Judge Blocks Trump Troops in L.A.… Get Out Now!!!

Summary

Legal AF by MeidasTouch: Episode Summary

Title: Judge Blocks Trump Troops in L.A.… Get Out Now!!!
Release Date: June 13, 2025
Hosts: Ben Meiselas, Michael Popok, Karen Friedman Agnifilo
Executive Producer: Meidas Media Network

---

Introduction

In this compelling episode of Legal AF by MeidasTouch, host Michael Popak delves into a significant legal battle shaking the intersection of law and politics: Judge Breyer's injunction against the Trump administration's attempt to federalize the California National Guard. The discussion provides an in-depth analysis of the legal reasoning behind the judge’s decision, its constitutional implications, and the potential ramifications for federalism in the United States.

---

Background of the Case

On June 6, 2025, the Trump administration initiated immigration raids in Los Angeles without coordinating with state or local authorities. This unilateral action led to tensions and violent protests, prompting President Trump to attempt to federalize the California National Guard to manage the situation. Judge Breyer of the Southern District of California intervened, issuing a temporary restraining order (TRO) against this move.

Michael Popak (01:29):
"Got the breaking news we were looking for. Judge Breyer in San Francisco has issued a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration..."

---

Legal Arguments

1. Presidential Authority to Federalize the National Guard

At the heart of the dispute is the extent of the President’s authority under 10 USC §12406 to federalize the National Guard. The Trump administration contended that the chaotic and violent nature of the immigration raids justified federal intervention.

Legal Analyst (01:54):
"The 10th Amendment of the Constitution..."

2. Definition of Rebellion

Judge Breyer scrutinized whether the events in Los Angeles constituted a "rebellion" as defined by the statute, which would justify federal intervention. He found that while there were instances of unruly behavior, such as the throwing of mangoes, firework, and bottles, these did not meet the threshold of an armed rebellion.

Michael Popak (05:18):
"That tipped over at times into being riotous... was a rebellion, as that term was used back in 1903..."

Legal Analyst (10:54):
"The court is troubled by the implication inherent in defendant's argument, Trump's argument that protest against the federal government can justify a finding of rebellion."

3. 10th Amendment and State Sovereignty

Judge Breyer emphasized the importance of state sovereignty, as enshrined in the 10th Amendment, which reserves powers not delegated to the federal government to the states and the people.

Michael Popak (13:09):
"He also found a violation of the 10th Amendment... that's state sovereignty."

---

Judge Breyer's Ruling

Judge Breyer concluded that the Trump administration violated the 10th Amendment by attempting to commandeer the California National Guard without adhering to the congressionally mandated procedures. He emphasized that presidential authority is not absolute and is subject to judicial review to ensure compliance with the Constitution.

Michael Popak (02:54):
"Because without it, the President, even though he's the commander in chief, cannot federalize."

Legal Analyst (08:24):
"The province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."

---

Implications and Next Steps

The TRO issued by Judge Breyer is temporary, set to remain in effect until noon Pacific Time on June 14, 2025. This window allows the Trump administration to appeal the decision to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. If the stay is not granted, the injunction will take effect, restoring control of the California National Guard to Governor Newsom and limiting the federal government's overreach.

Michael Popak (14:00):
"The judge has stayed this until tomorrow at about noon on Pacific time. That is giving the Trump administration the time to run to court and try to get a stay."

Should the Ninth Circuit uphold Judge Breyer’s ruling, the case may escalate to the United States Supreme Court, potentially involving a panel of nine justices to review the matter further.

---

Conclusion

This episode of Legal AF by MeidasTouch provides a thorough analysis of a pivotal legal challenge that tests the balance of power between the federal government and state authorities. Judge Breyer’s decision underscores the judiciary's role in maintaining constitutional checks and balances, particularly concerning state sovereignty and presidential authority. As the case progresses through the appellate system, it remains a critical focal point for understanding federalism and the limits of executive power in the United States.

