NOTE: VIDEO AT THE END OF ARTICLE
In a pivotal legal decision, a federal appeals court has ruled in favor of former President Donald Trump, affirming his authority to retain control over thousands of National Guard troops deployed in California. The court’s decision comes in response to a lawsuit filed by Governor Gavin Newsom, who sought to challenge the federalization of the California National Guard following over a week of unrest in Los Angeles.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that Trump acted within the scope of his presidential powers when he federalized approximately 4,000 Guard members to help restore order amid rising violence, vandalism, and attacks on federal property and personnel.
Court documents detailed incidents where protesters allegedly trapped federal officers and launched projectiles, including concrete and bottles, at law enforcement. Multiple federal buildings were damaged, and a government vehicle was attacked during the chaos. The judges concluded that these events justified federal intervention and that the president’s decision was backed by adequate evidence.
“The federal government has a significant interest in protecting its employees, facilities, and operations,” the court stated. “The deployment was a response to escalating violence that state and local forces were unable to control.”
Governor Newsom criticized the decision, claiming it undermines state authority and sets a dangerous precedent. He emphasized that while the court upheld Trump’s action in this specific case, it also rejected the notion that a president has unlimited authority without judicial review.
“This isn’t over,” Newsom said in a public statement. “The president must still be accountable to the courts. We will continue to push back against authoritarian overreach.”
Trump responded positively to the ruling on his Truth Social platform, describing the outcome as a “BIG WIN” and reaffirming his stance that the federal government must step in when states are unable to maintain public safety.
Legal analysts note that the case highlights ongoing tensions between federal and state powers, especially during periods of civil unrest. While the court recognized limits on presidential authority, it ultimately found that Trump’s actions in this scenario did not cross legal boundaries.
https://youtu.be/EN5MKyQrfeE?si=D8-NTnkSe3z7unDo
