Judge Breyer Cites Posse Comitatus Act in Ruling Against Federal Military Deployment in California

On Tuesday, a federal judge ruled that President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth acted unlawfully in deploying the California National Guard and U.S. Marines to assist with law enforcement in California, specifically in Los Angeles, Carpinteria, Camarillo, and Mecca.

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, a former Watergate prosecutor, concluded that the deployment was a direct violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, a law that prohibits federal military forces from engaging in civilian law enforcement. While the National Guard typically operates under a state’s governor and is not subject to this act, the ruling found that the Trump administration had federalized these units, thereby subjecting them to the Posse Comitatus Act.

In his Opinion Granting Injunctive Relief, Judge Breyer noted specific details of the deployment, including the fact that in June, 4,000 federalized National Guard troops and 700 Marines were placed under the command of Task Force 51, U.S. Army North’s deployable contingency command post. He cited one instance in which 100 to 120 of these troops were deployed to a cannabis farm in Carpinteria, California, despite there being “no specific threat or risk of riot.”

Breyer called the deployment intentional, stating that the defendants “instigated a months-long deployment of the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles for the purpose of establishing a military presence there and enforcing federal law.” Following the ruling, the judge’s order is stayed until September 12 at noon to allow the administration time to appeal.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta expressed confidence in the ruling on September 2, stating that he expected the federal government to appeal but believed the judge correctly applied the law. Bonta offered a sharp critique, saying, “If you don’t want to have court orders issued against you, stop breaking the law.”

Senator Monique Limón emphasized the constitutional principles reaffirmed by the ruling in a statement. “Today’s recent court ruling makes it clear that our National Guard is not to be used at the discretion of the President as a national police force. This ruling reaffirms the separation of powers our Constitution is based on and upholds 147 years of legal precedent. We expect the Federal Administration to appeal, as they have done with numerous other rulings, but California will continue to defend our constitution. Our state continues to be committed to defending our rights, liberties, and the rule of law,” said Limón.

Both Senator Alex Padilla and Assemblymember Gregg Hart condemned the administration’s actions. Padilla stated that U.S. service members “don’t sign up to serve as political props” and called for their immediate return home. Hart argued that allowing the president to use the military as a “de facto national police force undermines the checks and balances that protect our freedoms.”

Congressmember Salud Carbajal called the deployment “unjustified from the start,” stating that the ruling confirmed that Trump “unlawfully exploited our armed forces for political gain.” He announced his co-leadership with Congressmember Haley Stevens of the “Stop Trump’s Abuse of Power Act” to limit the president from calling federal troops to states or territories. Not only did Trump send National Guard to Los Angeles over the objections of California Governor Gavin Newsom, in recent days, he’s threatened to send Guard troops to Chicago, with Governor J.B. Pritzker.

On Bluesky, Joseph Nunn, an attorney with the Brennan Center, an independent law and policy organization, explained that the Breyer ruling, though limited to California, “presents a path by which other states may push back against the Trump administration’s unprecedented efforts to use the military for routine law enforcement inside the United States.”