Trump Forced Into Surprise Criminal Trial Starting Now

Summary

Legal AF Podcast Summary

Episode Title: Trump Forced Into Surprise Criminal Trial Starting Now
Release Date: August 11, 2025
Hosts: Ben Meiselas, Michael Popak, Karen Friedman Agnifilo
Producer: Meidas Media Network

---

Introduction

In this episode of Legal AF by MeidasTouch, host Michael Popak delves into the groundbreaking criminal trial against the Trump administration. This case marks a historic moment as it is the first prosecution of a presidential administration under the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. Popak provides a comprehensive analysis of the case's background, legal intricacies, and its potential implications on the intersection of law and politics.

---

Overview of the Trial [00:28 - 06:27]

Michael Popak opens the discussion by underscoring the significance of the trial commencing in Judge Breyer's courtroom in San Francisco. He describes the trial as "historic" and "unprecedented" (00:28), emphasizing that it centers on allegations that the Trump administration violated the Posse Comitatus Act by deploying federal troops for civilian enforcement during protests related to Trump's immigration policies.

Key Points:

• Allegations: Governor Newsom accuses the Trump administration of using federal troops inappropriately for domestic law enforcement.
• Legal Basis: The case challenges the administration's actions under the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts the use of the military for civilian law enforcement.
• Judge's Initial Ruling: Judge Breyer ruled against the administration, declaring the actions unconstitutional and a violation of the 10th Amendment (02:15).

Notable Quote:

"It's historic, it's unprecedented. It's the first case against an administration under the Posse Comitatus act of 1878." ([00:28])

---

Background and Legal Context [06:27 - 12:55]

Popak provides a detailed background of the case, tracing its roots to a lawsuit filed by the California Attorney General, Rob Bonta, aimed at preventing the Trump administration from commandeering the California National Guard. He explains that while the initial ruling addressed violations of the Anti-Commandeering Statute (18 USC Section 1246), it did not tackle the Posse Comitatus Act allegations, leaving a critical gap (05:00).

Historical Context:

• Posse Comitatus Act Origins: Enacted in 1878 during the post-Reconstruction era to prevent federal military interference in state affairs and maintain civilian control over law enforcement.
• Statutory Provisions: Under 18 USC 1385, unauthorized use of the military for domestic law enforcement is punishable by fines or imprisonment.

Appeal Proceedings:

• The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Judge Breyer's injunction solely on the commandeering issue, without addressing the Posse Comitatus violation (04:00).
• The appellate panel, composed of two Republican-appointed and one Biden-appointed judges, ruled 3-0 against the initial decision but did not consider the broader Posse Comitatus claims.

Notable Quotes:

"But the Posse Comitatus act issue is still present." ([05:00])
"Whoever... willfully uses any part of the army... as a Posse Comitatus... shall be fined... or imprisoned." ([05:30])

---

Current Trial Proceedings and Expectations [08:13 - 12:55]

As the trial commences, Popak anticipates a rigorous examination of evidence pertaining to the alleged misuse of military forces. He emphasizes that the trial is a bench trial, meaning it will be heard solely by Judge Breyer without a jury (00:28).

Key Expectations:

• Prosecution's Evidence: Expectation of detailed accounts and documentation showcasing instances where military personnel were directly involved in civilian arrests and law enforcement actions.
• Defense's Argument: Likely to revolve around the President's authority as Commander-in-Chief and the use of the National Guard as an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act.
• Judge Breyer's Stance: He has expressed a desire for substantive evidence before making a ruling, indicating a thorough judicial process (08:13).

Potential Outcomes:

• Ruling Against the Administration: If found in violation, the administration may face significant legal repercussions, including fines or imprisonment for key figures.
• Appeal Process: Anticipation of an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, potentially reverting to the same three-judge panel, followed by possible escalation to the Supreme Court by early 2026.

Notable Quotes:

"The judge wants to hear evidence... show me evidence." ([08:13])
"I don't think ultimately the US Government did a very good job at arguing that they did not violate it." ([10:00])

---

Implications and Future Coverage

Popak underscores the broader implications of the trial on the separation of powers and the limits of executive authority. He highlights the importance of maintaining civilian control over the military and preventing governmental overreach.

