Trump Troops in LA: Judge’s Ruling Imminent

LOS ANGELES – A federal judge is expected to rule imminently on whether the Trump administration can deploy National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles to assist in enforcing federal immigration laws.

California Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta filed an emergency request on Tuesday to block what they called an “needless” and “unlawful militarization” by President Donald trump and the Department of Defense.

U.S.District Judge Charles breyer, presiding over the federal hearing on Thursday, acknowledged the “extremely critically important” and urgent nature of the issues. He indicated his intention to “act expeditiously” and suggested an order could be issued “very soon,” possibly as early as Thursday.

The legal challenge is part of a larger lawsuit filed by Newsom and Bonta against the Trump administration, seeking to restrict the use of federalized National Guard and active-duty marines to the protection of federal buildings and property.

Legal Basis for Troop Deployment

Trump invoked Section 12406 of title 10 of the U.S. Code on Armed Services to justify sending thousands of National Guardsmen to Los Angeles. This section allows for federal deployment in response to a “rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.” trump’s order stated the troops would protect federal property and personnel.

During Thursday’s hearing, Judge Breyer stated that the central question is whether the president adhered to the Title 10 statute and if the National Guard was “properly federalized.”

The federal government asserted that the president acted in compliance with the law and further argued that the statute is non-justiciable, granting the president complete discretion. The court was urged not to issue an injunction that would “countermand the president’s military judgments.”

The attorney representing the state of California and Newsom argued that the National Guard was not lawfully federalized. They contended that deploying troops in a civilian city in response to perceived disobedience represents an “expansive, dangerous conception of federal executive power.”

Bonta also argued that Trump failed to meet the legal prerequisites for such a federal deployment.

“To put it bluntly,there is no invasion or rebellion in Los Angeles; there is civil unrest that is no different from episodes that regularly occur in communities throughout the country,and that is capable of being contained by state and local authorities working together,” Bonta stated in the emergency filing.

Breyer initially declined California’s request for an immediate temporary restraining order, scheduling the hearing for Thursday afternoon in San Francisco and allowing the Trump administration time to respond.

In their response, department of Justice lawyers requested the judge to deny Newsom’s request, arguing that limiting the military to protecting federal buildings would give a “rioters’ veto to enforcement of federal law.”

“The extraordinary relief Plaintiffs request would judicially countermand the commander in Chief’s military directives — and would do so in the posture of a temporary restraining order, no less. That would be unprecedented. It would be constitutionally anathema. And it would be dangerous,” they argued.

They further asserted that California should not “second-guess the President’s judgment that federal reinforcements were necessary” and that the court should defer to the president’s discretion on military matters.

Protests and Federal response

Some 4,000 National Guardsmen and 700 Marines have been deployed to the los Angeles area following protests over immigration raids. California officials allege that trump incited the protests by deploying the military unnecessarily.

The protests have since spread to other cities, including Boston, Chicago and Seattle.

Trump defended his decision to deploy the National Guard and Marines, stating that the situation in LA was “out of control.”

“All I wont is safety. I just want a safe area,” he told reporters. “Los Angeles was under siege until we got there. The police were unable to handle it.”

Trump suggested that the deployment was intended as a message to other cities not to interfere with ICE operations, warning they would face similar or greater force.

“If we didn’t attack this one very strongly, you’d have them all over the country,” he said. “But I can inform the rest of the country that when they do it,if they do it,they’re going to be met with equal or greater force than we met right here.”

“`