LOS ANGELES — A federal judge in California on Tuesday ruled that the Trump administration violated a 19th-century law when it mobilized 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles in June.
Lawyers representing California argued during a three-day trial last month that President Donald Trump had exceeded his authority by deploying federal troops after thousands of protesters took to the streets of downtown L.A. to protest his immigration policies.
California had asked U.S District Court Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco to order the Trump administration to return control of the remaining troops to Gov. Gavin Newsom and to stop using the military “to execute or assist in the execution of federal law.”
The Department of Justice countered that the deployment was necessary to protect federal property and personnel, and that the troops acted within the confines of an obscure law called the Posse Comitatus Act.
The 1878 statute prohibits the president from using the military as a domestic police force without approval from Congress.
“The context matters,” Justice Department attorney Eric Hamilton said during the trial. “If the purpose is the protection of law enforcement officers, it isn’t law enforcement in the first place. It’s instead protection.”
But Breyer seemed skeptical, pushing Hamilton several times on what limits, if any, the Posse Comitatus Act posed to the president under his argument.
“What’s the threat today? What was the threat yesterday? What was the threat last week or two weeks ago?” he asked Hamilton. “It’s the absence of any limits to a national police force. That’s what I’m sitting here trying to figure out.”
Meghan Strong, a California deputy attorney general, argued that having a standing army in Los Angeles defied a “deep-rooted policy against military involvement in civilian life” and created an environment of fear.
The “chilling of economic activity in Los Angeles, including the closure of restaurants, the cancellation of events and people staying home for fear of the military” were some of the lasting effects of the deployment of federal troops, she said.
The Department of Defense ordered some 4,000 California National Guard members and 700 Marines to Los Angeles in June. Several hundred National Guard members remain in the city, while all the Marines have returned to their regular stations.
The trial centered on the testimonies of three key figures. Two were ranking members of the task force overseeing the mission, and the third had decades of experience in immigration enforcement.
Maj. Gen. Scott Sherman, who commanded the National Guard troops, and William Harrington, deputy chief of staff for the task force, each told the court that intelligence briefings suggested there was minimal risk to immigration officers during several operations.
During an exchange with Breyer, Sherman said he was told by his chain of command that federal troops could conduct security patrols as well as traffic, crowd and riot control, in addition to protecting federal property and personnel.
“We were allowed to do these four things because it was in line with what the president was directing,” Sherman said.
Breyer bristled.
“What limiting factors are there, to the use of this force?” Breyer asked. “Why is the federalized National Guard, even though it’s been drawn down, still in place?”
Hamilton said the guard members and Marines were serving in a protective function, which is not a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.
“In other words, we’re going to see federal officers everywhere if the president determines there’s a threat to the safety of federal agents?” Breyer pressed Hamilton. “That’s what you’re saying the law is.”
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
