A federal appeals court ruled on Friday, October 23, 2026, in a 2-1 published opinion in Newsom v. Trump, No. 25-3727, that President Donald Trump broke the law when he federalized 4,000 California National Guard members in June 2025 and sent them into Los Angeles over Governor Gavin Newsom's objection, according to reporting on the ruling and the Governor's Office statement issued the same day.
Source: Governor of California (gov.ca.gov)
The panel affirmed US District Judge Charles Breyer's order enjoining the deployment in Los Angeles and directing that control of the California National Guard be returned to Governor Newsom. Judge Jennifer Sung wrote the majority opinion, Judge Eric Miller joined it in full and wrote a concurrence, and Judge Mark Bennett dissented.
Trump had relied on 10 U.S.C. § 12406, which allows a president to federalize the Guard where there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion, or where he is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws. The majority held that neither condition was met: the Los Angeles protests against immigration raids were not a rebellion, and 'regular forces' means the regular US military, so the government had not shown it needed the Guard to enforce federal law. Sung wrote: 'Defendants have not made either of the required threshold showings here. Thus, they have not carried their burden.'
Source: MEAWW (AP photo/reporting)
The ruling follows the US Supreme Court's order last year in Trump v. Illinois, which barred a similar federalization of the Illinois National Guard and changed the legal test the panel applied. The Governor's Office said today's decision also rejects the President's assertion that there was a 'rebellion' in Los Angeles, holding that claim was not 'a colorable assessment within a range of honest judgment.' The decision is binding precedent for future Ninth Circuit panels in similar cases unless overturned or superseded.
Governor Newsom said: 'Yet another court has issued a complete rejection of Donald Trump's illegal, authoritarian takeover of our state's National Guard. California fought back against this potential power grab, and in doing so created essential legal precedent that not only protects Californians but all Americans.' Attorney General Rob Bonta, who filed the suit on Newsom's behalf, said deploying the Guard in Los Angeles was 'a clear example of federal overreach.' Those are the statements of the winning side in the case.
In dissent, Judge Bennett argued the court should not have decided the case because the administration wanted to dismiss its appeal and return to the trial court to litigate the impact of the Supreme Court's ruling, writing that the majority was 'relying primarily on outdated briefs prepared amid a shifting legal landscape.' Trump's National Guard deployment in Washington, DC, which relies on a different legal authority, remains a separate matter and was not decided by this ruling.