Federal Judge Weighs National Guard’s Lawful Deployment in LA

State Challenges Trump Administration’s Use of Troops Amid Immigration Protests

A federal judge in San Francisco is examining whether the Trump administration overstepped federal law by deploying National Guard soldiers and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles following immigration protests. The core issue centers on the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits the military’s use as domestic law enforcement.

State Demands Troop Return, Ban on Civilian Law Enforcement

California is urging Judge **Charles Breyer** to order the federal government to relinquish control of any remaining troops and cease using military personnel for civilian law enforcement functions within the state. Governor **Gavin Newsom** and city leaders had previously objected to the deployment.

The legal battle stems from actions taken after protests erupted on June 7, following Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests at multiple locations. The administration federalized California National Guard members and dispatched them to Los Angeles, a move that sparked significant contention.

Posse Comitatus Act at the Center of Legal Debate

The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act is central to the case, potentially setting a precedent for future presidential authority in deploying the Guard domestically. The Trump administration’s actions involved approximately 4,000 California National Guard troops and 700 Marines.

While most troops have since departed, around 250 National Guard members remain stationed at the Joint Forces Training Base in Los Alamitos, according to Pentagon figures. Governor **Newsom** has been vocal in his opposition to the continued federal control.

Judge Previously Found Tenth Amendment Violation

Judge **Breyer** had previously granted an early victory to California, ruling that the Trump administration had violated the Tenth Amendment by exceeding its authority. However, the administration appealed this decision, obtaining a temporary halt on the ruling.

The appeals court’s decision allowed federal control of the California National Guard to persist as the lawsuit progresses. This legal maneuver means the state must continue to contest the federal government’s actions in court.

Troop Roles During Deployment

During their deployment, National Guard soldiers reportedly accompanied federal immigration officers during raids in Los Angeles and at marijuana cultivation sites in Ventura County. Marines primarily maintained a guard presence around a federal building in downtown Los Angeles, which houses a detention center that was a focal point of the protests.

Administration Cites Need for Protection Amid Protests

The Department of Defense asserted that troops were necessary to safeguard federal property and personnel in Los Angeles. This city has been a significant site for the federal government’s intensified immigration enforcement strategies. Since June, federal agents have conducted sweeps, detaining immigrants without legal status from various public locations, with some U.S. citizens also reportedly detained.

BREAKING: Federal Judge Charles Breyer will hear arguments today on whether the Trump administration illegally deployed the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles during immigration raids. The state of California is suing, arguing the Posse Comitatus Act was violated. #LAprotests #NationalGuard

— Breaking News (@BreakingNews) August 2, 2020

Ernesto Santacruz Jr., field office director for Homeland Security in Los Angeles, stated in court documents that local law enforcement’s response was too slow during a protest outside the federal building. He argued that the presence of military personnel was crucial in protecting federal property from “violent mobs.”

Despite the Trump administration’s opposition, Judge **Breyer** permitted California’s legal team to depose **Santacruz**. They also obtained a declaration from a military official regarding the National Guard and Marines’ operational roles in the city.

Administration Claims Legal Authority for Deployment

Attorneys for the Trump administration contended in recent court filings that the case lacks merit under the Posse Comitatus Act. They cited a law granting the president authority to mobilize the National Guard for law enforcement when federal capabilities are insufficient.

Specifically, the administration invoked Section 12406 of Title 10, which allows the president to federalize the National Guard during invasions, rebellions, or when federal law execution is hindered. However, Judge **Breyer** ruled that the Los Angeles protests did not constitute a “rebellion.”

A three-day bench trial has been scheduled, with Judge **Breyer** confirming, “Next week’s trial is not cancelled.” The outcome could significantly impact how presidents can deploy the National Guard in future domestic situations.