Notable Quotes:

• Michael Popak (02:12):
  "Legal AF hot take here. This is how the judge started it and then I'll tell you how he ended it."

• Judge Breyer (07:17):
  "You alone, as the president, can declare what is or what is not a rebellion, and that that is a political question as that term is used in the Supreme Court that can't be reviewed."

• Michael Popak (12:35):
  "Our Constitution says we must take that risk, the judge concludes."

---

Stay Informed: For ongoing updates and detailed analyses of this case and other legal-political intersections, subscribe to Legal AF by MeidasTouch on YouTube at @legalafmtn.

Transcript

[Narrator]

What is Dadication?

[Father]

The thing that drives me every day as a dad is Dariona. We call him Dae Dae for short. Every day he's hungry for something, whether it's attention, affection, knowledge. And there's this huge responsibility in making sure that when he's no longer under my wing that he's a good person. I want him to be able to sit back one day and go, we worked together. We did a good job.

[Narrator]

That's Dadication. Find out [e-mail] brought to you by the U.S. department of Health and Human Services and the Ad Council.

[Odoo Advertiser]

Imagine you're a business owner relying on a dozen different software programs, each one disconnected, more expensive and more complicated than the last. It can be incredibly stressful right now. Picture Odoo Odoo brings all the tools your business needs into one simple platform. CRM, accounting, inventory, manufacturing, marketing, HR and more. All seamlessly connected. Everything works together, giving you the peace of mind that your business is running smoothly from every angle. Odoo's open source applications are user friendly and designed to scale with your business, saving you time and money. Say goodbye to juggling multiple platforms and hello to efficient integrated management. Stop wasting resources on complicated systems and make the switch to odoo today. Visit odoo.com o d o o.com and discover how Odoo can simplify and streamline your business operations. Odoo Modern Management Made simple well, we.

[Michael Popak]

Got the breaking news we were looking for. Judge Breyer in San Francisco has issued a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration, putting the governor of California, Governor Newsom, back in charge of the state National Guard, finding that it was more likely than not at this juncture that the Trump administration has violated a particular congressional statute about when they can and cannot commandeer the State Guard, also violated.

[Legal Analyst]

The 10th Amendment of the Constitution in.

[Michael Popak]

Not respecting state sovereignty and has decided to put California back in charge. It's a win for California. Rob Bonta, the Attorney General, the governor, Governor Newsom and everyone else. Let me read to you from the.

[Legal Analyst]

Order I'm here on Midas.

[Michael Popak]

Touch on Michael Popak and let's get to the breakdown on our legal AF hot take here. This is what how the judge started it and then I'll tell you how he ended it.

[Legal Analyst]

Then I'll fill in the middle and connect the dots. It says on June 6, the federal government initiated immigration raids across the city of Los Angeles, judge Breyer writes. Protests swiftly followed and some individuals involved were unruly and even violent. State and local law enforcement responded the following day, President Trump ordered the members.

[Michael Popak]

Of the California National Guard to be.

[Legal Analyst]

Federalized and assume control of those forces.

[Michael Popak]

At this early stage, the court must.

[Legal Analyst]

Determine whether the President followed the congressionally mandated procedures for his actions.

[Michael Popak]

Because without it, the President, even though he's the commander in chief, cannot federalize.

[Legal Analyst]

And take over state militia. That is the very core of our federalism program, right.

[Michael Popak]

Which keeps our states aligned and in a union for our federal government. The court goes on and says the.

[Legal Analyst]

Court must determine whether the president followed those congressionally mandated procedures for his actions.

[Michael Popak]

The judge then said he, meaning Trump, did not. His actions were illegal, both exceeding the.

[Legal Analyst]

Scope of his statutory authority and violating the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution. He must therefore return control of the.

[Michael Popak]

California National Guard to the Governor of.

[Legal Analyst]

The state of California forthwith, particularly on the ver.

[Michael Popak]

At the very end, pages 35 and.

[Legal Analyst]

36 of the order, the judge lays.

