California filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on Monday, accusing President Trump of unlawfully using federal powers to deploy the state’s National Guard to handle protests in Los Angeles.
The state’s lawyers argue that Trump bypassed California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, and overstepped his authority by taking control of the National Guard without Newsom’s consent.
The National Guard and Protests in Los Angeles
The National Guard was deployed in response to ongoing protests in Los Angeles over recent immigration enforcement actions by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
According to the Trump administration, the troops were necessary to protect federal property and personnel, using the authority granted under a law that allows the President to call up the National Guard in cases of rebellion.
However, California’s lawsuit claims that this law does not apply to the current protests, stating that the demonstrations are not “rebellions” or “insurrections.” The lawsuit points out that the protests in Los Angeles have been mostly peaceful, with only some isolated incidents of violence.
Dispute Over Presidential Authority
California’s legal argument centers around Section 12406, a law that traditionally requires a governor’s approval before deploying the National Guard.
This law, the state claims, was violated by the federal government’s direct control over California’s Guard troops. The lawsuit further argues that the National Guard’s presence has increased tension with protesters and created fear in the community.
Governor Newsom, in his statement on social media, condemned the federal action, calling it an “illegal and immoral” power grab by President Trump. He emphasized that the decision to deploy the National Guard should remain under state control, highlighting the importance of civil, not military, rule in a democracy.
The Role of Local Police and the Need for the National Guard
California officials assert that local police have been able to manage the protests without needing outside intervention. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, in an interview, explained that the state has well-resourced law enforcement agencies that can handle the situation. He also emphasized that there was no legitimate need for the National Guard or federal troops to intervene.
While President Trump has continued to support the deployment, calling protesters “troublemakers,” the situation remains tense. Bonta made it clear that the federal presence only serves to escalate the situation, arguing that such actions increase tensions unnecessarily.
The Bigger Picture
The lawsuit is part of a larger battle between the state of California and the Trump administration, particularly over the control of resources like the National Guard. This conflict underscores a broader debate about states’ rights versus federal power, especially in matters related to law enforcement and public safety.
California’s legal team is determined to ensure that the state’s National Guard is not used for purposes that are beyond the scope of federal authority and that the control over these forces stays with the governor, as it has historically been.