*UPDATE* Judge Denies Newsom Immediate Restraining Order to Block Deployment
Newsom also apparently lied about a phone call from Trump.
SECOND UPDATE: Judge denies Newsom a quickie order.
JUST IN @NewsNation 
Newsom's request for an immediate restraining order denied pic.twitter.com/8HOngWRAyB— Jorge Ventura Media (@VenturaReport) June 10, 2025
*UPDATE* Trump’s team responds:
It seeks an extraordinary, unprecedented, and dangerous court order. If entered, Plaintiffs’ proposed order would jeopardize the safety of Department of Homeland Security personnel and interfere with the Federal Government’s ability to carry out operations. Plaintiffs’ request that this Court supervise the President and Secretary of Defense’s management of military forces is itself highly unusual and indeed non-justiciable under constitutional principles. The Court should reject Plaintiffs’ suggestion that this Court enter an order—on a one-sided record and without hearing from Defendants—on a subject of grave importance that implicates the separation of powers. As Plaintiffs noted in their motion, Defendants request the Court enter an order making Defendants’ opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion due tomorrow at 11 a.m. Pacific time. Defendants request 24 hours to finalize declarations necessary to expose certain of Plaintiffs’ allegations as false and demonstrate the irreparable harm to the Defendants if the Court were to enter the proposed order.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom demanded that a judge issue a restraining order from the time of filing (Pacific time) to block President Donald Trump and his administration from deploying the National Guard and Marines.
“The federal government is now turning the military against American citizens,” claimed Newsom. “Sending trained warfighters onto the streets is unprecedented and threatens the very core of our democracy. Donald Trump is behaving like a tyrant, not a President. We ask the court to immediately block these unlawful actions.”
As set forth in the accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities, a TRO is necessary by 1:00 p.m. on June 10, 2025, to prevent immediate and irreparable harm to Plaintiffs. Absent immediate injunctive relief, Defendants’ use of the military and the federalized National Guard to patrol communities or otherwise engage in general law enforcement activities creates imminent harm to State Sovereignty, deprives the State of vital resources, escalates tensions and promotes (rather than quells) civil unrest. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs seek a TRO and preliminary injunction to preserve the status quo.
Newsom knows his lawsuit against Trump and the administration is hogwash.
Trump deployed the National Guard, citing 10 U.S.C. § 12406.
Newsom insisted that Trump violated the Constitution and acted without lawful authority.
Oh, one more thing. Newsom said Trump never called him.
John Roberts at Fox has a different story:
"President Trump just contacted me from Air Force 1 to say this:
"First call was not picked up. Second call, Gavin picked up, we spoke for 16 minutes. I told him to, essentially, “get his ass in gear,” and stop the Riots, which were out of control. More than anything else, this… https://t.co/fHkI7FEFJJ— John Roberts (@johnrobertsFox) June 10, 2025
Here is the call log: https://t.co/Mmp0Np6aqf pic.twitter.com/nZMY9NevZ0
— John Roberts (@johnrobertsFox) June 10, 2025
I must point out that the video clip Newsom reposted shows Trump stating that he called Newsom a day ago.
The screenshot shows June 7. A day ago was June 9. I don’t know which day Trump meant because the screenshot confirms Newsom did not pick up.
The Washington Post reported Newsom’s comments about a phone call that happened on Friday, June 6. He said Trump rambled on about “trivial subjects,” but “unsuccessfully” moved the conversation “toward serious subjects.”
Newsom described Trump as “gracious,” but said the president never told him about deploying the National Guard or asked about the protests.
The last comment has me thinking. The statute states, “Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States or, in the case of the District of Columbia, through the commanding general of the National Guard of the District of Columbia.”
So, if I remember correctly, Newsom insisted before that he had to consent to the president sending in the National Guard.
Is his story now that Trump did not alert him? Did someone remind Newsom of the statute’s language?
I cannot keep up with these stories. Everyone seems to change their stories.