[Michael Popak]

Out exactly what's going to happen next. So that we all know he's enjoined temporarily the defendants, meaning the Trump and Trump administration, from deploying members of the California National Guard in Los Angeles, and.

[Legal Analyst]

They'Re directed to return control.

[Michael Popak]

Now, he has.

[Legal Analyst]

Judge Breyer stayed his order until tomorrow at noon Pacific time.

[Michael Popak]

That gives, without saying it, that gives the Trump administration time to. To go to the ninth Circuit Court.

[Legal Analyst]

Of Appeals and seek a stay.

[Michael Popak]

If they don't get that stay, this becomes. At 12:01 Pacific Time tomorrow, this order goes into effect. Plaintiffs are ordered to post a nominal bond of $100.

[Legal Analyst]

That takes care of the bond issue. And then the judge set up a.

[Michael Popak]

Briefing schedule and an order to show cause mechanism requiring the government, Trump to.

[Legal Analyst]

Show cause why the next level of injunction or block the preliminary injunction should.

[Michael Popak]

Not issue, and that he wants a hearing on 20th of June, just about a week away. Now, let's get down to the details. How do we get here? June the sixth, Donald Trump starts his deportation raid program without coordinating it with state officials or local officials or local law enforcement or the governor, basically creating or fabricating or manufacturing a tense environment.

[Legal Analyst]

That tipped over at times into being riotous.

[Michael Popak]

The question is, was it rebellious, a rebellion, as that term was used back in 1903 when the statute Donald Trump.

[Legal Analyst]

Is relying on was written, and the judge looked at it and said, no, I looked at all the dictionary definitions.

[Michael Popak]

That go back to 1903, and what we watched was not a rebellion. In fact, the judge says it is a scary proposition for the government to allege that the assertion of a First Amendment right of free speech which may have fringes of it, of people acting in an unruly way, suddenly can be transformed into a rebellion in order to crush it. And the judge is putting a stop.

[Legal Analyst]

To that, at least for now. Here's what the, here's what the court.

[Michael Popak]

Then said after going through ice coming in, the public's reaction and what happened. One of my favorite parts of when the judge takes on that this is not a rebellion, this is not organized violence. He notes that some people were throwing mangoes. Yes, that fruit and the supermarket. And he's like, well, I don't know if mango throwing, water bottle throwing, and chair throwing constitutes an armed rebellion, which is required for Donald Trump to invoke the statute that he's using, because let's just take a, take a breath for a minute. Donald Trump has not declared the use.

[Legal Analyst]

Of the Insurrection act if there was an insurrection.

[Michael Popak]

So he's stuck with the statute that he's using, which is 124 06, 10 USC 124 06, which has three triggering.

[Legal Analyst]

Events, one of them being rebellion and.

[Michael Popak]

The other one being the main two, the other one being that the president can't faithfully execute his laws.

[Legal Analyst]

Neither apply because the judge says so.

[Michael Popak]

The judge, Judge Breyer also tears down the argument, and we heard it in his oral in his hearing earlier today, and stops Trump right in his tracks when he says, your position is that.

[Legal Analyst]

You alone, as the president, can declare.

[Michael Popak]

What is or what is not a rebellion, and that that is a political.

[Legal Analyst]

Question as that term is used in the Supreme Court that can't be reviewed.

[Michael Popak]

By a federal judge. And Breyer said that's wrong. That is wrong dating back to Marbury versus Madison in 1807. You know, we, we do federal oversight.

[Legal Analyst]

As judges as to whether you are.

[Michael Popak]

Right or wrong about exercising that power. And if you're right, then you're allowed to exercise the power. But if you're wrong, it's up to the courts to declare that, which I.

[Legal Analyst]

Thought was a very, very telling comment.

[Michael Popak]

After he goes through the whole analysis.

[Legal Analyst]

On page nine, he starts with section 12406, the conditions for federalization. He says that through the militia act of 1903, Congress authorized the president to call into federal service members of the.

[Michael Popak]

National Guard of any state, but only.

