Appeals court temporarily allows Trump to keep National Guard in LA

A court of appeal temporarily blocked the order of a federal judge who ordered the Trump administration to return the control of the Troops of the National Guard of California in the State.

The decision of the Court of Appeal occurred a few hours after a federal judge said that Trump’s deployment of troops in Los Angeles to repress the immigration raids was illegal.

Trump said he was sending the troops – who are generally under the authority of the Governor – to prevent it from “burning” to protest against his repression of immigration.

California governor Gavin Newsom, and other local officials rejected this decision, however, and said it was unnecessary provocation. The Court of Appeal said it would be hearing on Tuesday.

During a previous hearing of the Federal Court, judge Charles Breyer said that the question posed by California’s request was whether Trump had followed the law established by the Congress on the deployment of the State National Guard.

“He did not do it,” wrote the judge in his decision. “His actions were illegal … He must therefore make control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California immediately.”

But the judge suspended the prescription until Friday afternoon to give the Trump administration time to call. The administration did it almost immediately after the order is put in place.

Newsom posted on social networks Thursday afternoon that “the court has just confirmed what we all know – the army belongs to the battlefield, not in the streets of our cities”.

The Trump administration said that it took charge of the California National Guard to restore order and protect immigration and customs’ application (ICE) agents while sweeping people in Los Angeles who would be in the country illegally.

Despite Newsom’s objections, Trump ordered a total of 4,000 troops in the National Guard and 700 navies to help repress the troubles. Some of the troops are now allowed to hold people until the police can arrest them.

A president last deployed the national guard without the governor’s consent over 50 years ago – at the time of civil rights. It is more common for a governor to activate the troops to deal with natural disasters and other emergencies, then to request federal aid.

Before a crowded courtroom on Thursday, a lawyer from the Ministry of Justice told Judge Breyer that Newsom did not need to be consulted when Trump made his order.

“Governor Newsom was fully aware of this order … He opposed it,” said lawyer Brett Shumate. “There is a commander -in -chief of the American armed forces.”

“No,” replied Judge Breyer, the younger brother of the former Supreme Court judge Stephen Breyer.

“The president is not the commander-in-chief of the National Guard,” he said, but added that there were moments and situations when the president could become the chief of the troops.

Breyer, who had put on a light blue butterfly knot, invoked the Constitution several times during the hearing, holding a copy of the document of the document at a given time.

“We are talking about the president who exercises his authority. And the president is, of course, limited in his authority,” he said. “This is the difference between a constitutional government and King George.”

Before the judge’s decision, the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, repeatedly refused to say if he complied with the order of judge Breyer.

“What I can say is that we should not ask local judges to determine foreign policy or national security policy for the country,” said Hegseth, speaking on Thursday during a hearing of the Chamber Armed Services Committee.

Hegseth declared that he would respect a decision of the Supreme Court.

The decision of the Thursday evening court of appeal allows the troops of the National Guard to stay in Los Angeles, because the case goes through the courts.

The Trump administration used a law that allows the president to call the National Guard in federal service when a “rebellion” occurs.

But California said in its trial that the demonstrations that had lasted almost a week in Los Angeles – and included more than 300 arrests and the closure of a major highway – has not reached this level.

“No time in the past three days, there has been no rebellion or an insurrection. These demonstrations have not increased in the demonstrations or riots that Los Angeles and other big cities have seen points in the past, including in recent years,” said the trial.

Additional report by Ana Faguy in Washington, DC