I cannot blame them. The evidence keeps blowing up their narratives.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
so while videos shows the violence and the looting going on
newsom maxine watters hakeem jeffries alllll denying that violence is taking place
itsssssssssssssss
timeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
It’s just exuberance!!!- Nancy Pelosi
The arsonist-thugs must destroy the store/building, first, before they can find out what’s in it.
Just like Trump and Republicans must first vote in favor of Trump’s “big beautiful budget bill” which adds trillions of dollars to our nation debt before they can find out what is in the “big beautiful budget bill”. Cue up Marjorie Taylor Green for a comment.
It has been online for months, retard.
Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump /
Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump /
Glorious Trummmmmmmp, wonderful Trummmmmp…
It’s not a “budget” bill, retard.
Try to stay on topic.
Poor little troll, trying desperately to stick to his talking points even when Trump is handed a win. Focus, trollboy. The subject is illegal immigration.
*Hic* 🥴🍸
Yeah, it did seem like she was soaked in vodka already. I think the rioters should riot in front of her home in San Francisco. She thinks they are exuberant now, I wonder how she would feel if it were HER house they were burning down??
What pansies. Bring back shoot to kill for looters and arsonists!
When publics safety is threatened with rioting deadly force is reasonable. Why aren’t those behind this crap having very bad days?
Because the local
constabularymyrmidons arrest only patriots.3.82 million people live in LA. The riots and looting are occurring in a small several block radius. This is serious, but it is not a national insurrection. Far more people were involved in the J6 insurrection. But Biden and the Democrats didn’t call in the Marines and US Military.
What a retarded take.
Shut up, you idiot.
JR and its other aliases are a step below moron.
Actually, you have no way of knowing the number or what is involved. Not to mention the unadulterated violence that is now occurring against law enforcement.
Only a fool would make such a comment, not to mention a fool with TDS.
How could Biden call in the military before he was president? Just curious. How could the Democrats when Trump was the commander in chief? Why do you list the Marines and US military like the Marines aren’t part of the US military?
Do you have any idea what you’re talking about?
1. No one said it was a national insurrection. But an insurrection it is. And if it’s coordinated with ones in other cities then “national” starts to be an appropriate adjective to use after all, although small-scale.
2. J6 was not an insurrection at all. Whatever it was, that term is just not applicable.
3. Of course Biden and the Democrats weren’t in charge at the time, and couldn’t call in the Marines or the Military. Trump, however, did call in the National Guard, but they were delayed by insubordinate people down the chain of command, who should be brought up on charges for that.
“This is serious, but it is not a national insurrection.”
Yet. Your Democrat masters intend to make it one.
Biden wasn’t President on 6 Jan doofus. Trump was President did request National Guard and was turned down. This is public knowledge. Far less “damage” occurred from grandma’s walking through the Capitol building than from one day of looting, arson and assaults in LA. Trump learned his lesson. When illegals started rioting and obstructing Federal Officers and Newsome/Bass refused to do anything he immediately bypassed them and got the National Guard involved which is perfectly legal no matter what fevered dreams Newsome has to the contrary.
Actually, I don’t know why I’m responding as your just a troll who posts to get reactions.
This may just be the time for Trump to defy a judge that exceeds his/her, they /them’s authority
Newscum clown show. He has no political future without aunt nancy to back him up.
After this second round of L.A. fires enabled by greasy Newsolini coddling, enabling and whitewashing criminal-thugs — the first round of fires having been caused by Newsolini’s incompetence and derelict policies — I’d posit that Newsolini now has no political future; period.
btw,,the dnc DOES GET IT
there is constant talk that the dems “just dont get it” why they lost
B/C THEY WIN
they rob they loot they murder
they are 95% covered from prison time as the left runs the show
thats why the left will only stop
when stopped
and debate,, as proven by the dnc,,isnt what they are after
You are off your meds again.
Shut up, idiot.
Says the clown who keeps a printed copy of the “Physicians’ Desk Reference” on his nightstand, for bedtime reading.
You were prescribed at least ten medications to moderate your infantile and stupid anti-Trump animus and obsessions. Sadly, none of them are working.
