Appeals Court Rejects Trump National Guard Takeover in California

A federal appeals court ruled October 23 that President Donald Trump lacked legal authority to take control of California’s National Guard and deploy roughly 4,000 troops to Los Angeles during protests over immigration raids. The 2-1 decision included the vote of a judge Trump appointed, producing a split over both federal power and how the events on the streets met the law’s requirements.

The troops had already left Los Angeles and control of the Guard had returned to California before the ruling. The decision instead settles, for now, whether the original federal takeover met the conditions Congress set. California Gov. Gavin Newsom welcomed the outcome.

The legal test behind the troop order

Under the federal law at issue, the president may assume control of state National Guard units in specified circumstances, including when ordinary federal forces cannot enforce federal laws or when there is rebellion against federal authority. The appeals court concluded that the record did not show either condition in Los Angeles.

The majority did not ignore incidents of violence. The court acknowledged reports that some protesters threw rocks and that a firebomb was thrown. Its analysis instead focused on the scale and character of the protests as a whole. Most demonstrations were peaceful, according to earlier findings cited by the panel, and there was no evidence of an organized, armed uprising against the federal government.

Judge Jennifer Sung, appointed by President Joe Biden, wrote the majority opinion. Judge Eric Miller, a Trump appointee, joined her. Judge Mark Bennett, another Trump appointee, dissented, arguing that Congress had already given the president authority to put Guard members into federal service under these circumstances.

Why two Trump-appointed judges disagreed

The disagreement centered on how much leeway federal law gives a president during unrest. The majority rejected the administration’s argument that its deployment decisions were effectively beyond judicial review. Bennett took a different view of the statutory power Congress had delegated.

A related Supreme Court decision from December 2025 had already blocked a similar deployment to Chicago. The panel relied in part on that ruling when assessing the California order.

Newsom characterized the judgment as a protection of state authority.

The next decision is whether to appeal

The White House did not immediately comment on the October 23 ruling, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. The administration could request rehearing before a larger Ninth Circuit panel or seek Supreme Court review.

The administration can still ask the full appeals court or the Supreme Court to reconsider the ruling.

References: Appeals court, including Trump appointed judge, sides against him in takeover of California National Guard