Federal Judge Orders Trump Administration to Withdraw National Guard from LA Amid Criticism Over "National Police Force"
A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration must withdraw National Guard members from Los Angeles, citing a lack of evidence that the deployment was necessary six months after protests over immigration ended. The decision comes as part of a gradual withdrawal process that began in July.
Judge Charles R. Breyer found no evidence to support the continued use of the National Guard in LA, stating that control of the remaining 300 Guardsmen must be transferred to Governor Gavin Newsom. The judge's ruling describes the deployment as a "national police force made up of state troops," and notes that despite the Trump administration's claims, there is no significant evidence that federal law enforcement is hindered.
The ruling has been welcomed by both California Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta, who accused President Trump of creating a "traveling national police force" as part of his attempts to exert control over local communities. Newsom described the deployment as an attempt to "displace the very communities they took an oath to serve."
The decision has sparked criticism from the White House, which claims that President Trump exercised his lawful authority to deploy National Guard troops in support of federal officers and assets following violent riots in LA. A spokesperson for the White House stated that the administration looks forward to achieving "ultimate victory" on the issue.
As expected, the Trump administration is likely to appeal the decision, which has significant implications for the ongoing debate over police power and state control.
A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration must withdraw National Guard members from Los Angeles, citing a lack of evidence that the deployment was necessary six months after protests over immigration ended. The decision comes as part of a gradual withdrawal process that began in July.
Judge Charles R. Breyer found no evidence to support the continued use of the National Guard in LA, stating that control of the remaining 300 Guardsmen must be transferred to Governor Gavin Newsom. The judge's ruling describes the deployment as a "national police force made up of state troops," and notes that despite the Trump administration's claims, there is no significant evidence that federal law enforcement is hindered.
The ruling has been welcomed by both California Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta, who accused President Trump of creating a "traveling national police force" as part of his attempts to exert control over local communities. Newsom described the deployment as an attempt to "displace the very communities they took an oath to serve."
The decision has sparked criticism from the White House, which claims that President Trump exercised his lawful authority to deploy National Guard troops in support of federal officers and assets following violent riots in LA. A spokesperson for the White House stated that the administration looks forward to achieving "ultimate victory" on the issue.
As expected, the Trump administration is likely to appeal the decision, which has significant implications for the ongoing debate over police power and state control.
so they're saying it's not necessary for a "national police force" but like what's next? deploying troops all over the country just to keep an eye on stuff? 
also can't help but think about all the resources being wasted on this when we got real problems like climate change and poverty 
they're not gonna be able to hide behind this national police force thingy forever, it's getting old news 
what's next, them deploying troops to chicago or new york? that'd be a whole 'nother can of worms 
! that's a huge win for Gavin Newsom and the people of California - no more 'national police force' 
300 National Guard members just chillin in LA? 
it's like, hello federal judge Charles R. Breyer saw through the hype and said NOPE 
we don't need some authoritarian attempt to control our cities! 
anyway, this is a huge reminder that even in times of 'chaos' our governments are supposed to prioritize community safety over brute force 
Just heard about the judge's ruling and I gotta say, it seems like common sense to me... I mean, if there's no evidence that the deployment was necessary six months after protests ended, then why keep them? 
It's not like they're trying to help or anything. The whole "national police force" thing sounds super fishy to me. California Governor Gavin Newsom is totally on point with his comments about displacing local communities. We need our leaders to actually listen to the people, you know? 
. I mean, isn't that what the police are for? They're supposed to protect us locally, not some generic federal authority 
. I get that there were riots and all, but shouldn't we be focusing on rebuilding and healing rather than deploying troops like they're in a foreign country 
.
. i mean its clear he was just looking to exert his authority over local communities without any real evidence to back it up. and now the judge is stepping in and saying 'hold up, nope' 
? I mean, what's next? The whole country going to be one big militia 
. It's like they're trying to create some kind of authoritarian regime out of thin air 
. I'm just glad someone is holding the administration accountable 
. Maybe this will finally put an end to this whole "national police force" nonsense 
... or maybe it'll just get appealed and we'll be back where we started 
governor newsom is being super dramatic rn... i mean wut r we even talking bout here? the national guard isnt even a police force lol its like half a solution to tryin 2 keep the peace 