You’re giving him way too much credit. JR seems more like a badly-programmed AI from 2019. “Trump Trump Trump!!!” I wouldn’t even call him sentient.
You have to take them for them to work. And sometimes I believe that JR fails to take his medications like the good doctors at the mental hygiene institution told him to before discharging him. But there you go and here we are.
Keep calm and have another booster.
At this point, not even meds would help your pathology.
Another district judge… another TRO. Criminals asking criminals to protect criminals? All that Trump did was expose the extent of unenforced law in LA. Lawless behavior evoking more lawless behavior and a dysfunctional police department which now is reported to be breaking down into tribal segments.
There is no TRO, Judge refused to grant. Judge is giving the President and his team time to respond, and there will be a hearing with all parties present on Friday.
So far, so good — that’s what judges do, give parties time to file and then listen to their pleadings in court.
Now if the judge at that point rules in a way that is clearly outside the law, the President can ask the 9th Circuit to enjoin and set up an expedited appeal. Also good and the way the system works.
Mr. Trump is handling this correctly: work the legal side of this completely and on the square. We’ll see if the courts stay within the law and Constitution.
Did you read the story? This judge had the intelligence to deny the TRO.
For now. He’s given the government the time it asked for to prepare a response, and then given the state time to prepare a response to that, and then he’ll decide whether a TRO is appropriate.
Charles Breyer is a serious judge. He’s not one of these radicals.
He seems to be unlike others who love the midnight injunctions decided after hearing one party and not giving the other time to respond. I’ve read a number of articles from very smart people and they all seem to agree that what Trump did was perfectly within his power and obligations as President even if they don’t agree he should have done it. We shall see but my sense is that Newsome knew his suing was stupid but like everything else about him was just a fake public relations ploy.
Milhouse – serious judge is also my observation. His ruling so far in the case is correct procedure. On the flip side, reading through the commentary on his wiki page indicates that he is likely very liberal, so his non partisan take so far is refreshing.
My understanding is that there are two separate statutes ( of sections of the statute) for calling the national guard, One requires the state officials/governor to request the NG and the second statute which doesnt require the governor to request. Apparantly Trumps call for the NG was using the statute that required the govenor’s request.
Newsom is doing his Governor Orval Faubus imitation:
https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/research/online-documents/civil-rights-little-rock-school-integration-crisis
The only question is: will the
DemocratsCommunists start another Civil War so they can play to their racist base?They may try. It won’t work unless they are much better armed and numerous than they are now. But I still think they will start a new global pandemic. It worked for them 5 years ago, and a pandemic would cause all nations to close their borders and nobody could be deported anywhere.
Forty of the 50 states would refuse to close. Most nations would refuse to close. Everyone saw what happened last time.
As the saying goes, even a flatworm learns to turn away from pain.
We’ll see. I’m sure their next pandemic will be a real one, and not a nothing burger like C-19 was. Odds are they will start it in the US so all other nations refuse to take flights from the US. If they engineer something deadly enough, fear will go up to 11.
Problem for them is that by the time they block US flights the virus will already have escaped. Any virus that’s so deadly that it kills quickly is fairly easy to contain because, well, victims don’t have time to spread it. A slow-burn virus will spread out of country before it can be contained. And if other countries were to isolate the US the global economy collapses, and the elites don’t want that. They need something mildly dangerous that kills a small amount of people, but not so dangerous that it results in a risk that they might catch it themselves. That’s a tall order. It’s why they built the nothingburger of covid into a nightmare plague in the media, because it fit the bill nicely. That’s difficult to pull off twice.
It depends on if they have something ready. Diseases are notoriously difficult to control once they’re out, and a lot of the elites are extremely elderly. One slip-up, a virus that’s too dangerous, and they risk their own lives.
Based on what I’ve read Covid was an accidental release of an under-construction virus that wasn’t quite ready for primetime. Part of the problem is that Chinese labs have all the biosecurity of your average 7/11, and the damned thing got out early. But once it did Xi was more than willing to let it be unleashed on the west (he made sure it spread) and our elites here gleefully went along with it because it gave them all sorts of emergency powers. It was like Christmas for the power-hungry.
