• A federal court initially ruled that Trump's deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles was illegal.
• The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily blocked this ruling, allowing Trump to maintain control over the troops.
• The legal dispute centers around the authority of the President versus state governance as immigration protests escalate.

A federal judge ruled that President Trump unlawfully mobilized National Guard troops in Los Angeles amidst immigration protests, stating that his actions exceeded his statutory authority and violated the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Judge Charles Breyer ordered that control of the National Guard be returned to California Governor Gavin Newsom, significantly reacting to the protests which Trump characterized as a “rebellion.” Breyer emphasized that protests against the federal government are core civil liberties protected under the First Amendment, and should not be construed as rebellion, according to SCMP, AA, and Dawn.

Despite the initial ruling in favor of Newsom, an appeal led to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals placing a temporary hold on Breyer’s decision, allowing Trump to retain command over the National Guard troops. Trump welcomed this decision, claiming it was necessary for maintaining safety in Los Angeles due to the unrest linked to immigration enforcement actions. The appeals court's stay was described as an administrative pause as the case continues to develop, noted India Times and India Times.

The legal conflict has highlighted the ongoing struggles between state and federal powers, particularly in the context of President Trump’s enforcement of immigration laws using military resources. Governor Newsom maintained his position that troop involvement in local immigration enforcement would only escalate tensions, providing grounds for his lawsuit against the federal government. His assertion that there is no rebellion and the federal government is overstepping its bounds echoed throughout his remarks following the court's initial ruling, as reported by Newsweek and AA.

This turbulent situation reflects broader polarizations around Trump’s immigration policies and military tactics, which critics claim exemplify authoritarian tendencies. The deployment included both National Guard and Marines to assist in policing amid protests, further complicating the state's ability to manage local law enforcement without federal influence. Both rising tensions and low-level violence during protests have raised concerns about public safety and proper conduct of federal military presence, affecting local dynamics as indicated by SCMP, Dawn, and Newsweek.