A federal judge in California ruled on Tuesday that President Donald Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles during immigration protests was illegal, violating the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts military involvement in domestic law enforcement. The ruling, which is on hold until September 12, allows for potential appeals and highlights ongoing tensions between federal and state authorities over immigration policies.
In June 2025, Trump deployed National Guard troops to Los Angeles in response to protests against immigration raids, arguing that military presence was necessary to quell violence and protect federal officers. California Governor Gavin Newsom opposed the move, suing the administration and asserting that state law enforcement could handle the situation without military intervention. The protests were part of broader demonstrations against the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement actions, which have been a focal point of political debate.
US District Judge Charles Breyer found that the deployment violated the Posse Comitatus Act, a law from 1878 that prohibits using the military for civilian policing tasks. Specifically, the judge cited activities such as setting up protective perimeters, traffic blockades, and crowd control as illegal under the act. Breyer emphasized that these actions constituted enforcement of domestic laws, which is beyond the scope of presidential authority without congressional approval.
The Trump administration defended the deployment, arguing that the Posse Comitatus Act did not apply because the troops were solely protecting federal agents and not directly enforcing laws. White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly criticized the ruling, calling Judge Breyer a ‘rogue judge’ and vowing to appeal, stating that the president has the authority as Commander-in-Chief to protect American cities. The administration is likely to challenge the decision in higher courts, potentially setting a precedent for future deployments.
Despite the ruling, Judge Breyer did not order the immediate withdrawal of the approximately 300 remaining troops in Los Angeles, allowing them to stay until September 12 to maintain order during the appeal process. This temporary reprieve aims to prevent any sudden disruption while legal proceedings continue. The ruling applies only to California, but it could influence similar cases in other states where Trump has considered deploying troops, such as Chicago or Washington DC.
Trump responded to the ruling by threatening to redeploy troops to Los Angeles, accusing Governor Newsom of weakness and claiming that his intervention prevented the cancellation of the 2028 Olympics. In a White House event, Trump suggested that violence might resurge without military support and hinted at expanding deployments to other cities. His comments reflect a broader strategy of using military force for domestic issues, which has raised constitutional concerns among legal experts and lawmakers.
The decision underscores the legal and political battles over the limits of executive power and states’ rights. Judge Breyer warned that Trump’s actions risked creating a ‘national police force’ with the president as its chief, emphasizing the importance of judicial oversight in maintaining the separation of powers. This case is part of a series of conflicts between the Trump administration and state governments, particularly on immigration and law enforcement matters.
Looking ahead, the ruling could have significant implications for future presidential use of the military in domestic affairs. It may lead to more lawsuits and legislative actions to clarify or reinforce the Posse Comitatus Act. The outcome of the appeal will be closely watched, as it could determine the balance of power between federal and state authorities in emergency situations involving military deployment.
