Federal Judges Side With Donald Trump, Shut Down Gavin Newsom’s Lawsuit [WATCH]

A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of President Donald Trump’s decision to federalize thousands of National Guard troops and deploy them to Los Angeles in response to violent riots that left businesses destroyed, officers injured, and one person dead.

The unanimous decision by a three-judge panel on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Trump’s authority to maintain control over approximately 4,000 members of the California National Guard.

The ruling, issued late Thursday, marks a legal setback for California Governor Gavin Newsom, who sued the Trump administration in an effort to retain state control of the National Guard.

Trump’s Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

Newsom had accused the President of acting “unlawfully” and exceeding his constitutional powers.

The court disagreed with Newsom’s arguments. In its opinion, the panel cited the federal government’s compelling interest in restoring order and protecting federal property.

“The undisputed facts demonstrate that before the deployment of the National Guard, protesters ‘pinned down’ several federal officers and threw ‘concrete chunks, bottles of liquid, and other objects’ at the officers,” the ruling stated.

“Protesters also damaged federal buildings and caused the closure of at least one federal building. And a federal van was attacked by protesters who smashed in the van’s windows.”

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

The judges concluded that the federal government’s response to the violence was justified.

“The federal government’s interest in preventing incidents like these is significant,” the court wrote.

President Trump responded to the ruling on Truth Social, calling it a “BIG WIN” for Los Angeles.

He wrote, “[A]ll over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done.”

President Trump congratulates the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for unanimously defending the president’s ability to call in the National Guard.

“We will continue to protect law abiding Americans.”

🇺🇸🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/RRyamSdXB6

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) June 20, 2025

Governor Newsom, in a statement released following the decision, criticized the ruling but claimed partial vindication.

“The court rightly rejected Trump’s claim that he can do whatever he wants with the National Guard and not have to explain himself to a court,” Newsom said.

“The President is not a king and is not above the law. We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump’s authoritarian use of U.S. military soldiers against citizens.”

This fight doesn’t end here. pic.twitter.com/6OZJdLcJK0

— Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 20, 2025

The unrest in Los Angeles that prompted the federal deployment followed more than a week of riots, including events tied to the “No Kings” protest movement, which had spread to cities across the country.

The protests, initially framed as demonstrations against authoritarianism, devolved into violent clashes in several locations, prompting a federal response.

The dispute between the federal and state governments began after Newsom won an initial ruling from U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco.

Breyer had sided with the state, arguing that the Trump administration failed to present sufficient evidence of a “rebellion or danger of a rebellion” that would justify federalizing the Guard.

However, that decision was stayed pending appeal, and Thursday’s appellate ruling overturned Breyer’s order.

The outcome has broader implications beyond California.

The decision may strengthen President Trump’s legal footing to deploy federal forces in other states where protests have turned violent.

Republican leaders have pointed to past episodes of unrest, including riots in Minneapolis and Portland during the 2020 George Floyd protests, as justification for a more assertive federal response to civil disorder.

With protests in most cities now subsiding, attention has turned to the legal precedent set by this case.

The 9th Circuit’s ruling is likely to shape future debates over the balance of state and federal power in times of domestic unrest, particularly in situations involving federal property or personnel.

Connect with Vetted Off-Duty Cops to Instantly Fulfill Your Security Needs