National Legal News, Information & Blogs
A federal appeals court ruled on October 23, 2026, that President Donald Trump violated the Constitution when he took control of approximately 4,000 California National Guard members during immigration enforcement protests in Los Angeles in 2025, rejecting his administration’s claim that the unrest amounted to a rebellion.
In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld an injunction against the deployment, finding that Trump exceeded the powers Congress granted the presidency. The judges also refused to let the administration withdraw its appeal of the original order, allowing the court to establish a precedent governing similar federalizations.
Trump ordered the troops into federal service on June 7, 2025, as protests spread across Los Angeles following immigration enforcement operations. The administration authorized a 60-day deployment, arguing that National Guard members were needed to protect federal personnel and property amid confrontations between demonstrators and law enforcement.
California Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta sued, challenging Trump’s authority to take command of the state’s troops. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer issued an order blocking the deployment and directing the administration to return control of the Guard to Newsom, prompting an appeal that initially resulted in the injunction being stayed.
Trump invoked 10 U.S.C. § 12406, a federal law permitting presidents to federalize National Guard units during an invasion, rebellion or danger of rebellion, or when they are unable to execute federal law using regular military forces. Judge Jennifer Sung, writing for the majority, found that the conditions in Los Angeles failed to satisfy the rebellion provision, even under the substantial deference courts ordinarily give presidential assessments of such threats.
The panel concluded that Trump’s determination fell outside the range of reasonable judgments permitted by the statute. While the administration cited violent incidents and threats to federal operations, the majority found that the evidence failed to establish a rebellion or sufficient danger of one against federal authority.
The judges also rejected the government’s alternative justification that the Guard was necessary to execute federal law. Relying on the Supreme Court’s December 2025 ruling in Trump v. Illinois, the panel found that the administration had failed to establish its authority to use regular military forces for that purpose or demonstrate an inability to carry out the task with those forces.
Those findings led the majority to conclude that Trump’s initial federalization order encroached on Congress’s constitutional authority to determine when state military forces may be called into federal service. The court also found California likely to succeed on its related Tenth Amendment claim, affirming Breyer’s preliminary injunctionA preliminary injunction is a temporary court order issued before a case is finally decided that requires a party to take or stop an action while the litigation continues. Federal courts generally consider the likelihood of success, irreparable harm, the balance of equities, and the public interest before granting one.Read more → against the deployment.
The Trump administration sought to withdraw two related appeals after the deployment ended, but the Ninth Circuit refused to dismiss the challenge involving the original June 2025 order. The judges cited the extensive litigation already completed and the possibility that California could face similar federalizations in the future.
In a separate order issued the same day, the majority warned that allowing parties to abandon fully litigated appeals could enable them to manipulate the development of legal precedent by withdrawing cases likely to produce unfavorable rulings. The court permitted the administration to dismiss its separate appeal concerning an extension of the deployment, which had received substantially less judicial review.
Judge Eric Miller, appointed by Trump, joined Sung’s majority opinion and wrote separately about California’s legal claims. Judge Mark Bennett, another Trump appointee, dissented, arguing that the court should have allowed the administration to withdraw its appeal and that the majority had made errors in upholding the injunction. He also questioned its reliance on the Supreme Court’s intervening decision, which the parties had only briefly addressed.
Newsom welcomed the ruling as a victory for the Constitution and the rule of law, while Bonta said the decision reinforced limits on presidential authority over state National Guard forces. California officials maintained that the administration had used unrest surrounding immigration enforcement operations to justify an unlawful deployment.
The October 23 decision leaves the preliminary injunction against the original deployment in place. A separate appeal concerning restrictions on using National Guard troops for civilian law enforcement activities remains on hold, leaving that dispute unresolved as the Ninth Circuit’s latest ruling establishes binding precedent within the circuit.
If you found this article insightful, consider sharing it with your network.
A federal appeals court on Monday rejected the Trump administration's emergency effort to block California from counting mail-in ballots from more than 20,000 voters it suspects are noncitizens, allowing election officials to continue processing votes ahead of the November 3 midterm elections.The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1… Read More »
A federal judge has thrown out the Trump administration's lawsuit against New York City's sanctuary laws, rejecting its attempt to force local authorities to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. The October 15, 2026, ruling preserves city restrictions on assisting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).U.S. District Judge Ramón E. Reyes… Read More »
A federal judge in Maryland has blocked the Trump administration from applying President Donald Trump’s latest birthright citizenship order to a class of U.S.-born children, finding that the Supreme Court already settled their constitutional right to citizenship earlier this year.U.S. District Judge Deborah L. Boardman issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday,… Read More »
President Donald Trump has taken control of the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department and ordered the deployment of the National Guard under a provision of the District’s Home Rule Act that no president has previously used. He issued the order on Monday, and by Tuesday, August 12, National Guard personnel… Read More »
California has filed a federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump over his sweeping imposition of global tariffs, marking the first legal challenge by a U.S. state to the administration’s use of emergency powers in the international trade arena. Governor Gavin Newsom alleges in the complaint that the tariffs are illegal,… Read More »
© 2020 – 2026 Law Commentary, LLC. All rights reserved.
We use cookies and similar technologies to help our website function, understand how visitors use our site, and improve your experience. Some cookies are necessary for the website to operate, while others may be used for analytics or advertising.
About the Author