Podcast Commitments:

• Daily Updates: The podcast pledges to provide comprehensive daily updates throughout the trial, ensuring listeners stay informed on developments.
• Exclusive Interviews: An upcoming interview with California Attorney General Rob Bonta is anticipated, offering deeper insights into the state's case.
• Extended Coverage: Additional content through the Legal AF YouTube channel and Substack will offer in-depth analyses, interviews, and exclusive reports.

Notable Quotes:

"That's what's happening this week. Because what Judge Breyer said is I want evidence. I don't want to rule on this at a preliminary injunction setting. I want a trial." ([08:13])
"We do about 10 videos every day at the intersection of law and politics..." ([12:00])

---

Conclusion

This episode of Legal AF by MeidasTouch provides a thorough examination of the unprecedented criminal trial against the Trump administration. By dissecting the legal arguments, historical context, and potential ramifications, Michael Popak offers listeners a nuanced understanding of a pivotal moment in American legal and political history.

---

Notable Quotes with Timestamps

• "It's historic, it's unprecedented. It's the first case against an administration under the Posse Comitatus act of 1878." ([00:28])
• "He ruled against the Trump administration and he ruled that what Trump was doing was unconstitutional. It violated the 10th Amendment." ([02:15])
• "But the Posse Comitatus act issue is still present." ([05:00])
• "Whoever... willfully uses any part of the army... as a Posse Comitatus... shall be fined... or imprisoned." ([05:30])
• "The judge wants to hear evidence... show me evidence." ([08:13])
• "I don't think ultimately the US Government did a very good job at arguing that they did not violate it." ([10:00])

---

This structured summary provides a detailed and engaging overview of the Legal AF podcast episode, capturing all essential discussions, insights, and conclusions for both regular listeners and those new to the content.

Transcript

[T Mobile Representative]

Summer fun goes great with family freedom from T Mobile. We'll pay off four phones up to $3200 and give you four free phones all on America's largest 5G network. Visit your local T Mobile location or learn more@t mobile.com FamilyFreedom up to $800 per line via virtual prepaid card typically takes 15 days. Free phones via 24 monthly bill credits with finance agreement eg Apple iPhone 16128 gigabyte 82999 Eligible trade in eg iPhone 11 Pro for well qualified credits end and balance due. If you pay off earlier, cancel contact.

[Michael Popak]

