San Francisco, Aug 11 (AP) A federal judge in San Francisco is set to examine evidence and hear arguments regarding whether the Trump administration violated federal law when it deployed National Guard soldiers and US Marines to Los Angeles following immigration raid protests earlier this summer.
The Trump administration federalized California National Guard members, deploying them to the nation's second-largest city, despite objections from Governor Gavin Newsom and city officials. The deployment followed protests that erupted on June 7 after Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers conducted arrests at multiple locations.
California is requesting that Judge Charles Breyer order the Trump administration to return control of the remaining troops to the state and prohibit the federal government from using military forces in California to enforce or assist in the execution of civilian law enforcement functions by federal agents. The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act restricts the president from using the military as a domestic police force, and this case could set a precedent for future deployments of the Guard by Trump in California or other states.
The Department of Defense had ordered the deployment of approximately 4,000 California National Guard troops and 700 Marines. According to the latest figures from the Pentagon, most have since left, with 250 National Guard members remaining at the Joint Forces Training Base in Los Alamitos, according to Newsom.
Governor Newsom achieved an early victory when Judge Breyer found that the Trump administration had violated the Tenth Amendment, which delineates the distribution of power between federal and state governments, exceeding its authority.
The Trump administration promptly filed an appeal, arguing that courts should not second guess presidential decisions, and secured a temporary halt from the appeals court. This allowed the federal government to maintain control over the California National Guard while the lawsuit progresses.
Following their deployment, the soldiers accompanied federal immigration officers on raids in Los Angeles and at two marijuana farm sites in Ventura County, while Marines predominantly stood guard at a federal building in downtown Los Angeles, a center of protests housing a detention facility.
The Trump administration justified the deployment by stating that troops were necessary to protect federal buildings and personnel in Los Angeles, which has become a focal point in the federal government's aggressive immigration policies.
Since June, federal agents have apprehended immigrants without legal status in various public locations, including Home Depots, car washes, bus stops, and farms. Some US citizens have also been detained during these operations.
Ernesto Santacruz Jr., field office director for the Department of Homeland Security in Los Angeles, asserted in court documents that the troops were essential because local law enforcement response was slow when crowds formed outside the federal building to protest the June 7 arrests.
"The presence of the National Guard and Marines has been crucial in protecting federal property and personnel from violent mobs," Santacruz stated.
In response to opposition from the Trump administration, Judge Breyer permitted California's attorneys to depose Santacruz and gather declarations from military officials regarding the National Guard and Marines' roles in Los Angeles.
The Trump administration's attorneys recently filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that the claims under the Posse Comitatus Act are legally baseless. They asserted that a specific law authorizes the president to summon the National Guard to enforce US laws when federal law enforcement capabilities are insufficient.
Trump federalized the California National Guard under Section 12406 of Title 10, a provision allowing for such action when the country faces invasion, experiences a rebellion or danger of rebellion, or when executing US laws becomes unfeasible. However, Judge Breyer determined that the protests in Los Angeles "fall far short of rebellion."
"The upcoming trial next week is not canceled," Judge Breyer stated in his ruling, scheduling a three-day bench trial to proceed. (AP) GRS GRS
(Only the headline of this report may have been reworked by Editorji; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
