Judges Temporarily Lift Restrictions on Trump’s Use of National Guard in LA
A federal appeals court on Thursday temporarily lifted restrictions placed on President Donald Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles, pausing a lower court ruling that said the operation violated federal law.
In a short order less than 100 words long, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted the administration’s request for an “administrative stay” of U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer’s Sept. 2 decision. Breyer, based in San Francisco, had found the Guard’s involvement in certain law enforcement activities ran afoul of the Posse Comitatus Act, an 1878 statute that bars federal troops from engaging in domestic policing.
The appeals court emphasized its ruling was procedural, not substantive.
“The request for an administrative stay is GRANTED,” the panel wrote, adding that the step “is only intended to preserve the status quo until the substantive motion for a stay pending appeal can be considered on the merits, and does not constitute in any way a decision as to the merits.”
Breyer’s earlier order had allowed troops to remain in the city to guard federal facilities but prohibited them from making arrests, conducting crowd control, or otherwise engaging directly in policing. He delayed enforcement of that order until Sept. 12 to give the government time to appeal.
The administration argued that Breyer’s restrictions jeopardized public safety and interfered with presidential authority over the military. “The district court’s order impinges on the Commander in Chief’s supervision of military operations, countermands a military directive, and puts federal officers (and others) in harm’s way,” government lawyers wrote in their appeal.
Trump initially deployed thousands of Guard members and Marines to Los Angeles in June, after immigration-related protests escalated into riots in parts of the city. Most of the forces have since returned home, but about 300 remain in the area.
California leaders, including Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and Attorney General Rob Bonta (D), have challenged the deployment as unlawful. They argue the president did not follow proper procedures to federalize the Guard and that command should have remained with the state.
Earlier in the case, Breyer agreed with that position and ordered control returned to Newsom, but the 9th Circuit swiftly intervened to halt his order.
Thursday’s ruling marks the second time the appeals court has stepped in to delay Breyer’s restrictions while it considers the administration’s arguments more fully.
The three-judge panel consisted of Judges Mark Bennett and Eric Miller, both nominated by Trump, and Judge Jennifer Sung, nominated by President Joe Biden.
The legal dispute highlights the ongoing clash between the administration and Democratic state officials over Trump’s use of the military in domestic law enforcement. While the Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits such involvement, the president can invoke exceptions by federalizing the National Guard.
Breyer concluded Trump had overstepped, while the Justice Department contends his actions fall within his constitutional authority as commander in chief.
The case in California comes as Trump has faced legal challenges over National Guard deployments elsewhere.
In Washington, D.C., the Democratic attorney general has filed suit over Trump’s activation of the Guard to help combat crime in the capital. The president has also threatened to send troops into other Democratic-led cities, including Chicago, where he has criticized local leaders for failing to address violent crime.
For now, the 9th Circuit’s order allows the 300 troops remaining in Los Angeles to continue their mission without the restrictions imposed by Breyer, at least until the panel rules on the administration’s full request for a stay pending appeal.
The court case highlights the ongoing dispute between the Trump administration and Democratic governors and mayors around the nation regarding immigration enforcement and anti-crime initiatives.
The Trump administration insists that violent crime in numerous major cities is out of control and would benefit from federal law enforcement “surges,” while Democratic governors and mayors insist the problem is under control.
The battle could be a pivotal one ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
