The Governor of California, Gavin Newsom, has filed a lawsuit to stop what he sees as illegal actions by President Trump, the Secretary of Defense, and the Department of Defense. He argues that these federal officials are unlawfully deploying members of the California National Guard without proper authority and in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Trump’s Immigration Raids in California
The core principle at stake is that the United States is governed by civilian, not military, rule — a principle enshrined in the U.S. Constitution to ensure government accountability and adherence to the rule of law. Governor Newsom claims that Trump has overstepped his executive powers by using emergency powers excessively. What happened?
Well, you likely already know the basic circumstances. The Trump Administration’s various steps to crack down on immigration have affected California, in particular, due to the state’s high migrant population. Federal immigration raids expanded into California’s agricultural regions, causing panic among farmworkers. Previously limited in scope, enforcement actions started targeting farm fields and packinghouses from the Central Coast to the San Joaquin Valley. At least two Congress members have condemned these actions as unjustified and harmful, emphasizing their economic impact and questioning agency tactics.
As part of the raids, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers had been carrying out enforcement actions at various locations within Los Angeles County and the City of Los Angeles. These operations included executing search warrants at places like Ambiance Apparel, a clothing wholesaler, as well as detentions and arrests at a doughnut shop in the Fashion District and two Home Depot stores in the Westlake District.
Federal officials did not coordinate with local law enforcement agencies such as the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (LASD) or Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), which led to tensions. ICE agents reportedly engaged in military-style operations that sparked panic in the community, including sealing off streets and using unmarked vehicles equipped with paramilitary gear. The enforcement activities resulted in approximately 44 arrests and 70-80 people detained.
Protests Spring Up
Californians weren’t thrilled. In response, members of the public gathered to protest at various locations, including the Edward R. Roybal Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, where detainees were reportedly held. Protests also occurred in other areas like Paramount. While most protesters aimed to express opposition to the Trump Administration's immigration agenda peacefully, there were instances of violence and law-breaking. This included some protestors who threw objects at law enforcement officers and damaged property. State and local authorities, including the LAPD, condemned these acts unequivocally and said they managed the protests effectively without significant escalation into rebellion or insurrection.
On June 7, Trump issued an order calling for federal control over California's National Guard. According to California Governor Gavin Newsom, this move disregarded his role as commander-in-chief of the state's National Guard under the California Constitution.
Grinding the Governor’s Gears
The statute that Trump invoked to justify his action over the California National Guard is 10 U.S.C. § 12406. That law has historically rarely been used on its own, and only under exceptional circumstances — circumstances that do not apply here, according to Governor Newsom. Per the statute, he argues, any orders involving state National Guards must be issued through state governors. But Trump bypassed Newsom when he sent 2,000 members of California's National Guard into federal service on June 7 and another 2,000 on June 9. In addition to deploying National Guard troops, Marines were also being sent to Los Angeles as part of the federal response.
Newsom Takes Trump to Court
On June 9, Governor Newsom filed a complaint in California federal district court on behalf of the state of California against the president himself (in addition to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the U.S. Department of Defense).
The governor argues that Trump invoked 10 U.S.C. § 12406 without meeting its criteria. These include conditions such as invasion, rebellion, or inability to execute laws with regular forces — none of which were present in California at the time. Furthermore, Newsom asserts that the orders for “federalizing” the National Guard should have been issued through state governors, a requirement explicitly stated in section 12406. By bypassing him and issuing orders directly through Secretary Hegseth, Newsom claims this action unlawfully circumvented his role as commander-in-chief of the state's National Guard under both the U.S. Constitution and the California Constitution.
Newsom highlights that local law enforcement was effectively managing protests and had not requested federal assistance. Therefore, Newsom argues there was no legal justification for deploying military forces in this manner. Doing so infringed on state sovereignty and violated constitutional limits designed to prevent federal overreach into state affairs.
Additionally, Newsom emphasizes that these actions risk violating the Posse Comitatus Act. This law restricts military involvement in domestic law enforcement unless explicitly authorized by Congress for extreme situations—a condition not met here.
Finally, it should be noted that the memo authorizing the federalization of the National Guard was vaguely worded. It purports to allow the federalization of National Guard personnel wherever protests against federal government officials are impeding law enforcement, "or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations." This language suggests the Trump administration would like to nationalize the National Guard in any state based on predicted protests, even if none are occurring at the time of federalization.
Newsom v. Trump Is Just Getting Started
Governor Newsom is asking the courts to declare Trump’s and Hegseth’s orders unauthorized and contrary to U.S. laws. He wants the court to prohibit the DOD from continuing to deploy the California National Guard without going through the proper procedure (including going through Newsom and deploying them only for specific reasons outlined in section 12406).
This latest action further formalizes the longstanding cold war between the governor and the president. Trump called for Newsom’s arrest, which the latter responded to with: "These are the acts of a dictator, not a President." Trump’s stance? "I think his primary crime is running for governor because he's done such a bad job."
Related Resources:
- Trump's New Travel Ban Explained (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life
- Top 3 Rights to Know If Stopped by ICE (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
- Court Curbs Trump's Power to Deport Venezuelans as 'Alien Enemies' (FindLaw's Federal Courts)