I don’t doubt they’d try again, but the question is whether the sequel would play out the same way… and I don’t think it would.
How dare he try to stop looters and rioters
Did Greta go to the wrong kerfuffle?
Probably not. Her Spanish is atrocious.
Worse, he’s trying to stop them by sending trained warfighters. Apparently we’d all be safer if he sends untrained warfighters.
LA is large, it’s easy for them to put a peaceful protest far away from where the violent protests are.
I guess some people would rather watch their city burn than have law and order. For the life of me I can’t understand who votes for this guy. Wasn’t Schwarzenegger pretty popular as a Repub governor there? (Yes Rino yeah yeah but only a squish wins in that state on the Repub ticket anyways)
just recent events and how they were handled :
hurricane katrina
train derailment
tornados
demvid19 riots
nyc violence (especially on the subways)
jan 6 protests
current la riots
ALL DECIDED BY THE LEFT regarding sentencing
didnt matter if gop was “in charge” or not
the lefty making the call on “justice”
HEY HOW ABOUT WE JUST CUT BLMPLO A CHECK for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
and then they can come back in a month and demand more
b/c unless the communistnazi is brought to a grinding halt
they are going to decide our fate again
so as I was reading around how many arrests are being made ,,,the numbers of course are very low compared to the mob you seeon the streets
BUT ONE THING CAUGHT MY EYE:
Dallas would not ensure that a conference of pro israel speakers and their paying customers COULD BE KEPT SAFE SO THE CONFERENCE WAS CALLED OFF ( another win for lefty)
BUTTTTT THE DLASS POLICE CHIEF
Said only 1 arrest was made during the protest and not only wont the name the suspect or state what they were arrested for ( hows that for “public trust”???)
THE CHIEF SAID THAT HIS JOB IS TO PROTECT THE PROTESTORS
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE CONFERENCE?? WHERE YOU COULDNT ///WOULDNT PROTECT THEM!!!??
there is no freedom of speech to be protected by the government
IF YOU ARE NOT PREACHING WHAT THEY WANT!!
The police will protect their pensions first and foremost.
Oops! I meant to reply to destroycommunism’s post @ 3:40 PM.
agree
This is part of the Insurrection Act that I believe is relevant:
No mention of insurrectionist governors getting to veto the President. The National Guard is not Newsom’s private army.
Of course the Constitution and the law do not matter to #Resistance Federal judges, who see what they want to see.
The correct framework is not the Insurrection Act b/c it hasn’t been invoked but rather Title 10, a similar but different authority. Generally Title 10 is used in cooperation with Governors to provide Federal funds in a disaster. Here Trump isn’t deploying the NG to patrol the streets of LA. Instead he’s using them as a static security force in/around Federal Buildings.
Huge difference in invoking the Insurrection Act and Title 10. Primarily this is around the disposition of forces and very importantly the ROE. An Insurrection is a ‘combat environment’ requiring an ROE to match those conditions and discarding normal civilian police tactics and procedures for military tactics and uses of force. You arrest ordinary criminals while you bring under fire those involved in an insurrection.
The Insurrection Act is where all this is most likely heading. Trump today made it clear he would consider continued chaos and Communist obstruction in the People’s Democratic Republic of California to be an insurrection.
https://ace.mu.nu/archives/415188.php
And even Title 10 does not make the governor the “co-commander in chief” of the National Guard. There is no card for Newsom to play.
Moreover Newsom cannot be seen as backing down in this fight, since that would end his political career (and maybe put his life in danger at the hands of his own Communist Party). He has to be seen as leading the insurrection – or else! The Antifa/La Raza/Intifada maniacs will tolerate nothing less. So it will be an insurrection.
Each Governor is absolutely the Commander in Chief of that State’s Military Forces both Army National Guard and Air National Guard as well as the unorganized Militia of their State. That’s not even close to being in doubt. Not is the authority of a Gov to modify orders to his own Nat Guard units under title 10…if they are willing/have the stones to do so.
