California Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on June 8, 2025, over the unlawful deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles. This legal action has further intensified the ongoing conflict between state and federal authorities, particularly regarding the Trump administration’s approach to civil unrest.
In a move that has caught the attention of both state and national leaders, California filed a legal challenge accusing the Trump administration of exceeding its constitutional authority by sending National Guard troops into Los Angeles without state consent. The deployment is in response to ongoing protests sparked by the Trump administration’s controversial immigration policies, particularly aggressive ICE raids that have drawn widespread protests in Southern California.
The Lawsuit and Its Legal Basis
The lawsuit centers around a violation of the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which grants states the right to manage their own affairs without federal interference. California argues that the federal government overstepped its bounds by ordering the National Guard to assist local law enforcement in quelling protests without prior consultation or agreement with state officials.
Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta argue that the use of military personnel to address domestic issues such as protests is not only unnecessary but also unconstitutional. The legal team filed the suit in the U.S. District Court, calling for a halt to the use of federal forces in what they describe as an effort to intimidate protesters and suppress free speech.
The deployment came after several nights of clashes between protestors and local law enforcement officers, who had already been struggling to manage the tensions surrounding the immigration raids. Despite the local government’s handling of the situation, the Trump administration’s insistence on federal intervention raised alarm within the state government, particularly among progressive leaders.
Background of the Protests
The protests, which began in late May 2025, were organized in response to a series of high-profile ICE raids targeting undocumented immigrants across Southern California. These raids led to the arrests of hundreds of individuals, causing widespread fear and anger within immigrant communities.
While some supporters of the raids argue that they are necessary to enforce federal immigration law, critics believe the tactics used are aggressive and violate basic human rights. The raids have caused significant disruptions in communities, particularly in Los Angeles, where immigrant families are deeply integrated into the social and economic fabric of the city.
The protests quickly grew in size and intensity, with many demonstrators calling for the abolition of ICE and the defunding of law enforcement agencies that collaborate with the federal government on immigration enforcement. This public outcry caught the attention of federal officials, prompting the decision to deploy National Guard troops to “restore order.”
The National Guard’s Role and the Governor’s Response
California’s National Guard has a unique relationship with the state. Unlike other states, where National Guard troops are controlled solely by the federal government, California’s National Guard is under the joint command of both the state and federal governments. This has led to tense situations in the past, as California has frequently clashed with federal administrations over the use of Guard forces.
Governor Newsom strongly condemned the federal intervention, stating that local law enforcement was fully capable of managing the protests without federal assistance. “The use of military force against peaceful protesters is an unacceptable escalation, and we will not stand by while this administration tramples on the rights of our citizens,” he said in a statement.
State lawmakers have also voiced concerns that the federal deployment could further exacerbate tensions between law enforcement and local communities, particularly communities of color that have historically been subjected to over-policing.
The lawsuit is not only a legal challenge to the deployment but also a broader challenge to the Trump administration’s handling of immigration and civil unrest. Legal experts believe the case could have significant implications for the future use of military forces in domestic affairs, particularly when it comes to protests and civil disobedience.
National Reaction and Political Fallout
The lawsuit has drawn sharp divisions along partisan lines, with Republicans defending the administration’s actions and Democrats rallying behind California’s legal challenge. National Guard deployments are typically used during natural disasters or national emergencies, but some critics argue that their use in domestic protests represents an overreach of executive power.
This legal battle is not only a reflection of the broader political divide over immigration policy but also a stark reminder of the power struggles that exist between state and federal governments in the United States.
If the court rules in favor of California, it could set a precedent for limiting federal military authority in domestic matters, particularly when states assert their rights to manage local affairs.
