Fact Check: U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer's Ruling on Trump's National Guard Deployment
What We Know
On June 11, 2025, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ruled that President Donald Trump's deployment of the National Guard in California was illegal. The ruling stated that the deployment violated the Tenth Amendment and exceeded the president's statutory authority under Title 10 of the U.S. Code, which governs the mobilization of National Guard troops (AP News) [source-1]. Breyer's decision specifically addressed the context of protests in Los Angeles related to federal immigration raids, asserting that the situation did not meet the legal definition of a rebellion that would justify federal intervention (Washington Post) [source-2].
The judge noted that the protests were a fundamental exercise of First Amendment rights, stating, “Individuals’ right to protest the government is one of the fundamental rights protected by the First Amendment” (CNN) [source-6]. Following this ruling, the Trump administration filed an appeal, arguing that the president has the constitutional authority as Commander in Chief to deploy National Guard troops without state consent (Time) [source-8].
Analysis
The ruling by Judge Breyer is significant in that it challenges the extent of presidential authority over state National Guard forces. Breyer's interpretation of the Tenth Amendment emphasizes the division of powers between state and federal governments, particularly in domestic matters (AP News) [source-1]. The judge's assertion that the protests did not constitute a rebellion is critical, as it directly impacts the legal justification for federal military involvement.
The sources cited provide a consistent narrative regarding the ruling and its implications. The AP News article provides a detailed account of the events leading up to the ruling and the immediate reactions from both state officials and the Trump administration, highlighting the contentious political climate surrounding the deployment (AP News) [source-1]. The Washington Post further elaborates on the legal arguments presented by both sides, indicating that the administration's appeal is based on a broader interpretation of executive power (Washington Post) [source-2).
However, the reliability of the sources is generally high, as they are established news organizations known for their journalistic standards. The articles present factual information and quotes from the ruling and involved parties, allowing for a well-rounded understanding of the situation.
Conclusion
The claim that U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ruled on June 11, 2025, that President Trump’s deployment of the National Guard was illegal and violated the Tenth Amendment is True. The ruling explicitly stated that the deployment exceeded the president's statutory authority and did not meet the criteria for federal intervention as defined by law. This decision underscores the ongoing legal and constitutional debates regarding the balance of power between state and federal authorities.