Under Title 10 the flow of orders to National Guard forces in Federal Service goes from POTUS through the Governor to the National Guard units. Newsom can absolutely alter the orders…..but that opens up a can of worms leading to very bad consequences he doesn’t want. Just like his ‘arrest me Bro’ bravado to Tom Homan his legal filing here is performative. Gov Newsom can modify the orders of these units if he dares but he won’t b/c he knows the personal consequences would be dire.
And yet Governor Faubus was pushed aside by Eisenhower when the former tried to use the Arkansas guard to block desegregation in his state. That does not sound like the governor is the commander in chief. Eisenhower federalized the guard, and that was that.
In short: who has the final say? It is NOT the governor. Otherwise Arkansas might still have segregation.
You are totally wrong, not a little bit wrong but absolutely incorrect. The Gov is most definitely the CINC of their State Guard and State Militia. Go look at the Constitution of your own State and it will be plain as day in clear black and white. It is the case in EVERY State.
When the POTUS exercises Title 10 then the POTUS becomes SR in the Chain of Command to the Gov. The statute literally states that orders flow from POTUS through the Governor to the NG units. Take a.look at it for yourself.
In Little Rock Eisenhower didn’t use Title 10 instead he used the Insurrection Act and not only federalized the Arkansas NG units the Governor had called up but also sent in the 101st Airborne to quell the ‘Insurrection’.
Again there’s a big difference between using Title 10 authority which is what’s going on today and using the Insurrection Act. Especially when the use of the Insurrection Act is clearly aimed at ending the ‘Insurrection’ being staged by the Governor …as was the case in Little Rock.
No. When enlisting in the National Guard, soldiers take a dual oath both to the state and the United States. For state deployments the State AG and Governor are in charge, it’s kind of garbled as to which is the ultimate authority but I’ll say the Governor is, but the President of The US is the ultimate authority over the State National Guard and can activate them without the Governors approval or in spite of it.
Newsome has no leg to stand on as Trump used his authority to activate the Guard and deploy the Marines to protect federal officers and buildings which is well within his rights whether or not Newsome likes it.
Diver64,
Nope. Please go review the Constitution of your State and it well spell out that the CINC is the Governor. Heck look at the US Constitution and see where the President may call the State Militia into Federal service or what authority Congress has over the State Militia.
The Governor IS the HMFIC of the State Militia and NG. Period. He doesn’t even lose his place in the Chain of Command under Title 10 authority. The very authorizing statute for a POTUS to ‘federalize’ a State NG directs that the orders flow from POTUS THROUGH the Governor TO the NG Units.
Now can the POTUS using the statutory authority of Title 10 or the Insurrection Act supersede the Governor of a State as the ultimate CINC of that State NG/Militia? Sure but 99.9% of the time the Governor is the CINC of the State NG/Militia. Even under Title 10 and Insurrection Act the Governor is still the CINC of his State NG/Militia but the POTUS by calling them into Federal service is now in ultimate authority.
Think of it like the distinction of administrative v tactical control if it helps you conceptualize this though it isn’t really the best analogy.
Y’all should take a.break from arguing folklore and mythology about the power of the POTUS and getting hung up on wanting the POTUS to have control of the State Militia and go READ the statutes and your own State Constitution + US Constitution. Nowhere in any of that does it state the POTUS can just remove the authority of an elected Governor over his State Militia using Title 10 and sure as Heck not on a day to.day normal 99.9% of the time basis. Arguably the use of the Insurrection Act b/c a particular Gov was in open rebellion with a portion of his Militia against the USA would remove the authority of the Governor from the remaining Militia. IMO it would in a defacto way but not in an official dejure way until his Legislature impeached and removed him. In the event of a State v Federal confrontation each member of the State Militia/NG would face the same bad choice of divided loyalties as Gen Lee expressed in 1861.
