FOLLOW US

The Trump administration has pulled back from a legal standoff over control of National Guard troops in Los Angeles, retreating from an effort that had kept hundreds of California soldiers under federal command despite a lower court ruling.

In a short filing Tuesday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, Justice Department lawyers said they would no longer fight a court order restoring authority over the Guard to California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The administration formally withdrew its request to maintain federal control while the appeal moves forward.

Federal Lawyers Step Aside

In the filing, government attorneys said they “do not oppose lifting of the partial administrative stay and hereby respectfully withdraw their motion for a stay pending appeal.” The decision removes a key procedural barrier that had delayed enforcement of the trial court’s ruling.

The move follows last week’s U.S. Supreme Court decision in Trump v. Illinois, which cast fresh doubt on the administration’s legal rationale for using National Guard troops in domestic law enforcement roles. While Tuesday’s filing does not concede the merits of California’s case, it signals a tactical retreat that could hasten the Guard’s return to state control.

Newsom Calls It an End to Intimidation

Newsom responded sharply on social media, calling the withdrawal an acknowledgment that the federal strategy was untenable. “This admission by Trump and his occult cabinet members means this illegal intimidation tactic will finally come to an end,” the governor wrote on X. He added that he is awaiting a formal 9th Circuit ruling to return the California National Guard fully to state service.

Troops Still in Limbo

Court records show roughly 300 California Guard members remain under federal control, including about 100 who were still active in Los Angeles earlier this month. In mid-December, video reviewed by The Times showed dozens of troops quietly departing the Roybal Federal Building downtown in the middle of the night after an appellate court ordered them to decamp. Armed soldiers had patrolled the building since June.

Judge Warned of Constitutional Fallout

Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer ruled that President Trump had illegally seized control of California’s National Guard during protests tied to immigration enforcement. Breyer ordered the remaining federalized troops returned to Newsom, rejecting the administration’s claim that once federalized, Guard units could remain under presidential command indefinitely.

Breyer warned that such a theory would tilt the constitutional balance between state and federal authority, granting the president unchecked power over state military forces.

A Broader Legal Battle

The Los Angeles dispute is one front in a wider legal war over presidential authority to deploy armed forces inside U.S. cities. Similar challenges involving Guard deployments in Oregon and Illinois are advancing through the courts, where judges — including several conservative appointees — have expressed skepticism that such decisions are immune from judicial review.

Members of Congress have also begun examining the deployments, voicing concerns about civil liberties and the expanding presence of military forces in civilian settings.

As the administration retreats from this procedural fight, the larger question remains: how far presidential power can stretch before it snaps against the guardrails of the Constitution.