California’s latest courtroom drama just took a sharp turn as a federal judge refused to slam the brakes on President Donald Trump’s troop deployment to Los Angeles.
The Washington Examiner reported that District Judge Charles Breyer declined to grant an emergency request from California officials to block the use of National Guard and Marines in L.A., setting the stage for a critical hearing on Thursday at 4:30 p.m. Eastern in San Francisco.
Let’s rewind to the weekend, when violence erupted in Los Angeles amid protests over immigration raids, prompting President Trump to send in the National Guard—without Gov. Gavin Newsom’s blessing, a move not seen since 1965.
By Monday, Trump doubled down, dispatching Marines to bolster efforts to curb the unrest, declaring from the Oval Office, “If we didn’t get involved, right now, Los Angeles would be burning.”
Well, that’s one way to put out a fire—pour on some federal muscle. While Trump’s decisiveness might resonate with those tired of watching cities spiral into chaos, it’s worth asking if this heavy-handed approach risks fanning the flames of tension instead.
Not surprisingly, Gov. Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta weren’t thrilled, filing a lawsuit on Monday claiming Trump’s actions violate the 10th Amendment and federal law, and requesting an urgent temporary restraining order.
In their plea, Newsom and Bonta argued that Trump’s troop deployment causes “imminent harm to State Sovereignty” and “promotes civil unrest.”
That’s a bold claim, but let’s be real—when has federal intervention in state matters ever sat well with local leaders?
California’s argument might appeal to those wary of overreach, yet it sidesteps the reality of streets gripped by violence that local forces seem unable to contain.
On Tuesday, the state pushed for an immediate block on the troop presence and demanded a response from the Trump administration by 4 p.m. Eastern, only to see the Justice Department request 24 hours to prepare its case.
Judge Breyer, in a filing just after 5 p.m. Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, granted the Justice Department’s request for extra time, ordering their opposition to be filed by 2 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday.
California officials were instructed to reply to that opposition by noon Eastern on Thursday, ensuring a rapid-fire exchange before the hearing later that day. Turns out, even in court, actions have consequences—and deadlines.
Until then, the scheduling order allows the National Guard and Marines to remain active in Los Angeles, a decision that keeps Trump’s boots on the ground despite California’s objections.
The Justice Department, in a notice to the court, called California’s request “highly unusual” and argued it’s not even a matter the courts should decide under constitutional principles.
If that’s not a polite way of saying “mind your own business,” I don’t know what is—though it does raise a fair point about the limits of judicial overreach into executive actions.
Meanwhile, Trump stood firm on Tuesday, insisting the National Guard will stay “until there’s no danger.” That’s a strong stance for law and order, though skeptics might wonder if “no danger” is a finish line that ever truly arrives in a city as complex as L.A.