Fact Check: "9th Circuit Court rules Trump likely acted lawfully in federalizing California troops"
What We Know
On June 19, 2025, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling allowing President Trump to maintain control over the California National Guard. This decision came in response to a lawsuit filed by California Governor Gavin Newsom, who argued that Trump's actions were illegal and exceeded his authority under the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (NPR, Reuters). The appeals court's ruling temporarily blocks a previous decision by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, who had ruled that Trump's deployment of the National Guard was unlawful (Washington Post).
The appeals court stated that a president has the authority to deploy the National Guard to prevent interference with the execution of federal law. The court emphasized that it would defer to the president's judgment regarding the necessity of such actions, despite the lower court's findings that the protests in Los Angeles did not constitute a rebellion (CalMatters, NPR). The ruling noted that incidents of violence during protests justified the deployment, including attacks on law enforcement and damage to federal property (Reuters, NPR).
Analysis
The claim that the 9th Circuit Court ruled Trump likely acted lawfully in federalizing California troops is partially true. The court did indicate that Trump's actions could be justified under federal law, specifically under § 12406, which allows the president to federalize National Guard troops for specific purposes, including law enforcement support (filed). However, the ruling is temporary and does not definitively conclude that Trump's actions were lawful; it merely allows him to retain control while further legal challenges are considered.
The reliability of the sources used in this analysis varies. Major news outlets like NPR and Reuters provide well-sourced and fact-checked reporting, while the court document itself (filed) offers direct insight into the legal reasoning behind the ruling. The Washington Post also provides a comprehensive overview of the situation, highlighting the implications of the ruling (Washington Post). However, the context surrounding the deployment of the National Guard and the legal arguments presented by both sides are complex and involve interpretations of constitutional law, making it essential to consider multiple perspectives.
Conclusion
The claim that the 9th Circuit Court ruled Trump likely acted lawfully in federalizing California troops is partially true. While the court's ruling does suggest that Trump's actions could be legally justified, it is important to note that this is a temporary ruling and does not definitively resolve the legality of his actions. The ongoing legal proceedings will further clarify the situation.
