Fact Check: "California's powers are being stripped under Trump's orders."
What We Know
The claim that California's powers are being stripped under Trump's orders stems from recent events involving the federal government's deployment of military forces in Los Angeles. On June 6, 2025, the federal government, through Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), initiated operations in Los Angeles without prior notification to local law enforcement, leading to community unrest and protests against these actions (source-1). In response to the escalating situation, President Trump declared the federalization of the California National Guard, deploying thousands of soldiers to the area (source-1).
Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta have publicly opposed these actions, arguing that Trump's order infringes upon the state's rights and the role of the Governor as Commander-in-Chief of the California National Guard (source-2). They filed a lawsuit seeking to block the federalization of the National Guard, asserting that Trump's actions were unnecessary and illegal (source-2).
Analysis
The evidence suggests that President Trump's actions have indeed led to a significant federal intervention in California's governance, particularly concerning law enforcement and military deployment. The federalization of the National Guard without the Governor's consent raises questions about the balance of power between state and federal authorities. Governor Newsom's lawsuit claims that this federal action violates both the U.S. Constitution and the President's Title 10 authority, which governs the use of the National Guard (source-2).
However, the situation is complex. While the Governor's office and various community leaders have expressed strong opposition to the militarization of Los Angeles, some argue that federal intervention was warranted due to the unrest caused by ICE operations (source-1). The deployment of military forces in civilian contexts is a contentious issue, with critics labeling it as a potential overreach of executive power (source-1).
The credibility of the sources involved in this dispute varies. The statements from Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta are official government communications, which lend them authority but may also reflect political motivations. Conversely, independent analyses from legal experts and military officials could provide a more nuanced view of the implications of such federal actions (source-1).
Conclusion
The claim that California's powers are being stripped under Trump's orders is Partially True. While there is substantial evidence that Trump's federalization of the National Guard and military deployment in Los Angeles represents an overreach of federal authority, the situation is complicated by the context of unrest and the actions taken by federal agencies like ICE. The ongoing legal battles and public protests illustrate the contentious nature of this issue, highlighting both the state's resistance to federal intervention and the federal government's justification for its actions.
