Gavin Newsom in court to deploy the Trump La National Guard

Gavard Gavin Newo had A fleeting victory against President Trump Last week, when a federal judge handed over an order that would stop Trump’s deployment at the Los Angeles National Guard. Within the hours thereafter, the Ninth Court of Appeal suspended the decision allowing the troops to remain under Trump’s control.

Today, the Court of Appeal is planned to take the place where it remained in Newsom’s challenge to Trump’s order.

The narrow focus of the hearing – and the judges’ expected order sometime this week – has huge consequences for California. Namely: can Newsom regain the National Guard command against Trump’s wishes?

The tenor of legal arguments is a cruel, reflecting increasing intensity in a quick transfer of relationships Between Trump and a nuance.

Last week Newsom likened Trump with ”Failed dictators.“Trump’s legal team’s arguments” are horrifying, “Newsom’s team wrote to the group of Judges watching the hearing todayS

On Sunday, Trump denied “radical left -wing democrats as” sick of the mind “who” hate our country ” social mediaS “We need to expand our efforts to retain and deport illegal aliens in the largest cities in America, such as Los Angeles, Chicago and New York, where millions of millions of illegal aliens reside,” He statedS

Arguments will be reproduced in front of a three -court panel, two of whom have been appointed by Trump And one of former President Joe Biden, Democrat.

This is not the only hearing to determine who will receive control of 4,000 security members, which Trump has been located on June 7, after protests in the Los Angeles area broke out in response to federal immigration officials who attack jobs and arrest persons who are said to be in the United States without permission. These protests were in full force over the weekendS

On Friday, the lower court, which initially gave way to Newsom’s lawyers, is expected to hear whether to issue a preliminary order blocking Trump’s deployment by military officials, including security guards, in Los Angeles. In order for the Newsom legal team to prevail in this hearing, they will have to clear a higher control threshold. This is because anyone looking for a preliminary order must demonstrate that the merits of their arguments are likely to prevail In full experienceS

But as the hearing this week and last they happen to different judges in different courts, the arguments are similar. Trump’s team says there is a rebellion on the streets. The Newsom team says the local police can handle the protesters and this sending Federal forces further impede the tension.

Trump’s lawyers say this is not even a subject to the courts can weigh, since the president has a complete judgment on when to use the military. Newsom’s lawyers – and the lower court, Charles Brayer – say.This argument failsS “

The lawyers of the US Department of Justice, who represent Trump, have so far claim that the president has his right to dispose of the National Guard under the law he cited last Saturday. Trump wrote last week that “incidents of violence and disorder“He came to LA in his message to call the National Guard. His lawyers continue to maintain that protesters in Los Angeles represent a” rebellion or danger of rebellion against the power “of the US government – the very language in the law that Allows President to Federalize the National Guard of the StateS

Much of the hearing this week is based on what the president has to have under this particular federal law. But Trump did not refer to the full package of his legal powers to send the military to California. This would mean activating the Law on the Uprising, which would allow the armed forces to act as a law enforcement. Currently, the National Guard must protect federal property and officers.

Therefore, the Legal Team of Newsom threw itself into a foot note in its argument with the Court of Appeal that even if the National Guard is not returned to the Newsom control, Trump still needs to be blocked by the fact that the guards carry out “law enforcement activities beyond the protection of federal buildings and staff in these facilities.”

The White House legal team also claims that, contrary to what the Newsom team says, the president under this federal law does not need the official approval of the state governor to call the National Guard.

Attorneys at the California Ministry of Justice, who represent Newsom, claim that only once before the president called for this law to call the National Guard; President Richard Nixon did this in 1970 to deliver the mail during US Post Office in the United StatesS

The National Guard in the Nixon era intervened to effectively replace 200,000 workers who were retaining their work. But in Los Angeles, thousands of law enforcement authorities from local and district agencies patrolled the streets during protests and arrested hundreds of people, Newsom’s lawyers wrote. There is no lack of law enforcement to suppress the pockets of the excitement in Los Angeles, they wrote.

According to Trump’s submission, “the crowd of protesters outside the federal building on June 6, which sparked the initial federalization order … completely scattered within about four hours after the arrival of LAPD,” ​​writes the Newsom Law Team In Sunday submissionS

“As the district court found on the basis of the evidence, the circumstances here are not distant from a” rebellion or danger of rebellion, “writes Newsom’s legal team.