California Governor Gavin Newsom recently responded to a federal court victory that deemed Donald Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles this summer as illegal.
Newsom triumphantly posted on X, “DONALD TRUMP LOSES AGAIN. The courts agree — his militarization of our streets and use of the military against US citizens is ILLEGAL.”
This statement underscores the court’s alignment with Newsom’s concerns regarding Trump’s actions.
The dispute arose when Trump instructed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to deploy at least 2,000 National Guard personnel to Los Angeles in response to protests. Newsom objected, arguing that the president’s assertion of control over the state’s militia was both illegal and unconstitutional.
In his lawsuit, Newsom emphasized the unusual nature of Trump’s intervention, noting it was only the second time in US history that a president had relied on this provision to federalize the National Guard.
Newsom’s lawsuit highlighted the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of active-duty armed forces and federalized National Guard for civilian law enforcement.
The governor argued that Trump’s deployment violated this act and the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states.
Newsom stated, “under our system of federalism, policing and crime control remain one of the most basic rights reserved to the states.” He further emphasized that local control of law enforcement is crucial for protecting liberty and government accountability.
The lawsuit also pointed out that Trump’s memo authorizing the deployment did not specify geographic limits or particular locations, potentially allowing for far-reaching implications.
Newsom expressed concerns that the National Guard might be compelled to accompany immigration enforcement on missions, which would be an unlawful expansion of federal power.
“Deploying over 4,000 federalized military forces to quell a protest or prevent future protests despite the lack of evidence that local law enforcement was incapable of asserting control and ensuring public safety during such protests represents the exact type of intrusion on State Power” that the 10th Amendment was meant to prevent.
Newsom’s victory in court reinforces the importance of maintaining the balance of power between state and federal authorities. The governor’s stance is that Trump’s actions overstepped constitutional boundaries, and the court’s agreement validates his position.
As Newsom noted, “local law enforcement agencies have responded appropriately and promptly to incidents of violence or destruction of property.”
He emphasized that primarily peaceful protests with some acts of violence or civil disobedience do not rise to the level of a rebellion, contradicting Trump’s claims.