FWIW, ICE just posted a couple photos on X chronicling an ICE enforcement operation today in LA. You’ll notice that while there are two federal agents doing the arrests, taking up a position of immediate perimeter security are two US Special Forces soldiers, identified by their very noticeable ‘lightening bolt’ (SSI) patch on their shoulders.
https://x.com/ICEgov/status/1932523385663168688
Not spec ops soldiers. One has the “Tropic Lightning” combat patch on his right shoulder. The other trooper doesn’t have a combat patch. Probably a couple of sharp NG troops.
Quite right. He could be current as my below post indicated or saw deployment with the 25th ID and then moved to California and joined a NG unit.
My mistake. Your eyes are WAY better than mine.
Yep. It’s on his Right Shoulder which is a combat patch aka SSIFWS (shoulder sleeve insignia of former wartime service) which denotes the unit he served with in combat in this case the 25th ID Tropic Lightning.
If I’m not mistaken that is the patch of the 25th ID out of Hawaii. Why they are there, IDK. Maybe on TDY to a unit near LA and deployed with the rest.
Left sleeve is patch of current unit. Right sleeve is for a combat patch (if you have one or even multiple but Soldiers are not required to wear it) and denotes the unit you served in combat. Also applies to Soldiers attached to the unit. The USMC 1st MEF had ‘combat patches’ made for my team in Ramadi as we were an Army team attached to a Marine HQ. Cut us orders and cleared it with ‘Big Army’ G1 getting us official permission to wear it which was a heck of a nice thing to do and probably cost some poor Marine Major a month of time to get it done.
My section leader had three dress green jackets, each with a different combat patch for his tours in Vietnam – 101st Airborne Division, 82nd Airborne Division, and the 173rd Airborne Brigade. He was sent on his first tour. Had so much fun he volunteered for the other two!
When serving with him, I thought he had a screw loose. Many years later, he explained his behavior. He had a NDE (near-death experience) as a child, and was simply not afraid of death.
RIP, Melvin.
Yup. I should have been more clear. When a soldier is active duty and deployed to a defined theater of combat he/she has the right to wear the patch of the unit they were deployed with on their right shoulder. The actual unit they are currently serving with is on the left. Some soldiers have multiple deployments with different units and can wear multiple patches, I have 2 different ones. Some NG soldiers were activated during the Gulf War and assigned to SF Units. They are authorized to wear the SF patch on the right even without SF rocker. I just repeated what you posted but it’s important for people to understand things like this, I think.
Cross branches get’s tricky and some awards do not transfer and can not be displayed. I think Airborne Wings earned the Army are one of them.
Absolutely true and many in the military rely on ‘what they think is correct’ or what my old 1SG told me once in briefing I fell asleep in’ as opposed to what the actual Army Regulation state. Often with CSM they can’t stand it when a Soldier chooses to wear the ‘combat patch’ of another unit v the current unit. Got so bad the Army clarified the issue and went further by granting the individual Soldier 100% discretion to wear or not wear a ‘combat patch’ at all if they chose to go along with the existing discretion to choose which one to wear if they multiple.
I liked to tweak this one particular CSM who somehow made E9 without a GWOT deployment (he had made Desert Storm) by wearing the 1st MEF patch b/c he would go berserk every time I did. He knew I had earned the patch of the current unit and was being obstinate. The first and last time he said something to me over it I had planned ahead and put ALL of my combat patches in my pocket except the current unit..I pulled them out one by one and asked him if it was better now or before like an optometrist does. He turned so red I thought the guy would stroke out. I only did it b/c I had publicly corrected him on this point in a staff meeting earlier in the week and he got butthurt over it.
And that is the key point, Since Trump has so far chosen not to invoke the Insurrection Act, the troops are not being used to enforce domestic law. They are merely protecting those who are properly doing so. Exactly as it should be. Newsom’s complaint that the USA is using “the military and the federalized National Guard to patrol communities or otherwise engage in general law enforcement activities” is untrue.
Should Trump decide to invoke the Insurrection Act then the troops will be able to enforce the law directly, and they will do so.
