Newsom Thought He Beat Trump... 'Whoops Not So Fast There Gavin' [WATCH]

A federal judge has ruled that President Donald Trump acted unlawfully in seizing control of California’s National Guard during recent unrest tied to anti-ICE demonstrations in Los Angeles.

The decision, issued Thursday by U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer, sided with California Governor Gavin Newsom and ordered that control of the state’s National Guard be returned immediately to the state.

“His actions were illegal—both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution,” Breyer wrote in the ruling.

“He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith.”

BREAKING: Judge Breyer orders Trump to return control of the National Guard back to California, saying the call-up was illegal. https://t.co/RjvefxZKIm pic.twitter.com/yBT8w5ypzD

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) June 13, 2025

Trump’s Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

Breyer emphasized the constitutional limits on executive power, writing, “Federalism is not optional. Even the president cannot legislate by fiat.”

The legal dispute stems from President Trump’s move to federalize approximately 4,000 National Guard troops amid ongoing riots, looting, and violent demonstrations in Los Angeles.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

The unrest erupted during a wave of anti-ICE protests that escalated into clashes with federal law enforcement.

President Trump had issued a federal proclamation to assume control of the California Guard, citing threats to federal personnel and facilities.

But Judge Breyer rejected the justification, concluding the legal basis was insufficient.

In his Thursday order, Breyer granted the plaintiffs’ request for a temporary restraining order and took immediate steps to halt the federal government’s deployment of California’s National Guard.

“Defendants are temporarily ENJOINED from deploying members of the California National Guard in Los Angeles,” the ruling stated.

“Defendants are DIRECTED to return control of the California National Guard to Governor Newsom.”

The court gave federal officials until noon on June 13, 2025, to comply and required plaintiffs to post a $100 bond within 24 hours.

A hearing was scheduled to determine whether the restraining order should be converted into a preliminary injunction.

Later that evening, the Trump administration filed an emergency appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The appeals court responded by granting a temporary stay of Breyer’s order, halting enforcement while further proceedings are conducted.

The court scheduled a briefing and a remote hearing, with a government response due by June 15, reply due June 16, and a Zoom hearing set for June 17.

“The court has received the government’s emergency motion for stay pending appeal. The request for an administrative stay is GRANTED. The district court’s June 12, 2025 temporary restraining order is temporarily stayed pending further order,” the Ninth Circuit stated.

Whoops not so fast there Gavin … 9th Circuit entered a stay… https://t.co/hwoU5q6O3x

— Harmeet K. Dhillon (@HarmeetKDhillon) June 13, 2025

California Attorney General Rob Bonta praised the district court’s ruling, calling it “an important step forward in protecting our communities and our rights while we continue to make our case in court.”

“The Trump administration had no right to federalize 4,000 California National Guard troops without authorization from Governor Newsom,” Bonta said.

“Trump’s actions were illegal, trampled on our state sovereignty, escalated tension on the ground, and promoted rather than quelled unrest.”

Bonta pushed back on the need for a military response in Los Angeles.

“We aren’t in the throes of a rebellion. We are not under threat of an invasion. Nothing is preventing the federal government from enforcing federal law,” he said.

He also cited the support of retired military leaders. “Just yesterday, a group of former secretaries of the Army and Navy and retired four-star admirals and generals joined together to publicly support our lawsuit,” Bonta said.

Those officials warned that improper domestic military deployments could jeopardize key national security and disaster relief missions.

“The truth is, the president is looking for any pretense to place military forces on American streets to intimidate and quiet those who disagree with him. It’s not just immoral—it’s dangerous, and it’s illegal,” Bonta added.

“We’d rather we have a president who follows the law and complies with the Constitution,” Bonta said.

“It’s not a good thing for the great United States of America to have a president, the most powerful elected official on the face of the Earth, to violate the law so frequently, to have such contempt for the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law.”

“He’s done it again,” Bonta concluded. “And it’s incumbent upon me and my fellow Democratic attorneys general… to be consistent and resolute, unapologetic and immovable in our commitment to taking [him] to court each and every time he breaks the law.”

The Trump administration pushed back strongly against the ruling. White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said, “The court’s order is unprecedented and puts our brave federal officials in danger. The district court has no authority to usurp the President’s authority as Commander in Chief.”

“The President exercised his lawful authority to mobilize the National Guard to protect federal buildings and personnel in Gavin Newsom’s lawless Los Angeles,” Kelly added.