Court reviews LA troop deployment
Panel questions role of judges in Trump decision
By: Terry Collins
USA today
..... A three-judge appellate panel is pondering what role the courts should play in determining whether President Donald Trump can keep control of the National Guard to protect immigration enforcement agents and suppress protesters in Los Angeles.
....
On June 17, [2025] the panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit heard arguments on whether to continue Trump's mobilization of the troops - quizzing lawyers form the Trump administration and from California on whether they should factor into Trump's decisions at all.
.... Trump ordered 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles following protests over raids by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
..... California Governor Gavin Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and other leaders repeatedly claim that Trump inflamed the protests by sending in the military when it wasn't necessary.
.... U.S. Distinct Judge Charles Breyer granted Newsom a temporary restraining order, which would have blocked Trump's deployment of the California national Guard and returned control of the troops to Newsom. However, the appellate court judges temporarily halted the district judge's order on June 12. [2025]
.....
Justice Department lawyer Brett Shumate told the apples judges at the hearing June 17 that Breyer "improperly second-guessed the president's judgment," adding, "there is nor role for the court to play in reviewing that decision."
..... California attorney, Samuel Harbourt, asked the appeals court to deny the Trump administration's motion. He called the federalization of the National Guard an "unprecedented, unlawful executive action."
..... Harbourt argued that the governor doesn't have any problem giving the president "some sort of deference"
in implementing federal law, but that there's nothing to order to in the case since Newsom did not consent to the National Guard;s activation as typically mandated by law.
..... "The president has not, and the defendants have made no attempt whatsoever to provide an argument or evidence that they even contemplated more modest measures to the extreme response in calling in the National guard and militarizing the situation," Harbourt said.
.....
Harbourt did say that Los Angeles has seen "certain episodes of unrest and even violence in recent days, including violence directed at state and local law enforcement officials." But he said local and state law enforcement have "strongly condemned these acts, and it has responded forcefully to them."
..... California's attorney urged the judges to remove the National Guard from Los Angels so that they can return to their regular duties, including responding to emergences such as wildfires. Harbourt concluded the troops' presence is "causing harm to our nation's broader democratic traditions of the separation of the military from civilian affairs."
.... On the other side, Shumate said the appeals court should stay the lower court's order.
.....
Shumate argued that Trump complied with the statute by norming the vernal in charge of the troops of his decision, and said the president does have the authority to call in the Nation la Guard. Indeed, he argued, Trump has "unrevealed" powers as the commander-in-chief to deploy troops for any reason he sees fit.
..... Before the lower court's ruling, Shumate said the president's decision are not subject to judicial review and claimed there was a 'documented record of sustained, ongoing mob violence." He told the three-judge panel that there were more than "1,000 violent protesters" outside a federal building on June 6. [2025] The National guard "were essential to protecting that building," eh said.
.....
The two Trump appointees, Judges Mark J. Bennett and Eric D. Miller, appeared doubtful of the Trump administration's claim that courts can't review the president's decision. But they also appeared to lean into the notion that the occasional violence at the protests was enough to warrant Trump's move.
..... And the bide appointee, Judge Jennifer Sung, has some doubts about the case made by Harburt, Newsom's attorney.
..... Bennett suggested that the court might act before a hearing that Breyer has scheduled in the case for June 20. [2025]
..... The hearing was another episode in "an interesting paradigm of power," between Trump and Newsom as the governor tries to assert his role as a major leader in American's most populous state, which has the world's fourth-larges economy, said Brian Sobel, a longtime political analyst based in San Francisco Bay Area.
..... "Newosm is trying to establish with people that he's a national player, that he's presidential-worthy because he's willing to take Trump on," Sobel told USA Today. He's choosing battles where he can have similar statue as the president, where he can asset his power and appear almost like a coequal."
.....
The June 17 appeals hearing took place as the Los Angeles mayor announced she was lifting the city's curfew.
..... "The curfew, coupled with ongoing crime prevention efforts, have been largely successful in protecting stores, restaurant, businesses and residential communities from bad actors who do not car about the immigrant community," Bass said in a statement. "I will be prepared to reissue a curfew if needed."
..... Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell said the decision showed the progress authorities have made in reducing crime and vandalism within the city's curfew zone. His department was "not letting our guard down," he said. "The LAPD will maintain a strong presence in the area and continue to monitor conditions closely to protect lives, uphold the right to lawful assembly, and safeguard property."
..... Los Angeles police have said that more than 500 arrests have been made related to protest activity since June 7. [2025]
..... Local organizers vowed to continue protesting against immigration raids despite demonstrations in downtown Los Angeles having calmed.
..... Contributing: Reuters