Divided Ninth Circuit panel rules Trump's 2025 federalization of California Guard for Los Angeles was unlawful

As of 7:09 a.m. ET, Oct. 25, 2026

A divided federal appeals panel ruled Friday that President Donald Trump exceeded his authority when he federalized 4,000 California National Guard members in 2025 in response to disturbances in Los Angeles, according to the opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The panel affirmed a district court order barring the administration from deploying California Guard members in Los Angeles and directing it to return control of the Guard to Newsom, the opinion in Newsom v. Trump (No. 25-3727) says. Judge Jennifer Sung wrote the opinion. Judge Eric D. Miller concurred, and Judge Mark J. Bennett dissented.

What the court held

The panel found that neither of the two provisions of federal law the administration relied on authorized the federalization order, according to a court staff summary of the opinion. It concluded that California was likely to succeed on its claim that the administration's determination that conditions in Los Angeles on June 7, 2025, amounted to a "rebellion or danger of a rebellion" did not reflect "a colorable assessment" within "a range of honest judgment."

Because neither provision applied, the panel held that the order exceeded the president's statutory authority and violated the constitutional separation of powers, the summary says.

In dissent, Bennett said he would not have decided the appeal and that the majority made "at least three errors," including reaching questions he said were scantly briefed after the Supreme Court's ruling in Trump v. Illinois, according to the summary.

California reacts

"Deploying the National Guard in Los Angeles with no rhyme or reason was a clear example of federal overreach, and it will not be tolerated," California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement. Newsom, in the same release, called the decision "a crucial day for the rule of law."

What is not known

The White House and the Defense Department had not commented in the material reviewed for this report. It was not immediately clear whether the administration would seek further review.