The legal battle over Donald Trump’s anti-immigration policies has intensified as a US appeals court temporarily blocked a ruling that ordered the president to return control of California’s National Guard to the state’s governor. The decision came just hours after a lower court had barred the federal government from deploying National Guard troops to Los Angeles.
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit paused the lower court’s ruling, which threatened to undermine Trump’s efforts to crack down on immigration and federalize the National Guard in California. A hearing has been scheduled for June 17 to determine the fate of the lower court’s decision.
The district court judge in San Francisco, Charles Breyer, who had initially barred the federalization of the National Guard, deemed Trump’s actions illegal and in violation of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, expressed confidence that the ruling would stand, criticizing Trump’s attempt to use the military against American citizens as a threat to democracy.
The legal dispute stemmed from a lawsuit filed by California challenging the legality and constitutionality of Trump’s order to mobilize the National Guard without notifying the state governor. Breyer questioned the government’s argument that the president had unlimited discretion, likening it to the actions of a monarch.
The Trump administration argued that California’s lawsuit sought an extraordinary court order that would impede federal operations. The government also deployed Marines to Los Angeles, but Breyer did not address this move in his ruling.
In a separate lawsuit, California and other states challenged a resolution signed by Trump that revoked California’s waiver to implement strict emissions standards for vehicles. The resolution, which blocked California’s ban on petrol-powered cars by 2035, was deemed unconstitutional by the plaintiffs.
The ongoing legal battles between California and the Trump administration highlight the clash between state and federal powers. The outcome of these cases will have significant implications for immigration policies and environmental regulations in the US. The White House has yet to respond to the latest developments in the legal disputes.
With additional reporting from correspondents in New York and Washington, the situation remains fluid as the courts continue to weigh in on the legality of Trump’s executive orders.
