.<\/p>\n June\u2019s deployment was the first time since 1965 that a president had federalised National Guard troops to address unrest in a state without a governor\u2019s permission.<\/p>\n The last time that happened, it was under President Lyndon B Johnson, and troops were sent to Selma, Alabama, to shield civil rights protesters from violence.<\/p>\n Protests against deportation push<\/p>\n In the case of California, protests erupted in and around Los Angeles in response to Trump\u2019s strong-armed approach to immigration enforcement, which saw workplace raids happening around the state.<\/p>\n Trump has pledged to carry out the \u201clargest deportation programme\u201d in the history of the US, but critics have expressed concern that his treatment of immigrants violates their rights and places them in harm\u2019s way.<\/p>\n On June 7, as the demonstrations swelled in Los Angeles, Trump issued a memo<\/a> placing the state\u2019s National Guard under his command, ostensibly for the purposes of protecting federal property.<\/p>\n He justified his action by comparing the protests to a rebellion.<\/p>\n \u201cTo the extent that protests or acts of violence directly inhibit the execution of the laws, they constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States,\u201d the memo explained.<\/p>\n But Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass quickly denounced the decision as antidemocratic and said the presence of the troops inflamed the protests rather than abating them.<\/p>\n \u201cThe federal government is now turning the military against American citizens,\u201d Newsom said in a statement<\/a> at the time. \u201cDonald Trump is behaving like a tyrant, not a president. We ask the court to immediately block these unlawful actions.\u201d<\/p>\n The federalisation was slated to last 60 days, but as Breyer pointed out, at least 300 National Guard soldiers remain stationed in Southern California under Trump\u2019s command.<\/p>\n Breyer also pointed out that Trump has threatened to deploy federal troops to other parts of the country, including the Midwestern metropolis of Chicago, Illinois.<\/p>\n He quoted Trump as telling his cabinet in August, \u201cI have the right to do anything I want to do. I\u2019m the president of the United States. If I think our country is in danger, and it is in danger in these cities, I can do it.\u201d<\/p>\n But Breyer said that perspective does not reflect the separation of powers set out in the US Constitution.<\/p>\n While the constitution establishes the president as the commander-in-chief, Breyer explained that title comes into effect only when the military is called into service \u2013 and that it is Congress, not the president, that has the \u201cbulk of the federal authority over the military\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is little support in the Founding Era [of the US] for an inherent constitutional authority for the President to call forth the militia, or to use the military generally, to execute the laws,\u201d Breyer wrote.<\/p>\n The judge also dismissed the Trump administration\u2019s claims that the executive branch should decide the limits of the Posse Comitatus Act, calling that assertion a \u201cconflict of interest\u201d.<\/p>\n Trump eyes Chicago for deployment<\/p>\n The Trump administration has repeatedly accused judges of bias against its immigration agenda.<\/p>\n Breyer\u2019s ruling is limited to the troop deployment in California, and it places a stay on the injunction against the troop deployment there until noon local time (19:00 GMT) on September 12.<\/p>\n That pause allows for an expected appeal from the Trump administration. Otherwise, the injunction would prevent the soldiers from participating in arrests, searches, crowd control and other forms of law enforcement normally barred under the Posse Comitatus Act.<\/p>\n While Tuesday\u2019s ruling is a setback for Trump\u2019s far-reaching claims to presidential authority, the president still has continued to threaten a similar military deployment to Chicago.<\/p>\n \u201cChicago is the worst and most dangerous city in the World, by far,\u201d he wrote<\/a> on social media on Tuesday morning. \u201c\u2026 I will solve the crime problem fast, just like I did in DC. Chicago will be safe again, and soon. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!\u201d<\/p>\n In August, Trump deployed the National Guard to the streets of Washington, DC, on the basis that the US capital was suffering from a \u201ccrime emergency<\/a>\u201c.<\/p>\n Federal law, however, largely allows such a deployment to Washington, DC, because the US government holds greater powers over the capital district.<\/p>\n But critics pointed out that a deployment to Chicago would likely raise many of the same constitutional concerns that the mobilisation in Southern California did.<\/p>\n So far, Trump\u2019s military deployments to address crime have only targeted Democrat-led cities.<\/p>\n Newsom, who has repeatedly trolled Trump, a Republican, on social media in recent weeks, applauded Tuesday\u2019s decision as a rebuke against the president\u2019s overreach.<\/p>\n