T Mobile the criminal trial against the Trump administration that starts today, this week in Judge Breyer's courtroom in San Francisco is just not getting enough attention. It's, it's historic, it's unprecedented. It's the first case against an administration under the Posse Comitatus act of 1878. Because the allegations by Governor Newsom against the Trump administration are that by using federal troops on the ground in California for civilian enforcement operations during the protests related to Donald Trump's immigration policy, that wasn't just authorized by the federalization or the commandeering statutes about when a president can commandeer the use of state National Guard, it crossed the line and became a violation of the Posse Comitatus act, for which that is not an exception. You're not going to be confused. When I'm done with this hot take, the trial starts this week. I'm going to be doing daily updates about what's happening in the courtroom. There's no jury, only Judge Breyer, the brother of retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. And you're on the Midas Touch Network and on Legal af. I'm Michael Popach. Let me give you the update. Chop it at the bit to start at start on this trial. Now let me back up. A couple of months ago, in June, the California attorney general brought a case into Judge Breyer you might have heard of, to stop the Trump administration from taking control and command of the California National Guard. It's their National Guard. There are limited exceptions when the federal government and the commander in chief can take control of it to commandeer spirit. California argued those exceptions were not present. Trump argued that they were, that he needed, among other things, federal troops to help him execute federal law that was being interfered with on the ground by protesters. And that was the argument. Judge Breyer, the trial court judge, after hearing argument and reading the briefs, ruled against the Trump administration originally. Well, actually, he ruled against the Trump administration and he ruled that what Trump was doing was unconstitutional. He ruled that it was a violation of the 10th Amendment. These are powers reserved to the state. It violated the anti the commandeering statute about when the circumstances that are limited that you can take over a state National Guard. He, he did not. However, and this is very important for this outtake, he did not rule on the Posse Comitatus act violation alleged by California. So what went up on appeal to the 9th Circuit by way of Donald Trump did not have the posse Comitatis part. It only had the findings that had violated the Commandeering Statute Section 1246. That's what went up to the three judge panel at the Ninth Circuit which ultimately reversed the injunction issued by Judge Breyer on the commandeering of the National Guard issue only. And it was a three judge panel, two Republicans, one Trumper and a Biden appointee. But 3, 0, they said Breyer was wrong on that issue. But they did not discuss the posse Comitatus because appellate courts can only talk about and address those things that were handled below. If it's not briefed below, if it's not addressed below, the trial judge is in the first position to make a ruling. So that happened and we said at the time, but the Posse Comitatus act issue is still present. Okay, let me read to you for what? Read to you what the Posse Comitatus act currently embodied and memorialized in a US Code 18 USC 1385, what it provides. Then I'll tell you where it came from and then I'll tell you what's going to happen at this trial this week. Whoever accepted cases under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the army, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the Air Force or the Space Force as a Posse Comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years or both came out of an 1878 post reconstruction period after the Civil War. It was a way to resolve an election issue where the southern states of the former Confederacy were worried and continued to be worried that the Union, well now the Union had been put back together again, but that the Northern troops, the federal troops, would forever be present in their communities enforcing the law. And they did not want that. So, so Congress said, all right, we'll appease you in this area. We'll assure you that federal troops will not be used on domestic soil for law enforcement purposes. And they set up this fine and imprisonment function. It's never been tested before. It's from 1878. No president has ever tried to violate the Posse Comitatus Act. Question is, it runs up, as you can see, against a couple of interesting doctrines, the war powers of a commander in chief, the fact that appellate court has already ruled that he's allowed to commandeer the National Guard, but that's a separate issue for whether he can use the US Military troops along with the National Guard. And then three the immunity decision, the criminal immunity decision that the that the United States Supreme Court granted all presidents, mainly Trump. If he violates a criminal code while he's in office, he had immunity.

[Dr. Stephanie Van Watson]

You ever notice the signs of getting older?

[Michael Popak]

Creeping in?

[Dr. Stephanie Van Watson]

Poor sleep, low energy, maybe a little brain fog or stiffness that didn't used to be there. Same here. And healthy aging is something I've been thinking about more than ever.

[Michael Popak]

That's why I'm so excited to share with you guys.

[Dr. Stephanie Van Watson]

C15 from Fatty 15, the first emerging essential fatty acid to be discovered in more than 90 years. It is an incredible scientific breakthrough to support our long term health and wellness and you guessed it, healthy aging. Fatty 15 co founder Dr. Stephanie Van Watson. She discovered C15 while working with the US Navy on aging dolphins. Over 100 studies now show that C15 strengthens our cells and helps slow biological.

[Michael Popak]

Aging at the cellular level.

[Dr. Stephanie Van Watson]

When our cells don't have enough C15, they become fragile and age faster. That's called Cellular Fragility Syndrome, the first new nutritional deficiency. In 75 years. One in three people worldwide may have it. Fatty 15 is a science backed, award winning, patented 100% pure C15 supplement that repairs cellular damage, boosts sleep and brain health and helps your body feel younger from the inside out. I've been taking fatty 15 for a few months now and I really started noticing deeper sleep and more energy throughout the day.

[Michael Popak]

I wasn't expecting much at first, but.

[Dr. Stephanie Van Watson]

I've actually seen a difference and that's saying a lot when most supplements don't deliver and it comes in a beautiful reusable jar with easy refills sent right to your door. Fatty 15 is on a mission to optimize your C15 levels to help support your long term health and wellness, especially as you age. You can get an additional 15% off their 90 day subscription starter kit by going to fatty15.com legalaf and using code legal af at checkout.

