ICYMI: Judge Rules Trump Administration’s Use of Military Troops in LA is Unlawful

OAKLAND — Today, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that the Trump Administration’s use of federalized California National Guard troops and Marines for civilian law enforcement in Los Angeles violated the Posse Comitatus Act. The court permanently enjoined the Trump Administration from engaging in the same or similar activity in California in the future, including but not limited to, engaging in arrests, apprehensions, searches, seizures, security patrols, traffic control, crowd control, riot control, evidence collection, interrogation, or acting as informants. 

Below are key excerpts from today's opinion by U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer:

On the Trump Administration’s Explicit Violation of Federal Law: 

“The record is replete with evidence that Task Force 51 executed domestic law in these prohibited ways … Moreover, Defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act willfully … Defendants knowingly contradicted their own training materials, which listed twelve functions that the Posse Comitatus Act bars the military from performing … They did so while refusing to meaningfully coordinate with state and local officials … And they 'coach[ed]' federal law enforcement agencies as to what language to use when submitting requests for assistance in an attempt to circumvent the Act. These actions demonstrate that Defendants knew that they were ordering troops to execute domestic law beyond their usual authority. Whether they believed that some constitutional or other exception applied does not matter; 'ignorance of the law is no excuse.'" 

On the Trump Administration’s Effort to Create a National Police Force: 

“President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have stated their intention to call National Guard troops into federal service in other cities across the country—including Oakland and San Francisco, here in the Northern District of California—thus creating a national police force with the President as its chief.”

“Further, President Trump’s recent executive orders and public statements regarding the National Guard raise serious concerns as to whether he intends to order troops to violate the Posse Comitatus Act elsewhere in California…” 

'I have the right to do anything I want to do. 
I’m the President of the United States. 
If I think our country is in danger, and it is in danger in these cities, 
I can do it.' 
President Donald J. Trump, August 26, 2025 

On the Infringement of States’ Rights: 

“Because Defendants’ alleged violations of the Posse Comitatus Act include allegations that Task Force 51 troops have engaged in law enforcement—a domain traditionally within the state’s control—California has suffered an injury that gives it standing to challenge those violations.”

On the Risk of Harm to California: 

“Without injunctive relief, California would lack any remedy against Defendants’ unlawful use of the U.S. military in a way that infringes on California’s police power and risks economic and other harms to California’s residents … It is ahistorical and illogical to think that Congress reacted to this by passing a statute that had as its sole enforcement mechanism federal prosecution of individual troops by the same federal government that would have ordered the troops to engage in domestic law enforcement.”

“Defendants mention that only 300 National Guard troops remain stationed in Los Angeles, suggesting that injunctive relief is unwarranted because their footprint is smaller than it was in early June. Their point is not well taken. Those 300 National Guard troops are set to remain deployed through November, see Aug. 5 Activation Order, and they have already been improperly trained as to what activities they can and cannot engage in under the Posse Comitatus Act.”

On the Trump Administration’s Sustained Effort to Bypass the Law:  

 “The Court will not take Defendants’ invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the Act itself … President Trump did not rely on the Insurrection Act when he federalized the California National Guard … This is, perhaps, a tacit admission that President Trump would be unable to make the showing, required under the Insurrection Act, to rebut the presumption that state and local officials in Los Angeles were unable or unwilling to act … The Court therefore concludes that § 12406(3) is not an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act. If the President wants to avoid the Act’s restrictions, he must invoke a valid exception—like the Insurrection Act, along with its requisite showing that state and local law enforcement are unable or unwilling to act.”

A copy of the court’s order is available here.