I continue to be impressed with the quality of legal advice the President is receiving in this term. On each major issue, the team is providing him with the best option which also is the most narrow option that does the job. Mr. Trump is not authoritarian, per the complaints of the progressives — in fact he’s been quite restrained and proper in his responses.
Agreed. No bull in a China shop is necessary. His team is allowing things to play out to maximize the legal position of the Trump Admin when they act. Here, by delaying use of Insurrection Act and simply using NG to protect Federal Property and Federal Personnel it keeps the focus for willing the riots, looting, arson, blocking roadways on the local and State Officials.
Very smart b/c by declining to go into the streets just yet (IMO a d/prog wokiesta Tar Baby) the Responsibility for the failure to end this crap and secure the City remains on Bass and Newsom. The moment Trump uses the authority under the Insurrection Act that responsibility for ‘safety and security, law and order’ in LA falls directly on Trump.
Trump has been flexing executive muscle such as no POTUS has exercised for decades. (Not counting law-breaking by the likes of BHO and JB.) It’s a form of “shock and awe” and it’s put the Dems back on their heels.
Newsom would better be named Loathsom. There may be no one in American politics today that is moreso.
He reminds me of Max Headroom.
So, which judge got he case?
Early this morning, the case was ‘randomly’ (as they all are, allegedly) to Charles Breyer, brother of former SCOTUS Justice Steven Breyer. My presumption is Breyer is how denied the request for TRO. But, I haven’t seen the order yet myself, so I don’t know for certain.
clinton nominated
FYI, it was definitely Breyer….
https://x.com/VenturaReport/status/1932546803049832642
I demand Scumball STFU. To which judge should I shop my demand.
newsom: we still win
now it looks like I trieddd to protect you from bad orangeman and the msm will back him up
the only way we win is go scorched earth on these leftists and defund everything but the
military
courts
treasury
You don’t even have the spelling skills of a 3rd grade elementary student.
Talking to yourself again, Dickweed?
Get the hell out of here.
Yes, he’s difficult to read. Sort of like Cormac McCarthy. But worth the read, as he usually nails it.
You probably never considered that his typing skills are the problem. Spell check would correct his spelling, but he apparently ignores it. His delivery is, then, likely intentional.
Would that be a California 3rd-grader, or a Mississippi 3rd-grader?
But you do.
The judge denies that Newsom’s emergency motion was actually an emergency.
Newsom forgot that if you’re going judge shopping in San Francisco be sure to wear some flowers in your hair.
And wipe your shoes before entering the courtroom.
Newsome was slapped down as he should have been. Trump activating the Guard over Newsome’s head to protect Federal Officers enforcing Federal Law and to protect Federal buildings is perfectly within his authority as President. Newsome’s “irreparable harm” argument is what, that thugs will be stopped from rioting, assault, looting and arson? Strange argument but Newsome has always been a feckless poser.
Thugs might be stopped from thugging.
He’s denying them their identity as thugs, dangit. He’s such a bigot.
Defendants’ use of the military and the federalized National Guard to patrol communities or otherwise engage in general law enforcement activities
But that’s not what Trump did/is doing. He is merely deploying them to protect federal buildings and federal agents doing their jobs under federal law. So, the entire premise for the desired injunction is false.
“…the President may call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State in such numbers as he considers necessary to repel the invasion, suppress the rebellion, or execute those laws. Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States”
For what it’s worth this is my reading on the above. The President (in the circumstances listed in the act) has permission to activate the NG. He is not required to do so. However the actual orders that come from that activation are to be made by the governors of the state. “Shall be issued through..” is not the same thing as requiring the consent of the governors nor is it the same thing as meaning the governor must initiate the order. It is (IMHO) a delegation by the President to the governor. The President may or may not activate the guard. When he chooses to do so than the governor shall order the guard to activate. He simply has no choice. He is acting by Presidential order. An action that would usually be done by federal orders is delegated to the state. Probably for reasons of expediency. Bottom line Trump does not need Newsom’s consent. Newsom however must order the activation of NG troops as per Trump’s order.
Leave a Comment