LOS ANGELES, June 9, 2025 — President Donald Trump’s deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles has ignited a fierce legal and political battle, as California officials decry the move as an overreach of federal authority and a threat to civil liberties. The deployment, aimed at quelling escalating protests over recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids, marks the first time in six decades that a president has federalized a state’s National Guard without the governor’s consent.
The protests erupted following coordinated ICE operations across Los Angeles on June 6, which resulted in the arrest of 44 individuals, including David Huerta, president of SEIU California. Huerta was detained for allegedly obstructing federal agents during a raid and sustained injuries during his arrest. His detention galvanized demonstrators, leading to widespread protests in areas such as downtown Los Angeles, Paramount, and Compton. Clashes between protesters and law enforcement ensued, with reports of tear gas, rubber bullets, and flash-bang grenades used to disperse crowds. A British photojournalist was among those injured during the unrest.
In response to the escalating demonstrations, President Trump invoked Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code to federalize the California National Guard, bypassing Governor Gavin Newsom’s authority. The president justified the action by citing the need to suppress what he termed a “rebellion” and to restore order in the city. Trump’s decision has been met with sharp criticism from California officials, including Governor Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, who argue that the federal intervention is unnecessary and exacerbates tensions.
Governor Newsom announced plans to file a lawsuit against the Trump administration, asserting that the deployment violates the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts the use of federal military personnel in domestic law enforcement. “The federal government is taking over the California National Guard and deploying 2,000 soldiers in Los Angeles—not because there is a shortage of law enforcement, but because they want a spectacle,” Newsom stated. He emphasized that California law enforcement agencies are capable of managing the situation and urged protesters to remain peaceful.
Legal experts have expressed concerns about the precedent set by the federalization of the National Guard without state consent. Critics argue that the move could infringe upon First Amendment rights and represents a dangerous expansion of executive power. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has indicated plans to challenge the deployment in court, highlighting the potential for civil liberties violations.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defended the president’s decision, attributing the unrest to Governor Newsom’s “bad decisions” and asserting that the deployment was necessary to protect public safety. “Governor Newsom has proven that he makes bad decisions. The president knows that he makes … stated. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt echoed this sentiment, accusing California’s Democratic leaders of abdicating their responsibility to protect citizens.
The deployment has further strained relations between the federal government and California’s leadership, highlighting deep divisions over immigration policy and the use of federal authority in state matters. As legal challenges unfold and protests continue, the situation in Los Angeles remains tense, with both sides steadfast in their positions.