Skip to main content
News Directory 3
  • Home
  • Business
  • Entertainment
  • Health
  • News
  • Sports
  • Tech
  • World
Menu
  • Home
  • Business
  • Entertainment
  • Health
  • News
  • Sports
  • Tech
  • World
Trump National Guard Control: Appeals Court Ruling

Trump National Guard Control: Appeals Court Ruling

June 20, 2025 Catherine Williams - Chief Editor Entertainment

A California appeals court has‍ temporarily blocked Governor Newsom’s ‍efforts, granting President Trump the authority to oversee‍ the California National Guard‘s operations in Los Angeles. This ​decision is the key growth in the ongoing legal battle. The court’s⁢ move effectively​ halts a previous ruling that favored Newsom, who sought to regain state control. Trump’s deployment of the National Guard‍ and​ U.S. Marines, following escalating protests, has been at the heart of⁣ the‍ dispute. Judge ‍Breyer⁤ initially ruled against Trump, citing overreach⁤ of his constitutional authority. The former‍ president argued his actions were⁤ necessary due to obstruction⁣ and a ‌purported rebellion, a claim contested by Newsom’s team.⁣ The situation marks a meaningful clash between federal and state powers,with⁣ the appeals court’s ruling temporarily upholding Trump’s actions. News Directory 3 is tracking‌ this story closely. Discover what’s next as the ‍legal challenges continue.







Trump Retains Control of California⁤ National​ Guard Amid⁤ Newsom Challenge












Trump Retains Control of California national Guard Amid Newsom Challenge

A‌ California appeals court has ‌granted President Trump the authority ⁤to maintain ⁣command of the California⁣ national Guard troops‍ stationed in ⁢Los Angeles, temporarily thwarting Gov. Gavin Newsom’s bid to regain control. This is the ⁢latest advancement in an ongoing legal ‌dispute over the deployment and authority of the Guard.


Protesters face california National guard in Los Angeles during a 'No Kings' protest.
Protesters stand off against California National Guard soldiers at the Federal Building in downtown Los Angeles during a “No Kings” protest. Richard Vogel/AP

the appeals court’s decision puts a hold on a previous ruling by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer,‌ who sided with Newsom⁣ last week. Breyer had determined that ⁤President Trump’s use of ⁤the California National Guard in⁤ Los Angeles was unlawful ⁣and ordered⁣ the federal government ‍to return⁣ control to the state.

Judge ‍Breyer’s ⁢36-page ruling stated⁣ that ⁣Trump’s actions exceeded his statutory authority and violated the​ Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which outlines the ‌division of powers ‌between state and federal governments.Trump asserted control over the Guard,citing a purported rebellion in Los Angeles against federal authority.Though, Breyer’s ruling acknowledged instances of violence but concluded‌ that the ‌protests did not constitute a rebellion.

On June 7, following a day of ⁣escalating protests,⁤ Trump federalized ⁤and deployed approximately 4,000 members of‌ the California‌ National Guard and ⁤700 ​U.S. ⁢Marines, despite newsom’s objections. While ⁤governors typically command National Guard units within their⁢ states, presidents have⁣ the power ‌to federalize⁢ them. The current ruling does‍ not address the status of the ‍Marines.

Trump’s order to deploy the Guard cited attempts to obstruct immigration agents in⁣ Los Angeles, characterizing it as “a form of rebellion against the authority of the⁤ government.” Lawyers representing Trump presented images of burning vehicles and crowds impeding the movement ​of​ Immigration⁢ and Customs Enforcement⁢ (ICE) agents.

This marked the first instance in 60 years of a president activating a state’s​ National Guard⁤ against the governor’s wishes. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson deployed troops to Alabama to safeguard civil rights demonstrators.

California’s legal team argued that trump’s federalization of the National Guard was illegal, emphasizing that Newsom was not consulted before the decision, a customary ⁣practice.Newsom contended​ that a military ‍presence would exacerbate tensions between protesters and law⁣ enforcement,⁤ asserting that local law enforcement could manage the situation.

Attorneys representing the federal government maintained that Trump acted within his constitutional‌ authority to mobilize the National Guard. They argued⁤ that the management fulfilled ⁣the legal requirement to consult with Gov.‍ Newsom by coordinating with the Guard’s adjutant general in California, who represents the governor.

The Trump administration asserted ‍that ICE agents were‌ unable to enforce federal laws, necessitating the deployment⁤ of the⁢ Guard. They cited instances of protests turning into riots and argued that the president has the discretion to determine whether a situation warrants such action, asserting that the courts lack the authority to challenge that decision.The California National Guard’s ​role

Share this:

  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X

Related

Search:

News Directory 3

ByoDirectory is a comprehensive directory of businesses and services across the United States. Find what you need, when you need it.

Quick Links

  • Copyright Notice
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms and Conditions

Browse by State

  • Alabama
  • Alaska
  • Arizona
  • Arkansas
  • California
  • Colorado

Connect With Us

© 2026 News Directory 3. All rights reserved.

Privacy Policy Terms of Service