Judge Rules Trump violated the law by sending the La-Calmatters National Guard

President Donald TrumpThe deployment of the Military in Los Angeles violated the Federal Laws And its use of the Armed Forces must be limited strongly in California, a federal judge has ruled on an opinion on 52 pages, which has embarked on the president’s conviction that he has been abolished by the power to send military to the US cities.

“There were indeed protests in Los Angeles and some people involved in violence,” writes Charles Braire, the judge who controls the process. “Still, there was no rebellion, no civil law enforcement authorities were able to respond to the protests and apply the law.”

The judge blocks the Trump administration from the use of the military to engage “arrests, fears, searches, seizures, security patrols, movement control, clot control, riots control, gathering evidence, interrogation or acts as informants, but not” the Trump administration presents.

Braire’s ruling dresses a phase of the legal saga because of the use of the Los Angeles military. A three -day trial followed In August, this included about 10 hours of testimony from military officials, cross -interrogations and arguments from lawyers representing California and the federal government.

His order stains an increasingly conjugated legal environment on a national scale after Trump implemented National Guards in Washington, Colombia District – Aided by several republican governors – and has threatened Send troops to Oakland and Chicago and New YorkS

Braire’s decision follows closely the arguments of California General Prosecutor Rob Bont, which he made. They claim that 700 American infantrymen and 4,000 national guards, which the Trump administration has deployed in southern California, violate a 19th -century law called the Posse Committee Act. It prohibits the military from participating in law enforcement.

Bont emphasized this point when he asked about the case of a recent press conference. “There was a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act that the military was incorrectly on the spot in LA, participating in civil law enforcement, contrary to what it envisages (the Komite Act),” Bont said. “They were involved in blockades and support of the perimeter and the application of movement and implementation of immigration.”

Less than 300 troops of the National Guard remain in Los Angeles, although the Ministry of Defense issued a New Enable Order To deploy troops in California for another 90 days on August 5. Trump settled the military After protests In Los Angeles erupted against Federal Immigration MetteS

California’s attorneys claim that by supporting federal immigration agents, the National Guard fulfilled obligations to enforce the Federal Statute – and the Ministry of Defense of the Ministry of Defense Guide – Prohibition. This guide is said that the Armed Forces cannot do the following: “gathering evidence; security functions; crowd and traffic control; and operational, manipulations or control points for staff.” California lawyers Indicate this language in their legal pants.

Federal Lawyers of the Ministry of Justice firm that these actions are not considered law enforcement. They also said that California is wrong to judge the Posse Comitatus Act in a civil court, since this act is a criminal statute, not civil.

Military as “National Police”

California’s attorneys also said in their briefings that the use of the National Guard in Los Angeles means that soldiers can accompany any number of federal agencies applying nation laws, such as food inspectors, medical fraud investigative or voice rights to “monitor” election.

Braire seemed convinced of this argument. He writes in his decision that if the government’s justification is that the military can help law enforcement agencies when there is a danger to employees, there is no logical end to the participation of the military, since the law enforcement agencies are dangerous.

Brayer’s decision echoed his question on the third day of the trial of the borders of military participation. “So, again, I come back to what I am really disturbed by: it is that restrictive factors are about the use of this power,” after the incident that requires the presence of the troops, it was extinguished, Breir asked a federal lawyer during the trial of last week. “How a person looks at this national police force coming out of the place where the threat was and begins to fulfill other laws.”

How often does the national guard join immigration agents

California’s attorneys showed during the trial that the National Guard soldiers have participated in over 60 operations with the federal forces to enforce immigration. The National Guard accompanies agents for the enforcement of immigration of about 75% of the missions of agents between June and the beginning of July, testifies to the immigration and customs officer of the field for the application of customs for Los Angeles. The Guards created armed perimeters that blocked traffic and people, the lawyers said and detained at least one protester.

The troops also participated in a mission in Park Park, a public park in Los Angeles, which a government note presented during the process is described as “demonstrating a federal scope and presence”.

The National Guards arrived with Humvees and tactical vehicles. Other evidence from the federal documents that California lawyers show that “this intelligence does not show a goal of high value or threat to the federal functions of this place” and that “there is no indications that the failure to act would lead to a loss of life or significant property damage.”

Is the National Guard subordinate to put Comitatus?

Another major question in the process was whether the National Guard was covered by the Posse Comitatus Act, even when the president uses an unclear law, federalizing troops.

That is, Braer wrote. “The court will not take the defendants’ invitation to create a whole new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act, which invalidates the act itself.”

The federal government claims that the National Guard is not bound by Posse Comitatus and can actually comply with the laws of the nation because of another law that allows the president to call the National Guard in emergencies. It was a statement that Brayer answered skeptically during the process.

“Why I spent one day examining slide after slide and regulation after regulation and reports after reports on the soldiers to make sure they are in accordance with the Posse Comitatus Act. Brayer asked the federal government’s lawyer during the trial.

“If the President wants to avoid the law restrictions, he must refer to a valid exception – as UprisingAlong with the need, showing that state and local law enforcement authorities are unable to or do not want to act, “Braire wrote.

California’s lawyer, Megan Strong, a lawyer representing California, said a note from the Ministry of Defense on June 16, which she determined that she shows that the use of the National Guard to implement laws “would be contrary to the Posse Committee Act.” This opinion was confirmed again by William Harrington, the deputy head of the working group 51, which is the military unit located in Los Angeles.

“You said that if a National Guard troops were federalized as part of the deployment, they would lose the ability to carry out law enforcement activities because of the Posse Comitatus Act,” Strong told Harrington in the trial last Monday.

“Right,” Harrington replied.

California’s lawyers said during the trial that the National Guard could still play a role in emergencies, as long as it is not the law enforcement. These include the guard of federal buildings or even supplyAs the National Guard did during the Nixon Administration in 1970, while postal workers were strikersS