[Michael Popak]

So you got a lot of these things circulating, but that doesn't mean that Judge Breyer shouldn't go forward with this trial and shouldn't ultimately determine whether the Posse Comitatus act was violated. Whether Donald Trump has an immunity for it, has an exception for it, has a defense to it. Another story, got to prove the crime first, the crime and the fine first. So that's what's happening this week. Because what Judge Breyer said is I want evidence. I don't want to rule on this at a preliminary injunction setting. I want a trial. And he set that back in June. That would happen this week in August. And here we are, three day trial. On one side, the California State Attorney General. I'm going to be speaking to the actual attorney general, Rob Bonta this week about this case and other matters here on Legal af. Keep an eye out for that. And on the other side, the Trump administration, you know, one of, one of their lawyers, they're running out of lawyers, but it'll be one of their lawyers. I don't think they'll trot out somebody like John Sauer, who's the Solicitor General. I think they'll save him for the appeal. They'll trot out some other senior trial lawyer. And what the judge wants to hear is evidence of the violation, the use of the military on domestic soil as a posse comitatus. There's been briefing that led into this. I've read through the briefing. I don't think ultimately the US Government did a very good job at arguing that they did not violate it. Their primary argument is we can't violate it. We're the commander in chief and using the National Guard and commandeering. The National Guard provides the exception. And the judge said no. He denied their motion to dismiss. He says no, we're going to trial. I want to hear evidence is show me pictures, show me evidence. And there is, there is plenty of evidence of people being arrested, protesters being arrested by the Marines, you know, in handcuffs, detained and arrested. That's not what they're, that's not what they are supposed to be doing on domestic stock. They want to set up a perimeter around buildings and let the law enforcement or National Guard handle the rest. That's a different story. But like actually doing something affirmatively to make arrest or take down people, that's not the kind of United States that you and I want to live in with that. Just like, just like the Confederacy states didn't want federal troops on the ground either. And so three days of testimony, three days of evidence. I'm sure most of what Donald Trump's team is going to argue is illegal doctrines. Most of what the California team is going to argue is a lot of evidence and facts to make a record the judge is then going to rule. I'm not sure he's going to rule from the bench. There's no jury here at the end of the third day, but sometime in the next week he's going to issue a ruling. Usually judges that are handling bench trials already have their clerks drafting orders, opinions that they're going to issue subject to whatever they hear at the trial. So I won't be that far after that. And then if he rules against the Trump administration, there's going to be another appeal to the ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. I think it goes to the same three judge panel. We'll have to see if that, if that actually happens. The three judge panel was not great for California the first time around on these particular issues, Bennett, Miller and Sung. But we'll have to see with the Posse Comitatus act if, if the facts and the law change matters. Once there's a ruling at the ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the loser is going to take a Supreme Court either emergency appeal or a regular docket appeal. That'll end up sometime in the first, last quarter of 2025, first quarter of 2026. But it sort of got lost in the shuffle this first trial against the Trump administration, criminal at that. About the Posse Comitatus act sort of went under the radar. But don't let it be under the radar here on Midas Dutch. We'll follow it here and come over to Legal AF, the YouTube channel. Hit the free subscribe button there as well. I curate that channel, the managing editor of that channel. We got about a dozen contributors. We do about 10 videos every day at the intersection of law and politics and some combination of me, the other contributors, Alan Klassfeld, sorry, Adam Klassfeld, who runs All Rise News, just joined us to do regular video contributions. He's, he's following every minute, every hour of the trial. And we'll rely on a lot of his reporting as well. And then, as I said, Rob Bonta, Attorney general for California, is going to be joining Legal AF and me for an interview sometime the early part of this week. So, you know, come over, subscribe, hit the reminders. Everything's for free. It's the way to support our channel. So until my next report, I'm Michael Popak.

[Legal AF Contributor]

Can't get your fill of Legal af.

[Dr. Stephanie Van Watson]

Me neither.

[Legal AF Contributor]

That's why we form the Legal AF substack. Every time we mention something in a hot take, whether it's a court filing or a oral argument, come over to the sub stack. You'll find the court filing in the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do called, wait for it Morning af. What else? All the other contributors from Legal AO for there as well. We got some new reporting, we got interviews, we got AD free versions of the podcast and hot takes where Legal AF on Substack. Come over now to free subscribe.