Judge Rules TrumpS Military deployment to Los Angeles Violated Federal Law
A federal judge has ruled that former President Donald Trump‘s deployment of military troops to Los Angeles in June was illegal, violating both his statutory authority and the 10th amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The ruling stems from a case brought following the deployment of approximately 5,000 Marines and National Guard troops to the city, a move opposed by california Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass.
Judge Charles R. Breyer of the U.S. District Court for the northern District of california issued a 36-page decision finding that Trump’s actions “were illegal.” The ruling specifically cites violations of the Posse comitatus Act, which generally prohibits the use of the U.S. military for domestic law enforcement purposes.
The trial revealed details of controversial military actions in Southern California, including a July raid of MacArthur Park that drew criticism from residents and city officials. Testimony from Major General Scott Marshall Sherman revealed that Border Patrol agents had initially proposed targeting the park on Father’s Day, but the military overruled the plan due to concerns about large crowds and potential danger. Sherman stated, “It was going to be a very large amount of peopel in the park…I could not approve it because of the high risk.”
Evidence presented at trial showed that soldiers, frequently enough wearing obscured protective armor, established perimeters, created traffic blockades, and engaged in crowd control, demonstrating a critically important military presence in Los Angeles.
While Judge Breyer initially issued an order halting the deployment, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals paused that order, allowing the troops to remain in Los Angeles while the case proceeds in federal court.The appellate court resolute the president possesses broad, though not “unreviewable,” authority to deploy the military within American cities.
Despite the stay, Judge Breyer’s recent ruling reinforces his initial assessment. “The evidence at trial established that Defendants systematically used armed soldiers…and military vehicles to…otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles,” he wrote.
The case raises concerns about the potential expansion of military involvement in civilian policing. experts note that deploying soldiers into American cities has been a long-held ambition of Trump’s. Eric J. Segall, a professor at Georgia State University College of Law, observed, “The reason trump might find that delightful is because that’s what Lincoln did. Trump wants to be Lincoln.”
trump himself indicated his intention to expand such deployments, stating during an August press conference, “We’re going to look at new York. And if we need to, we’re going to do the same thing in Chicago. Hopefully, L.A. is watching.”
The ruling has broader implications, as Trump also issued an executive order in August declaring a public safety emergency in Washington D.C., invoking Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act to place the Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control.As noted by law professor at Ohio Northern University,”It’s crucial to see what can the president get away with.” Judge Breyer expressed similar concerns, questioning, “What’s to prevent a national police force? Is there any limit?”
