SAN FRANCISCO – A panel of three appellate judges in San Francisco heard arguments by attorneys for President Trump and California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Tuesday, over whether the president has the authority to send in the National Guard to Los Angeles without the governor’s consent.
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judges Mark Bennett of Honolulu, Eric Miller of Seattle, and Jennifer Sung of Portland —will preside over the hearing remotely in a case simply titled Trump v. Newsom. KTVU livestreamed the hearing at noon.
The hearing will be heard in San Francisco at the James R. Browning U.S. Courthouse, though the courtroom will only have spectators, no judges.
And right off the bat, Bennett and Miller led the questions of Trump’s team, asking pointed questions about the power of the president.
Newsom’s arguments
Newsom briefly won a temporary restraining order last Thursday, when U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer said that Trump exceeded his authority in sending in 4,000 National Guard members to Los Angeles to protect ICE agents during immigration enforcement actions without getting Newsom’s consent first.
Specifically, Breyer, a President Bill Clinton appointee, ruled that Trump violated the Tenth Amendment, which defines power between the federal and state governments. The order applied only to the National Guard troops and not Marines who were also deployed to the LA protests. The judge said he would not rule on the Marines because they were not out on the streets yet.
In addition, Newsom argued that the troops who were originally deployed by Trump to protect federal buildings were actually escalating tensions and promoting civil unrest.
Title 10 allows the president to call the National Guard into federal service when the country “is invaded,” when “there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government,” or when the president is unable “to execute the laws of the United States.”
Breyer said in his ruling that what occurred in Los Angeles does not meet the definition of a rebellion. describing a “documented record of sustained, ongoing mob violence.” He told the judges that there more more than “1,000 violent protesters” last weekend outside a federal building “and it required the National Guard. They were essential to protect that building.”
Judges for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco hear the Trump v. Newsom case remotely. June 17, 2025 Photo: Joseph Cousins
Trump’s arguments
Trump’s attorneys then immediately appealed that decision to the Ninth Circuit, which meant that the National Guard has been allowed to remain in Los Angeles.
Brett Shumate, an attorney for the federal government, argued that Trump complied with the statute by informing the general in charge of the troops of his decision and has the authority to call in the Guard even if he had not.
Shumate also argued before Breyer that the president’s decisions are not subject to judicial review.
Shumate continued to argue this point before the three judges, describing how
The judges
Bennett and Miller were appointed by Trump. Sung was appointed by then-President Joe Biden.
George Washington University of Law professor Laura Dickinson told KTVU that a judge’s political appointment doesn’t necessarily forecast the conclusion of a case.
“Judges do their best job to apply the law neutrally,” she said.
What’s next
While many cases before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals can take months, some legal experts say that a ruling in this case could come within days. And then again, the ruling would most likely be on a temporary basis.
That’s because, whoever loses this ruling could then ask the full appeals court, whose 29 judges include 16 appointed by Democratic presidents, for a new hearing before an 11-judge panel.
And then whoever loses that ruling could appeal to the Supreme Court for a final ruling.
