A federal appeals court has temporarily upheld President Donald Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops in downtown Los Angeles, allowing their continued presence amid ongoing protests against federal immigration enforcement actions. The decision, issued on June 13, 2025, stays an earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who had ordered the removal of the troops, citing concerns over the legality of the federalization process.
The protests erupted following a series of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids targeting undocumented immigrants across the city. Demonstrations have been concentrated in downtown Los Angeles, particularly around federal buildings such as the Wilshire Federal Building, which have become focal points for both protest activity and federal protection efforts.
In response to the escalating demonstrations, President Trump authorized the deployment of approximately 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 active-duty Marines to Los Angeles. The administration justified the move by invoking the Insurrection Act, asserting that the deployment was necessary to protect federal property and personnel amid what it described as “lawless violence” directed against federal law enforcement efforts.
California Governor Gavin Newsom challenged the federalization of the state’s National Guard, arguing that the president’s actions exceeded his statutory authority and violated the Tenth Amendment, which reserves certain powers to the states. On June 12, Judge Breyer ruled in favor of the state, stating that the president had not followed congressionally mandated procedures in federalizing the National Guard and that the deployment was not justified under the circumstances.
However, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay of Judge Breyer’s order, allowing the federal deployment to continue pending further legal proceedings. The appeals court’s decision means that the National Guard and Marines will remain in place in Los Angeles at least until a scheduled hearing on the matter.
The presence of federal troops in Los Angeles has intensified political tensions between the Trump administration and California state officials. Governor Newsom has publicly condemned the deployment, labeling it an “unwarranted federal intrusion” and asserting that local law enforcement agencies are capable of managing the protests without federal assistance. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has also criticized the federal response, emphasizing the city’s commitment to protecting the rights of its immigrant communities.
The deployment has sparked broader national debates over the use of federal military forces in domestic law enforcement roles, the balance of power between state and federal governments, and the rights of individuals to protest government actions. Legal experts and civil liberties organizations have expressed concern that the federalization of the National Guard in this context may set a precedent for future interventions in state affairs.
As the legal battle continues, the situation on the ground in Los Angeles remains tense. Protesters have vowed to continue their demonstrations against ICE raids and the federal government’s immigration policies. Local authorities have implemented curfews in certain areas of the city to maintain order, while federal troops continue to guard key federal facilities.
The upcoming appeals court hearing will be closely watched, as it may have significant implications for the scope of presidential authority in deploying military forces domestically and the autonomy of state governments in managing their internal affairs.