California Governor Gavin Newsom has announced plans to file a lawsuit against the Trump administration, contesting the federal deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles amid ongoing immigration-related protests. Newsom contends that the move is “illegal, immoral, and unconstitutional,” asserting that it bypasses established protocols requiring state consent for such deployments.
The controversy stems from President Donald Trump’s decision to federalize the California National Guard under Title 10 of the U.S. Code, Section 12406, which permits the president to mobilize state National Guard units during instances of invasion, rebellion, or when local authorities are unable to enforce the law. This marks the first time since 1965 that a president has deployed National Guard troops to a state without the governor’s approval.
Background of the Deployment
The federal action followed a series of protests in Los Angeles sparked by aggressive Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids targeting undocumented immigrants. These operations led to the arrest of 118 individuals in Los Angeles and approximately 2,000 nationwide per day. Demonstrations escalated into confrontations with law enforcement, resulting in property damage, injuries, and over 100 arrests.
In response, President Trump ordered the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles, stating that the measure was necessary to restore order and protect federal property. However, Governor Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass criticized the decision, arguing that it was an overreach of federal authority and would only exacerbate tensions.
Legal and Political Implications
Legal experts have questioned the justification for invoking Title 10 in this context, noting that the protests, while disruptive, do not constitute a rebellion or prevent law enforcement from executing their duties. The Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits the use of federal military personnel in domestic law enforcement, and while the National Guard can support federal agents and protect property, their deployment without state consent raises constitutional concerns.
Governor Newsom emphasized that the federal government did not coordinate with state officials before the deployment, violating established protocols. He stated, “There’s a protocol. There’s a process. He didn’t care about that. And the worst part, he completely lied.”
Reactions and Ongoing Developments
The deployment has drawn criticism from various political figures and civil rights organizations. Former Vice President Kamala Harris and Senator Bernie Sanders condemned the move as authoritarian and inflammatory. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced plans to pursue legal action, arguing that the deployment infringes upon First Amendment rights.
Despite the backlash, President Trump defended the decision, asserting that the National Guard’s presence was necessary to maintain order. He also hinted at the possibility of invoking the Insurrection Act to deploy active-duty military personnel if unrest continues.
Table: Key Events Surrounding the National Guard Deployment
| Date | Event |
| June 6 | ICE conducts raids in Los Angeles, arresting 118 individuals. |
| June 6-7 | Protests erupt in response to ICE raids, leading to clashes with law enforcement. |
| June 7 | President Trump orders the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles. |
| June 8 | Governor Newsom announces plans to file a lawsuit challenging the deployment. |
| June 9 | Protests continue; legal and political debates intensify. |
Conclusion
The legal challenge by California sets the stage for a significant confrontation over federal authority and states’ rights. As the situation unfolds, the balance between maintaining public order and upholding constitutional protections remains at the forefront of national discourse.
