Judge declines to consider request to bar National Guard from California
The article reports that a federal judge, Charles Breyer, declined to rule on California Governor Gavin newsom’s request to block the deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles. Newsom sought an injunction to remove the military presence, arguing the use of troops violated federal laws, specifically the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts federal military involvement in civilian law enforcement. This legal battle follows a previous ruling by Judge Breyer that President Donald Trump’s earlier deployment of troops to los Angeles was unlawful. The Trump management has appealed that decision,and the case is under review by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The deployment began amid protests against immigration enforcement but has raised broader concerns about the military’s role in civilian policing.Although the judge did not grant Newsom’s request to instantly remove the troops, he ordered the White House to cease using them to enforce laws while the legal process continues.
Federal judge declines to consider Newsom request to bar National Guard from California
A federal judge on Wednesday declined to consider Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D-CA) request to remove National Guard troops from Los Angeles.
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer indefinitely paused the state’s request for a preliminary injunction blocking hundreds of military troops from patrolling the city’s streets due to questions about whether he holds the authority to grant the demand when a higher court is already probing the matter.
The development comes after Breyer ruled last week that President Donald Trump’s move to deploy the military to Los Angeles earlier this year broke federal law, specifically the Posse Comitatus Act, which limits the use of federal troops to enforce civilian laws.
The Trump administration swiftly appealed the ruling in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where the case is now being examined.
The debate started in June when the president authorized thousands of National Guard troops to Los Angeles amid protests and riots against the Trump administration’s effort to deport illegal immigrants in the area. The president said troops were needed to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from violence and deter crime in the city. In August, after the unrest subsided, Trump authorized another extension of 300 National Guard troops to remain in Los Angeles until early November.
The affair has sparked disputes over the military’s role in civilian life, with critics arguing the deployment violates constitutional limits on mixing the two. While California and Trump’s federal takeover of the District of Columbia provoked the initial controversy, the matter has become a broader issue as the White House has toyed with sending federal troops to some of the largest cities in the United States, including Chicago and New York, as an anti-crime effort.
In Los Angeles, Newsom resisted the troops from the start, accusing Trump of illegally trying to use the military as a domestic police force.
After Trump appealed the use of troops to the 9th Circuit last week, Newsom asked Breyer to block the National Guard from operating in the city, as it is set to spend nearly another two months in the metropolitan hub.
NEWSOM HIGHLIGHTS CALIFORNIA’S BATTLE WITH FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DURING STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS
The judge on Tuesday ruled against Newsom’s efforts to seek a preliminary injunction blocking the administration’s Aug. 5 order to extend the deployment of the 300 troops for another 90 days.
Although the remaining 300 soldiers will not be required to leave as the legal battle plays out in the higher court, the judge ordered the White House to stop using the troops “to execute the law.”
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
