LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in California ruled Tuesday that the Trump administration violated a 19th-century law barring the use of soldiers for civilian law enforcement activities when it mobilized 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles in June.
"The evidence at trial established that Defendants systematically used armed soldiers (whose identity was often obscured by protective armor) and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco said in a 52-page filing.
"In short, Defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act," he said.
Hours after Breyer's ruling, California filed a request for a preliminary injunction asking the court to remove the remaining 300 National Guard members stationed in Los Angeles.
The motion is in response to an Aug. 5 federal extension of the guard members, whom Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered to stay in the region through the redistricting special election in November.
“The timing of Trump’s extension of the National Guard soldiers isn’t coincidental — he’s holding onto soldiers through Election Day,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement. “The reality is this — they want to continue their intimidation tactics to scare Californians into submission.”
FOR SUBSCRIBERSA harrowing ordeal aboard an Israel-bound plane
FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe debate over AI’s future rages on both coasts
FOR SUBSCRIBERSA harrowing ordeal aboard an Israel-bound plane
FOR SUBSCRIBERSThe debate over AI’s future rages on both coasts
Breyer's ruling strikes a blow to President Donald Trump's push to deploy troops to city streets as part of an effort to fight crime. Critics have branded the deployments federal government overreach.
Trump first deployed National Guard troops to Los Angeles before he sent soldiers into Washington, D.C., enraging many political opponents and residents. He has indicated his interest in deploying troops to other cities, as well.
“Once again, a rogue judge is trying to usurp the authority of the Commander-in-Chief to protect American cities from violence and destruction," White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement.
Lawyers representing California argued last month that Trump had exceeded his authority by deploying federal troops after thousands of protesters took to the streets of downtown Los Angeles to rally against his immigration policies.
The Trump administration had framed the protests as violent riots that were overwhelming local authorities and endangering residents. The National Guard was necessary, it argued, to protect federal property and personnel from the escalating chaos.
But Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats, pushed back immediately, insisting they had matters well in hand and arguing the protests were largely peaceful.
Lawyers representing California had asked Breyer, a Clinton appointee and younger brother of retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, to order the Trump administration to return control of the remaining troops to Newsom and to stop using the military “to execute or assist in the execution of federal law.”
The Justice Department countered that the deployment was necessary to protect federal property and personnel and that the troops acted within the confines of the Posse Comitatus Act.
The 1878 statute prohibits the president from using the military as a domestic police force without approval from Congress.
The Trump administration “deployed the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles, ostensibly to quell a rebellion and ensure that federal immigration law was enforced,” Breyer wrote in Tuesday’s ruling.
“There were indeed protests in Los Angeles, and some individuals engaged in violence,” he wrote. “Yet there was no rebellion, nor was civilian law enforcement unable to respond to the protests and enforce the law.”
Breyer ordered the Trump administration to stop using military troops in California “to execute the laws, including but not limited to engaging in arrests, apprehensions, searches, seizures, security patrols, traffic control, crowd control, riot control, evidence collection, interrogation, or acting as informants,” unless the situation meets the bar for an exemption to the Posse Comitatus Act.
He also wrote that Trump’s intention to call National Guard troops into federal service in other cities would be “creating a national police force with the President as its chief.”
Newsom celebrated the ruling, saying in a statement that "no president is a king — not even Trump — and no president can trample a state’s power to protect its people."
Bass, who repeatedly accused the Trump administration of "invading" Los Angeles, applauded the court ruling and said the city would not "buckle."
"We will not be divided and we will not be defeated," she said in a statement.
National Guard members were spotted at several high-profile immigration enforcement actions, including in MacArthur Park and at two cannabis cultivation centers north of Los Angeles. Both incidents sparked backlash from immigrant rights advocates and local leaders.
Maj. Gen. Scott Sherman, who commanded the National Guard troops, and William Harrington, the task force’s deputy chief of staff, each testified that intelligence briefings suggested there was minimal risk to immigration officers during several operations, including the MacArthur Park action.
Sherman said his chain of command told him that federal troops could conduct security patrols as well as traffic, crowd and riot control, in addition to protecting federal property and personnel.
“We were allowed to do these four things because it was in line with what the president was directing,” Sherman told the court.
Breyer bristled.
“What limiting factors are there to the use of this force?” Breyer asked. “Why is the federalized National Guard, even though it’s been drawn down, still in place?”
Justice Department attorney Eric Hamilton said the guard members and Marines were serving in a protective function, which is not a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.
“In other words, we’re going to see federal officers everywhere if the president determines there’s a threat to the safety of federal agents?” Breyer pressed Hamilton. “That’s what you’re saying the law is.”
