A unanimous three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that former President Donald Trump can maintain control over California’s National Guard during ongoing legal proceedings, temporarily halting a lower court’s order that would have returned authority to Governor Gavin Newsom. 

The three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that ruled in favor of President Trump consisted of Mark J. Bennett (appointed by President Donald Trump), Eric D. Miller (appointed by President Donald Trump), Jennifer Sung (appointed by President Joe Biden).

On June 7, Trump ordered 4,000 California National Guard troops into federal service for 60 days, specifically to protect federal personnel and property. This move was made over the objections of Governor Newsom, who argued that the deployment would escalate tensions and divert resources from critical state functions like wildfire response and drug enforcement.

The National Guard was called to Los Angeles, where a few hundred protesters had gathered after reports of asylum seekers were being detained without humane accommodations after showing up for routine ICE check-ins. 

In response, President Trump invoked his authority under 10 U.S.C. § 12406, a federal statute that allows the president to “call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State” if certain conditions are met, such as when the president is unable to execute federal laws with regular forces alone.

While the government said protesters were violent, saying protesters blocked and attacked federal officers, vandalized property, and clashed with law enforcement over several days, people and journalists in Los Angeles described the protests as largely non-violent, and said many times law enforcement were the instigators. 

Once the National Guard arrived in Los Angeles, the protests grew to over 1,000 people, but continued in isolated areas. 

Governor Newsom and the State of California quickly filed suit, alleging that Trump’s actions were “ultra vires” (beyond his legal authority) and violated the Tenth Amendment, which reserves certain powers to the states. They also claimed procedural violations, arguing that the president failed to properly coordinate with the governor as required by law.

On June 12, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer sided with Newsom, issuing a temporary restraining order (TRO) that blocked the deployment and ordered control of the Guard returned to the governor. Judge Breyer found that the statutory conditions for federalizing the Guard, including the presence of a rebellion or an inability to enforce federal law, were not satisfied, and that Trump had not properly issued the deployment order “through the governor” as required by statute.

The Trump administration immediately appealed and sought an emergency stay of Judge Breyer’s order. On June 19, the Ninth Circuit granted the stay, allowing Trump to retain control of the California National Guard while the lawsuit proceeds.

In its opinion, the appeals court made several key findings:

Statutory Authority Likely Satisfied: The panel concluded that President Trump likely acted within his statutory authority under 10 U.S.C. § 12406(3), which allows federalization of the Guard when the president is unable to execute federal laws with regular forces. The court cited evidence of violent protests and interference with federal officers as a sufficient basis for the president’s determination.

Judicial Review Permitted, But Highly Deferential: The court rejected the administration’s claim that presidential decisions under § 12406 are completely insulated from judicial review. However, it emphasized that courts must be “highly deferential” to the president’s judgment in such matters, citing longstanding legal precedent.

Procedural Compliance Likely Met: The panel found that the statutory requirement for orders to be issued “through the governor” was likely satisfied when the Secretary of Defense transmitted the order to California’s Adjutant General, who acts in the governor’s name under state law. Even if there had been a procedural misstep, the court said, it would not justify the broad relief granted by the district court.

No Gubernatorial Veto: The court made clear that the law does not give governors the power to veto or block a president’s order to federalize the National Guard.

President Trump celebrated the ruling on social media, calling it a “BIG WIN” and asserting that the federal government would protect Americans when local authorities could not. 

Governor Newsom, while expressing disappointment that federal control would continue for now, welcomed the court’s rejection of Trump’s broadest claims of unchecked presidential power. 

“The court rightly rejected Trump’s claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court,” Newsom said. “The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump’s authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens.”

Currently, Trump retains control of the California National Guard for now, but this could change depending on the outcome of the next district court hearing or further appellate review. The state of California has the option to request a rehearing by the full Ninth Circuit or to appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court if they are dissatisfied with future rulings.