Did a Federal Judge Deny California's Request to Halt Trump's Military Deployment in Los Angeles?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
In a significant legal battle, a federal judge has dismissed California's emergency request to halt the Trump administration's military deployment in Los Angeles, raising questions about federal authority over domestic military operations. With a hearing scheduled, the implications of this ruling could resonate throughout the state and the nation.
Key Takeaways
- Federal Judge denied California's request to block military deployment.
- Deployment includes 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines.
- California claims violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.
- Federal lawyers call the request legally meritless.
- Hearing scheduled for Thursday to discuss California's motion.
Sacramento, June 11 (NationPress) — A federal judge has turned down California Governor Gavin Newsom's urgent plea to prevent the Trump administration from swiftly deploying military forces in Los Angeles, undermining the state's endeavors to contest federal control over domestic military actions.
US District Judge Charles Breyer opted not to issue a temporary restraining order that would have halted nearly 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines from patrolling the city right away. Instead, Breyer has provided the Trump administration until 2:00 p.m. Wednesday to respond to California's emergency motion, as reported by Xinhua news agency.
This decision followed arguments from California officials asserting that President Donald Trump's deployment breached federal law, specifically the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids active-duty military personnel from performing civilian law enforcement duties.
Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta contended in their Tuesday morning motion that the military's presence posed “immediate and irreparable harm” to state sovereignty.
On the other hand, federal government lawyers labeled Newsom's request as “legally meritless” and cautioned that obstructing the deployment would be “extraordinary, unprecedented, and dangerous.”
They argued such a move could “jeopardize the safety of Department of Homeland Security personnel and disrupt the Federal Government’s operational capabilities.”
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced that this military assignment would last for 60 days, with an estimated cost of $134 million.
This deployment marks one of the largest domestic military operations in recent times. Breyer, brother of retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, has arranged a hearing for 1:30 p.m. Thursday local time to review California's motion.
The Trump administration is required to submit their opposition brief by 11:00 a.m. Wednesday local time, with California permitted to respond by Thursday morning.
If Breyer ultimately rules against California, the state has the option to appeal to the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, which holds a narrow majority of Democratic appointees.
Regardless of the temporary restraining order's outcome, California's underlying lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the deployment will persist.
Point of View
It is essential to recognize the broader implications of this ruling. The intersection of state sovereignty and federal authority is a critical issue in contemporary governance. This case illustrates the ongoing tension between state and federal powers, inviting further scrutiny and legal examination as it unfolds.
NationPress
14/06/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the judge's ruling regarding the deployment?
The federal judge rejected California's emergency request to halt the military deployment, allowing it to proceed while granting the Trump administration time to respond.
How many troops are being deployed?
Approximately 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines are being deployed to Los Angeles.
What law did California claim the deployment violated?
California officials argued that the deployment violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts active-duty military personnel from performing civilian law enforcement.
What could California do if the ruling is against them?
If the ruling is unfavorable, California can appeal to the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals.
What are the financial implications of the deployment?
The military assignment is estimated to cost around $134 million over a 60-day period.
