A judge has ruled the Trump administration’s use of national guard troops during southern California immigration enforcement protests is illegal.
Judge Charles Breyer ruled Tuesday that Donald Trump’s administration violated federal law by sending troops to accompany federal agents on immigration raids. The judge did not require the remaining troops withdrawn, however.
California sued, saying the troops sent to Los Angeles over the summer were violating a law that prohibits military enforcement of domestic laws. Lawyers for the Republican administration have argued the Posse Comitatus Act doesn’t apply because the troops were protecting federal officers not enforcing laws.
The judiciary, yet again, is out here being the only meaningful check and balance in this speedrunning of a fascist takeover.
The judge did not require the remaining troops to withdraw
The military are still on the ground in LA so what meaningfully changed?
Fair point. Nothing.
also add to that, that the top court of the country was expected to overrule this court and it shows how flimsy this “meaningful check” truly is.
Would have been nice if the fucking JAG corp had taken up that torch within the context of the military command itself, but no, we have to wait for the fucking glacial and compromised civilian judicial system to putter along, and then it’ll just be appealed to the tribunal of six, who will at best be ignored by orangeboi, and at worst will full-throatedly endorse everything he’s doing “because he’s the president”. Fucking tools.
Perhaps the Supreme Court will overrule this?
They don’t need to. The courts can rule that Trump was not allowed to do this, but the Supreme Court decision in Trump v. United States prevents anyone from holding him accountable for having done it anyways.
And that can continue being the case, even in LA again, because he can keep making up different reasons for deploying troops wherever he wants and they’ll need to be challenged in the courts again each time it happens, during which time no one can stop him.
Under normal circumstances, the state would appeal to immediately stop the behavior, but the precedent set within the appeals court (quoted from this very case) is that the courts must be “highly deferential” to the authority of the president, as they cannot interfere with the duties of a higher office on the basis of “speculation” until an official verdict is reached.
That would be some crazy precedent reversal, especially after at least 2 military folks (1 Marine and I think 1 National Guard) both said they saw no real threat to any federal officers. This is the biggest kangaroo court we’ve ever had though, so I guess we wait for Trump to appeal it and see.
it’ll be interesting if he challenged it because the court didn’t push back any significant way.
