A federal appeals court ruled 2-1 on Friday, Oct. 23, 2026, that President Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles last year was unlawful. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit rejected the administration's argument that violent demonstrations protesting immigration enforcement justified federalizing state troops against the wishes of Gov. Gavin Newsom (D). The decision follows a similar Supreme Court ruling regarding a deployment to Chicago.
The legal dispute centered on Trump’s use of Section 12406 of the U.S. Code to federalize 4,000 National Guard troops in June 2025 during protests against federal immigration raids. While the 9th Circuit had initially allowed the troops to remain in place during an earlier stage of the case, the panel’s final ruling found the administration failed to meet the legal threshold required to seize control of state forces from a governor.
U.S. Circuit Judge Jennifer Sung, a Biden appointee, wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Judge Eric Miller, a Trump appointee. They determined the government did not show that regular military forces were unable to execute federal law, a prerequisite for the domestic mobilization. Judge Mark Bennett, also a Trump appointee, dissented, arguing the court should not have decided the case because the administration had sought to dismiss the appeal and return to a lower court.
The ruling directly affects the 4,000 National Guard members who were federalized in California, as well as state officials and residents in Los Angeles. By declaring the deployment unlawful, the court limits the president’s ability to federalize state troops for domestic law enforcement without a governor’s consent. In this instance, the troops were redirected from state-level public safety operations to federal duties, including setting up perimeters and crowd control during protests.
The scale of the action involved 4,000 service members deployed in response to demonstrations where some participants reportedly looted and threw Molotov cocktails. While most of these troops have already returned to state service, the ruling creates a binding legal precedent for the 9th Circuit, which covers nine Western states. This means any future attempt by the executive branch to federalize the Guard in these states for similar reasons would be subject to this court-defined standard regarding the Posse Comitatus Act—a 1878 law that restricts the military from performing domestic law enforcement like arrests or searches.
The decision also impacts related litigation in other cities, such as Portland and Washington, D.C., where similar deployments occurred. It reinforces a Supreme Court finding that "regular forces" typically refers to the U.S. military rather than the National Guard, clarifying the legal boundaries between state and federal authority. While the Los Angeles mission has concluded, the ruling prevents the administration from citing those past events as a justification for a perpetual military presence. Trump has suggested he may seek to redeploy troops in the future. Federal deployments in Washington, D.C., continue under different legal authorities.