[Legal Analyst]

If and then he goes through the factors. He then takes on what I called.

[Michael Popak]

Or what he called justiciability. Can a federal court, even a judge, or provide oversight for presidential action?

[Legal Analyst]

He starts on page 10 with Marbury versus Madison in 1803.

[Michael Popak]

And he says it is emphatically the.

[Legal Analyst]

Province and duty of the judicial department.

[Michael Popak]

To say what the law is. Indeed, this is what he Sundays on page 11.

[Legal Analyst]

Indeed, at the hearing which was today, defendants contended that the President could invoke section 12406 on no evidence whatsoever and remain immune from judicial review. And to be sure, when the executive.

[Michael Popak]

Possesses a constitutional or legal discretion, their acts are only politically examinable, meaning you fire them at the. At the election, on Election Day, defendants.

[Legal Analyst]

Misconstrue the plain language of 124 06. The judge says the statute permits the.

[Michael Popak]

President to federalize the National Guard whenever.

[Legal Analyst]

One of the three enumerated conditions are met, not whenever he determines that one of them is met.

[Michael Popak]

He says that Trump is putting the cart before the horse. For the President to exercise his discretion.

[Legal Analyst]

As to how many National Guard members.

[Michael Popak]

Or units to federalize, there first must be an invasion, a rebellion, or an.

[Legal Analyst]

Inability to execute the laws.

[Michael Popak]

The President's discretion in what to do next does not mean that the President can unilaterally and without judicial review, declare.

[Legal Analyst]

That a vacancy exists in order to fill it.

[Michael Popak]

He then takes on the analysis of a Trump and adopts the analysis of a Trump appointed judge, Judge Rodriguez in.

[Legal Analyst]

The north, in the Southern District of.

[Michael Popak]

Texas back in May, in a case called jav, in which that judge shot down Donald Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act. And the judge, Judge Breyer says, I.

[Legal Analyst]

Like this analysis and it because Trump is raising the same arguments, he's saying.

[Michael Popak]

Everything'S a political question and I'm immune from judicial review. And that's wrong. It was wrong as Judge Rodriguez laid it out. And now Judge Breyer has adopted that framework and taken it wholesale in what he calls the thoughtful reasoning in jav. I love the fact that the judge Breyer is using the analysis of a Trump appointed judge, a Judge Rodriguez in Texas. He then goes through what the definition of rebellion is, including an open, organized and armed resistance to an established government.

[Legal Analyst]

Or ruler, an organized attempt to change.

[Michael Popak]

The government through violence, deliberate organized resistance by force and arms to the laws.

[Legal Analyst]

Of and operations of the government committed by a subject.

[Michael Popak]

And he goes on, he said, under.

[Legal Analyst]

Any of that analysis. This is on page 19. The protest in Los Angeles fall far.

[Michael Popak]

Short of what is defined as. As a rebellion.

[Legal Analyst]

Defendants refer repeatedly to violent rioters and mobs. And so the court pauses to state.

[Michael Popak]

There can be no debate that most protesters demonstrated peacefully. Nonetheless, it is also beyond debate that.

[Legal Analyst]

Some individuals use the protest as an excuse for violence and destruction and destruction. Some bad actors on June 6, sometimes I say June six.

[Michael Popak]

I'm about to say January 6.

[Legal Analyst]

On June 6, through concrete chunks, bottles of liquid and other objects at officers.

[Michael Popak]

Some people threw fireworks, someone fired paintballs.

[Legal Analyst]

And a crowd injured five officers. Violence is necessary for a rebellion, Judge Breyer Sundays on page 19.

[Michael Popak]

But it is not sufficient even accepting the questionable premise that people armed with.

[Legal Analyst]

Now listen to this list.

[Michael Popak]

Fireworks, rocks, mangoes, concrete chairs or bottles.

[Legal Analyst]

Of liquid are armed as that term would have been used in 1903. The court is aware of no evidence.

[Michael Popak]

Of any actual firearms. There is little evidence of whether the violent protesters were open or avowed, in other words, that they organized and coordinated together.

