California officials have asked a federal district judge to enjoin the Trump administration from using the National Guard in Los Angeles, arguing the high appeals court order allowing the federalization has been treated as a “blank check” to use the forces beyond the Golden State.
In a filing to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, officials argue that there is “no lawful basis” for keeping troops deployed as fiery protests of immigration enforcement operations have died down since their peak in June, when the deployment of National Guard troops began.
“Defendants are treating the President’s June 7 memorandum as a blank check that allows them to federalize state National Guard troops in any number and for any duration they please and to send those troops anywhere in the country, even to places that were not part of their justification for the original federalization,” the filing said.
“Whatever 10 U.S.C. § 12406 permits, it certainly does not authorize the sort of broad-ranging, never-ending federalization and military occupation of American cities that Defendants are perpetrating,” the filing added.
A panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has allowed California National Guard troops to be federalized and deployed to Los Angeles to protect federal assets amid unruly immigration protests since June, after quickly halting U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer’s ruling blocking the deployment. The filing asks Breyer to issue a renewed injunction over subsequent extensions of the deployment, something the federal judge has declined to do so far, citing that the Ninth Circuit is still weighing the merits of the case.
The filing late Thursday cited the Trump administration’s movement of federalized California troops to Oregon and Illinois, where federal courts have blocked the deployment and federalization of National Guard troops for now, as evidence that President Donald Trump’s “unlawful orders have multiplied and expanded.”
The Ninth Circuit panel, which has largely taken jurisdiction over the dispute between California officials and the Trump administration, heard arguments in the case last month, with the length of the deployment being the center of the courtroom’s discussion. Justice Department lawyers argued that the president has no limit on how long he may deploy National Guard troops, while California officials contended that courts should limit how long troops may be deployed.
While the administration has fared well in the lawsuit challenging its deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles, it has faced various setbacks in the courtroom regarding its deployments in Chicago and Portland.
The Portland deployment has been blocked by a federal district judge, an order that is currently in effect, and faces a hearing before the full Ninth Circuit.
DOJ TELLS SUPREME COURT TO GIVE TRUMP ‘EXTRAORDINARY DEFERENCE’ TO DEPLOY TROOPS TO CHICAGO
The Chicago deployment was also blocked by a federal district judge, a ruling upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, leading the administration to appeal the order to the Supreme Court’s emergency docket.
The high court requested additional briefing over whether “regular forces,” which the president must use before justifying deployment of the National Guard, includes the military. The administration told the high court earlier this week that it does not, while Illinois officials insisted that it did. The Supreme Court could issue an order on the emergency request as soon as next week.