Breaking News: Court of Appeal Authorizes Trump to Maintain Control of National Guard in Los Angeles
Published on: 20/06/2025 – 10:41 CEST
By: Di Euronews Agenzie: AP
Court of Appeal Upholds Trump’s Control Over National Guard in Los Angeles
The Court of Appeal of the Ninth Circuit of the United States has authorized President Donald Trump to maintain control of the National Guard in Los Angeles, rejecting the appeal of California Governor Gavin Newsom. This decision overturns a previous ruling by a lower court that had deemed the presidential intervention illegitimate. The controversy arose from the deployment of the military during protests sparked by Trump’s immigration measures, marking one of the most contentious civil crises in recent years.
Sufficient Evidence Justifies Federal Intervention
According to a unanimous decision by the appeal jury composed of three judges, the Trump administration has provided “sufficient” evidence to justify the federalization of the National Guard. The court highlighted that the disorders posed a real risk to federal agents, with some immobilized by demonstrators and buildings and federal vehicles targeted with violent attacks, including the throwing of concrete and bottles. The court emphasized that “the interest of the federal government to prevent such accidents is significant,” justifying Trump’s intervention in an emergency context and potential paralysis of local authority.
Governor Newsom’s Disappointment and Legal Battle
Governor Gavin Newsom expressed profound disappointment with the outcome, calling it a blow to state sovereignty. However, he also welcomed the court’s recognition of the need to justify similar actions before the judges. “The president is not a king and is not above the law,” Newsom said, promising to continue the legal battle. Trump immediately celebrated the court’s decision on his Truth Social platform, defining the sentence as a “great victory” and reiterating his hard line on internal security.
Implications for Presidential Powers and State Sovereignty
This case has the potential to become a relevant legal precedent in defining the constitutional limits of executive authority during internal crises. The possibility for a president to federate the National Guard without state consent had been rarely exercised since the war, and always with strong political and legal reserves. The outcome of this case could influence future presidents in their use of internal military force, especially in protest contexts, civil emergencies, or political tension. For Trump, the sentence represents a symbolic success that strengthens his narrative on order and control. For Newsom and other governors, it sounds an alarm bell on constitutional state powers.
Evergreen Context: The Role of Federal and State Authorities
Understanding the role of federal and state authorities in managing crises is crucial. Historically, the federal government has intervened in state affairs during times of significant civil unrest, such as the Civil Rights Movement and the Watts Riots in the 1960s. However, these interventions have often been contentious, raising questions about state sovereignty and the balance of power. As we move forward, the debate on the appropriate role of federal authorities in state affairs is likely to continue, with this recent decision adding a new layer to the conversation.
Stay tuned to archyde.com for more updates on this breaking news story and other relevant developments. Your voice matters—share your thoughts and engage with our community on the future of presidential powers and state sovereignty.