[Legal Analyst]

And that is the definition of rebellion.

[Michael Popak]

The court is troubled this is on.

[Legal Analyst]

Page 20 about the First Amendment implications. The court is troubled by the implication.

[Michael Popak]

Inherent in defendant's argument, Trump's argument that.

[Legal Analyst]

Protest against the federal government, a core.

[Michael Popak]

Civil liberty protected by the First Amendment.

[Legal Analyst]

Can justify a finding of rebellion.

[Michael Popak]

The US Reports are chock full of.

[Legal Analyst]

Language explaining the importance of individuals right.

[Michael Popak]

To speak out against the government even when doing so is uncomfortable, even when doing so is provocative, even when doing so causes inconvenience any departure. But our Constitution says we must take.

[Legal Analyst]

That risk, the judge concludes.

[Michael Popak]

Applying these principles, courts have repeatedly reaffirmed that peaceful protest does not lose its protection merely because some isolated individuals act violently outside the protection of the First Amendment. Citing citing case law.

[Legal Analyst]

That's on page 21. Finally, as we get into the other.

[Michael Popak]

Analyses, he says that they also violated 12406, his requirement that they have to go through the governor to have those orders issued. They said, well, we satisfied that judge, and judge said, how so? Well, we wrote through the governor at the top.

[Legal Analyst]

I'm not making this up.

[Michael Popak]

The judge says that's not sufficient. We're not saying the governor has veto power, but you got to coordinate with the governor. If not, you might have to use another statute or the Insurrection act if you need to, if you need to.

[Legal Analyst]

Go around them, so to speak.

[Michael Popak]

He also found a violation of the 10th Amendment, which which is briefly that the federal government is defined by statute, its powers and by and by the Constitution. And if it's not there, all remaining power is it is resides in the hands of the state and the people and that's state sovereignty. And that's what's also under attack. Now, what does it mean that the.

[Legal Analyst]

Judge let's end it this way.

[Michael Popak]

The judge has stayed this until tomorrow at about noon on Pacific time. That is giving the Trump administration the time to run to court and try to get a stay. I don't think they're going to get the stay. Depends on the three judge panel. I'll report on it here on Midas Touch it on Legal af. Assuming they don't get the stay, this goes into effect and they're going to have to deal with a preliminary injunction hearing and briefing from now until next week in addition. So if they don't get the stay, they'll file an emergency appeal at the 9th Circuit. If they don't like the ruling there, they'll try to take an emergency petition to the United States Supreme Court. First stop on that train, Justice Kagan, who sits in the moderate left leaning wing, the democratically appointed wing to decide. She'll probably refer it over to the full group and we may have a yet another I think it's up to 20 now emergency petition that's going to be up before the United States Supreme Court on a skeletal record. Not enough briefing, no oral argument and then a ruling because that has been.

[Legal Analyst]

Par for the course so far.

[Michael Popak]

I'm glad you're here on Legal, a effort on the Midas Touch Network.

[Legal Analyst]

Take a moment, hit the subscribe button here.

[Michael Popak]

Come over to Legal AF, the YouTube channel. Hit the subscribe button there and continue to set your reminders for our almost.

[Legal Analyst]

Hourly reports at the intersection of law and politics until my next report.

[Michael Popak]

I'm Michael Popak in collaboration with the Midas Touch Network. We just launched the Legal AF YouTube channel. Help us build this pro democracy channel where I'll be curating the top stories the intersection of law and politics. Go to YouTube now and free subscribe @legalafmtn. That's egalafmtn.

[SOFI Advertiser]

High interest debt is one of the toughest opponents you'll face unless you power up with a SOFI personal loan. A SOFI personal loan could repackage your bad debt into one low fixed rate monthly payment payment. It's even got super speed since you could get the funds as soon as the same day you sign. Visit sofi.com power to learn more. That's sofi. Com po w e r loans originated by Sofa Bank NA member FDIC terms and conditions apply. NMLS 696891.