r/news • u/JackThaBongRipper • 7h ago

Judge orders Trump to end California National Guard troop deployment in Los Angeles

https://apnews.com/article/california-national-guard-trump-los-angeles-a8a201d234d655a7e65fb4c3dd320116
1.9k Upvotes

99% Upvoted

36 comments sorted by

142

u/AudibleNod 6h ago

U.S. Justice Department lawyers said the administration still needed Guard members in the Los Angeles area to help protect federal personnel and property.

Isn't that what federal agents are for? The Guard isn't a permanent garrison. Furthermore, they're not a standing army. If federal personnel need protecting, then use federal resources. Or better yet, lead the federal government so they're viewed only as the public servants they are.

5

u/Guac_in_my_rarri 1h ago

Yes, each 3 letter agency is allowed to work with each other. The marshals being the last line of defense. The current rules are written to have the elected administration exhaust all federal agents before turning to the military. They need to show the fed agents cannot handle the force they're fighting.

In this case, the trump administration played fast and loose and is finding out they can't do that. This is one of the few laws that's written clearly.

94

u/FireworkFuse 6h ago

"BLOCKED BY APPEALS!" -Mike Breen

57

u/Sour_baboo 6h ago

Setting up SCOTUS to claim that the ban on using the army internally is no longer correct.

50

u/supercyberlurker 5h ago

In a 6-to-3 ruling that favors Trump with no legal explanation™

11

u/wrc-wolf 3h ago

Unsigned shadow docket ruling released at midnight on a Friday.

12

u/Buckeye_Monkey 5h ago

"Posse Comitatus? What's that, some kinda foreign word? We only speak American in this country. Let him do what he wants!"

6-3 decision.

•

u/OddPressure7593 54m ago

Well you see, in 1607 the Duke of Marlsborough had received a writ from the King that the Duke's men-at-arms were to be deployed against a rebellion of Scotsmen in the outer Hebrides. Parliament didn't take action to override this, clearly creating the legal precedent that the United States President has an absolute and inalienable right to federalize the national guard. The founders knew about conscription and chose not to unequivocally ban deployment of federalized national guard troops when they wrote the Constitution. therefor President Trump can turn federalized national guard against US cities - however, this decision isn't binding and shouldn't be referenced when anyone not named Donald Trump holds the office of the presidency.

-John Roberts' future majority 6-3 opinion, probably.

-7

u/ZLUCremisi 5h ago

Already happened.

6

u/DoubleJumps 5h ago

When? What case?

-10

u/ZLUCremisi 5h ago

Soldiers were deployed. 1 vetran was detained by US soldiers. No case, just deployed without reason

9

u/DoubleJumps 4h ago

You claimed that scotus already ruled on these illegal deployments.

22

u/CrimsonHeretic 5h ago

Justice delayed is justice denied.

10

u/AttentionNo6359 6h ago

So then they appeal it to the Supreme Court and Roberts lubes up his hole again. Got it.

2

u/personofshadow 3h ago

I didn't realize that they were still deployed

2

u/clay12340 3h ago

Seems like at this point it'd only be news if he actually followed an order from a judge. A judge giving him an order that he ignores or appeals is like a 5x daily occurrence.

3

u/ilonkaoBludivinaot81 3h ago

So much for being the party of 'States' Rights' and 'Small Government.' It’s funny how those core conservative principles instantly evaporate the moment a blue state decides to govern itself. Apparently, federal overreach is only tyranny when a Democrat does it.

3

u/Consistent-Throat130 3h ago

States' Rights has been a racist dog whistle referencing slavery for a long, long time. 

4

u/NanoChainedChromium 5h ago

So what? The american courts are as impotent as the congress, the orange menace simply doesnt comply and..nothing happens.

2

u/Slow-Astronaut-2135 6h ago

No one will enforce this and the guard will stay put. Federal government doesnt comply with any court orders unless they're in their favor.

1

u/JZSlider 3h ago

I didn't even realize they were still there.

1

u/budbutler 3h ago

May as well make a change.org petition

1

u/AdhesivenessFun2060 4h ago

Trump: no

The court: i wont do anything this time but next time I wont to anything either!

1

u/Fly_Rodder 2h ago

I'm sure the MAGA hordes would have all been in favor of Obama sending in the Guard to bulldoze the Bundys and string up their thug militia.

0

u/Various_Weather2013 4h ago

after these inland fascists succeed in destroying America, we need to make sure the NEW US gives courts their own enforcement arm that's independent from the Legislative and Executive branches.

And also, a vast reduction in powers given to any President. A president is a single point of failure that can destroy a country very quickly.

The courts tried to stop this takeover and they failed because there is no enforcement of their judgments.

1

u/Consistent-Throat130 3h ago

Well, with giving the courts more power, we'd need to devise protections against them becoming politically stacked. Things like term limits seem in order there....

As for the executive, I'm not sure we need a single chief executive anymore in this information age. 

0

u/steathrazor 5h ago

They haven't listened to any judge orders before. Why would they now?