Newsom Seeks Injunction to Block Federalization of California National Guard Through Election Day

California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta on Monday asked a federal court for a preliminary injunction to bar the Trump administration from keeping California National Guard troops under federal control through Election Day.

The filing, submitted shortly after a federal judge ruled that the president violated federal law when he deployed thousands of National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles this summer in response to protests tied to immigration enforcement actions, asks the court to return the remaining Guard members to state control. "There was never a need—and there is certainly no need now—for troops to be deployed against their own communities," Newsom said, adding that he "won't submit to small men in the White House" and that "we won't back down."

The new legal action comes after the administration on Aug. 5 issued an order to federalize and deploy the roughly 300 remaining California National Guard personnel who had not been placed under federal control. Bonta said in a press release accompanying the filing that, if the order proceeds, "California’s residents will remain under a form of military occupation until Nov. 5," a reference to the day after the Statewide Special Election on Nov. 4. The attorney general said the presence of federally controlled troops raises constitutional and civic concerns about the integrity of elections and the rights of Californians.

Newsom and Bonta asked the court to stop what their filing describes as the "continued federalization of the National Guard through Election Day." The request seeks an injunction to compel the administration to return the Guard members to state control so they can be demobilized or reassigned under state authority.

Federalization of state National Guard units is typically accomplished by activating them under federal authority, which shifts command and control from a governor to the president. The litigation follows heightened tensions this year over the use of federal military and law-enforcement assets in U.S. cities during protests and law-enforcement operations.

A federal judge's recent ruling that the president violated federal law by deploying troops and Marines to Los Angeles during the summer marked a legal blow to the administration's handling of those operations. California officials said the ruling supported their argument that the federal government overstepped its authority and that the remaining federally controlled personnel should be returned to state jurisdiction.

The White House has argued that the deployments were necessary to protect federal property and personnel and to assist local authorities, while state officials have maintained that the presence of federal troops in local communities was unnecessary and escalatory. The current court filing intensifies a legal confrontation that could shape the rules governing the use of National Guard forces in domestic disturbances and around election events.

The case is expected to move quickly given the proximity of the Nov. 4 election. Court reviews of preliminary injunction requests typically consider whether plaintiffs are likely to prevail on the merits and whether they will suffer irreparable harm without immediate relief. California's filing asks the court to act before any further federal activations take effect.

Officials for the Department of Defense or the White House did not immediately comment on the filing. The litigation will proceed in federal court, where the judge who issued the earlier ruling will determine whether to grant the state's request for temporary relief.