In a troubling display of judicial overreach, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer—a Clinton appointee and brother to retired liberal Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer—has ruled against President Donald Trump’s federalization of California’s National Guard, claiming it violates the Posse Comitatus Act. This decision not only undermines the president’s constitutional authority to maintain national security but also emboldens figures like California Governor Gavin Newsom, whose obstructionist tactics have exacerbated chaos at the border.
The facts are clear: In June, facing rampant anti-ICE riots and protests that threatened federal operations, Trump wisely federalized about 4,000 National Guard troops and a small number of Marines to support immigration enforcement in California. This was no violation but a measured response to a crisis, with most troops already demobilized by the time of the ruling.
The administration, backed by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Major General Scott Sherman, argued convincingly that the Posse Comitatus Act doesn’t apply here, and that courts must defer to the executive branch on such deployments—as affirmed by the Ninth Circuit in a prior related decision. Trump’s move was about protecting American sovereignty, not domestic policing, and it aligns with his broader efforts to secure borders and restore order in Democrat-run cities plagued by crime.
Newsom’s role in this fiasco is particularly egregious. By objecting to the federalization and fueling the lawsuit, Newsom prioritized his progressive ideology over public safety, turning California into a sanctuary for disorder. His actions reflect a broader pattern among blue-state leaders who resist federal authority when it doesn’t suit their agenda, even as they beg for resources during emergencies. This ruling, if upheld, could hamstring Trump’s plans to deploy the Guard elsewhere, like in Washington, D.C., leaving communities vulnerable to the very unrest Newsom’s policies encourage.
Judge Breyer’s bias is evident: Ignoring the Ninth Circuit’s call for deference, he fixated on the remaining 300 troops and their training, twisting facts to fit a partisan narrative. This isn’t justice; it’s activism from the bench, potentially setting a dangerous precedent that weakens presidential powers at a time when strong leadership is needed.
Trump’s administration is right to appeal, and with a likely path to the Supreme Court, there’s hope for reversal. In defending our nation, Trump has shown resolve against both external threats and internal sabotage. Americans should support his efforts to put security first, rejecting this flawed ruling and the obstruction from leaders like Newsom.
