Advertisement

Newsom vs. Trump: What to know about California’s lawsuit against the federal government

National Guard troops secure the Metropolitan Detention Center
National Guard troops secure the Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles on June 8.
(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Even a casual reader of this newsletter knows the Trump administration has deployed nearly 7,000 federal troops to L.A. over the last two weeks. Most also know California officials sued to stop them.

(I reported earlier that the line he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed from Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution was first invoked to deploy troops against civilians to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act.)

Advertisement

But if your life and your For You Page are anything like mine, you may not have kept up with the details since then. So as your resident legal affairs correspondent, I’m here to tell you what’s happening with California’s lawsuit against the federal government, and what you should watch for next.

Newsom vs. Trump in a nutshell

California’s June 9 suit makes two big legal claims:

  1. that the unrest in L.A. was insufficient to justify the powers Trump invoked to quell it
  2. that federalized troops were doing (or were likely to do) things they’re not allowed to in those circumstances.

On June 12, U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer — the bowtie-wearing brother of retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer — agreed with the first set of claims, saying the government hadn’t shown evidence of a “rebellion” in Los Angeles and that civilian efforts to frustrate ICE raids were not disruptive enough to trigger 10 U.S.C. § 12406. He issued an order that would have given control of most troops back to Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Trump appealed the order. The 9th Circuit hit pause to review it, leaving the troops in Trump’s hands. A week later, the appellate panel tossed out Breyer’s order entirely. In the court’s Juneteenth ruling, Judge Mark J. Bennett wrote that the Constitution and the U.S. Code gave the president broad authority to interpret the facts as he saw them.

Advertisement

But neither court has yet opined on California’s second major claim: that by assisting immigration raids, troops under Trump’s command violated the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which forbids soldiers from enforcing civilian laws.

(That law has an “ignominious” history. I’ll explain more later this week.)

On Tuesday, Breyer gave state attorneys the green light to start collecting evidence about troop activities “on the streets of communities in Southern California”, and to depose key officials, including ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Field Office Director Ernesto Santacruz Jr. and Maj. Gen. Niave F. Knell.

Meanwhile, DOJ lawyers argued troops aren’t enforcing civilian law; and even if they were, that would be allowed under the statute; and even if it wasn’t, the Northern District of California has limited authority to say so.

Advertisement

(Anyone who listened to Assistant Atty. Gen. Brett Shumate argue before the 9th Circuit last week will instantly recognize this as his signature style.)

So what happens now?

Trump’s June 7 executive order called up troops for 60 days — or at the discretion of the secretary of Defense. Does that mean soldiers could be deployed in Los Angeles indefinitely? That’s something California lawyers have sought to clarify through the courts while the PCA claim is heard. In his Tuesday order, Breyer signaled he could weigh in on it. The one thing we can say for sure is, if California wins, the Trump administration will appeal.

Today’s top stories

A picture of a sign that says: No child is born in the wrong body.
Protesters at a Los Angeles church express their opposition in 2024 to California policy, which supports the teaching of gender identity as more complex and varied than a male/female binary.
(Silvia Razgova / For The Times)

Gender identity in sex education lessons

Immigration raids

Israel-Iran ceasefire

Advertisement

What else is going on

Commentary and opinions

This morning’s must-reads

A new data tool shows how large the gaps are between environmental health risks and outcomes in Latino and white neighborhoods in Los Angeles.

Other must-reads

For your downtime

Guests gather outside Azizam, an Iranian restaurant in Silver Lake
Guests gather outside Azizam, an Iranian restaurant in Silver Lake, during a community backgammon night. The event featured complimentary tea and traditional games aimed at bringing people together in a relaxed and welcoming environment.
(Alex Golshani / For The Times)

Going out

Staying in

Advertisement

And finally ... your photo of the day

A woman works on a sculpture of a dog
“That’s how I give life,” animator-turned-ceramicist Rami Kim said of her hand-built sculptures, including custom figurines she creates for pet owners.
(Juliana Yamada / Los Angeles Times)

Today’s great photo is from Times photographer Juliana Yamada at the garage of animator-turned-ceramicist Rami Kim, who has been making whimsical character-driven ceramics in Los Angeles for more than a decade.

Have a great day, from the Essential California team

Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Andrew Campa, Sunday writer
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to essentialcalifornia@latimes.com. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

Advertisement