Trump’s temporary appeals court allows the preservation of the National Guard in Los Angeles

The Court of Appeal temporarily prevented the order of the Federal judge who ordered the Trump administration to re -control the California National Guard forces to the state.

The decision of the Court of Appeal came hours after a federal judge said that Trump’s deployment of the forces on Los Angeles to suppress the immigration raids is illegal.

Trump said he was sending the forces – who were usually under the authority of the ruler – to prevent Los Angeles from “combustion” in protests against the Immigration campaign.

However, California Governor Gavin New Roire and other local officials rejected this step, and said it was an unnecessary provocation. The Court of Appeal said it would hold a session on Tuesday.

At a hearing in the former federal court, Judge Charles Brayer said that the question submitted by California was whether Trump followed the law that Congress placed on the deployment of the National Guard of the state.

“He did not,” the judge wrote in his decision. “His actions were illegal … Therefore, he must re -control the California National Guard to the governor of California immediately.”

But the judge remained until Friday afternoon to give the Trump administration time to appeal against him. The administration did so almost immediately.

Newsom published on social media on Thursday afternoon that “the court just confirmed what we all know – the army belongs to the battlefield, not in the streets of our city.”

The Trump administration said that the matter took the National Guard in California to restore the regime and protect the customers of immigration and customs (ICE) as they invaded people in Los Angeles who are believed to be in the country illegally.

Despite the NewSom objections, Trump ordered a total of 4000 National Guard soldiers and 700 naval infantry to help suppress the turmoil. Some guard forces are now allowed to detain people so that the police can arrest them.

Another president deployed the National Guard without the approval of the ruler for more than 50 years – during the era of civil rights. It is more common for the governor to activate the forces to deal with natural disasters and other emergencies, then seek federal assistance.

Before the crowded court hall on Thursday, the lawyer for the Ministry of Justice told Judge Prayer that Newsom does not need to be consulted when Trump issued his order.

Lawyer Brett Shomat said: “The Governor New Yoshom was fully aware of this … “There is one commander of the American Armed Forces.”

“No,” Judge Prayer, the younger brother of former Supreme Court judge, Stephen Prayer, answered.

He said, but he added that there are times and situations in which the president could become head of the forces: “The president is not the commander of the head of the National Guard.”

Prayer, who had wore a light blue player, called the constitution several times during the session, carrying a booklet version of the document at one point.

“We are talking about the president exercising his authority. The president, of course, is limited in his authority,” he said. “This is the difference between the constitutional government and King George.”

In front of the judge’s decision, Defense Minister Beit Higseth has repeatedly refused to say whether he would agree with Judge Prayer’s order.

“What I can say is that we should not have local judges who define foreign policy or the country’s national security policy,” Higseth said at the hearing of the Armed Services Committee in the House of Representatives on Thursday.

Higseth said he would consider the Supreme Court ruling.

The decision of the Court of Appeal late Thursday allows the National Guard forces to stay in Los Angeles, where the case makes its way through the courts.

The Trump administration used a law that allows the president to contact the National Guard to the federal service when a “rebellion” occurs.

But California said in her lawsuit that the protests that spanned nearly a week in Los Angeles – and included more than 300 detention and closure of a major highway – did not rise to this level.

“At any time in the past three days, there has been a rebellion or rebellion. These protests have not increased to the level of protests or riots that Los Angeles and other major cities in points in the past, including in recent years.”

Additional reports by Anna Vagoi in Washington, DC