N🟁N

Trump can maintain control of thousands of California national guardsmen, appeals court rules | CNN Politics

The article from CNN, published on June 19, 2025, titled "Trump to Continue Control of California National Guard," delves into the ongoing political and legal battle over the control of the California National Guard. The piece provides a comprehensive overview of the situation, detailing the historical context, the current state of affairs, and the potential implications for both California and the broader United States.

The article begins by outlining the origins of the dispute, which can be traced back to early 2021 when former President Donald Trump, during his first term, invoked a rarely used federal statute to assume control of the California National Guard. This move was met with immediate backlash from California's state government, led by then-Governor Gavin Newsom, who argued that the federal intervention was an overreach and a violation of states' rights. The controversy escalated into a series of legal battles that have continued well into 2025.

In the intervening years, the control of the California National Guard has become a focal point of political contention. The article explains that Trump's decision to maintain control over the Guard was initially justified by the administration as a necessary measure to address what they described as "rampant lawlessness" in California. This justification was met with skepticism and outright rejection by many, including California's political leaders and a significant portion of the public, who viewed it as a politically motivated move to undermine the state's autonomy.

The article goes on to detail the legal proceedings that have unfolded since Trump's initial decision. A series of lawsuits were filed by the state of California, challenging the legality of the federal takeover. These cases have wound their way through the courts, with varying degrees of success. In 2023, a federal district court ruled in favor of California, declaring that the federal government's actions were unconstitutional. However, this ruling was appealed by the Trump administration, and the case eventually reached the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court's decision, handed down in early 2025, was a pivotal moment in the saga. In a closely divided 5-4 ruling, the Court upheld the federal government's right to control the California National Guard, citing the President's authority under the Insurrection Act. This decision was met with outrage from California's political leaders and many legal experts, who argued that it set a dangerous precedent for federal overreach.

The article then shifts focus to the current state of affairs, explaining that President Trump, now in his second term, has reaffirmed his commitment to maintaining control over the California National Guard. In a recent statement, Trump emphasized that the Guard's presence is essential for maintaining law and order in the state, particularly in light of ongoing protests and civil unrest. This stance has further inflamed tensions between the federal government and California's state government, which is now led by Governor Eleni Kounalakis, who succeeded Newsom in 2023.

Kounalakis has been vocal in her opposition to the federal control of the Guard, arguing that it undermines the state's ability to respond effectively to local emergencies and natural disasters. She has called for a renewed legal challenge to the Supreme Court's decision, urging other states to join California in resisting what she describes as an "unprecedented assault on states' rights."

The article also explores the broader implications of the ongoing dispute. It notes that the situation in California has become a flashpoint in the national debate over federalism and the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Some political analysts argue that the Trump administration's actions in California could set a precedent for similar interventions in other states, potentially leading to a significant shift in the federal-state power dynamic.

Furthermore, the article discusses the impact of the federal control of the California National Guard on the Guard itself. It reports that morale among Guard members has been affected, with many expressing frustration over the political nature of their deployment. There have been reports of increased resignations and difficulties in recruitment, as potential members are wary of being caught up in a political battle.

The piece also touches on the public's reaction to the ongoing situation. It notes that public opinion in California is sharply divided, with some residents supporting the federal intervention as a necessary measure to restore order, while others view it as an infringement on their rights and an example of federal overreach. Nationwide, the issue has become a rallying point for both supporters and critics of the Trump administration, with many seeing it as emblematic of broader political and ideological divides.

In conclusion, the article emphasizes that the future of the California National Guard remains uncertain. While President Trump has made it clear that he intends to maintain federal control, the state of California continues to explore legal avenues to challenge this decision. The outcome of this ongoing battle will likely have far-reaching implications for the relationship between the federal government and the states, as well as for the role of the National Guard in American society.

Overall, the CNN article provides a thorough and nuanced examination of the complex and contentious issue of federal control over the California National Guard. It offers valuable insights into the historical context, the current state of affairs, and the potential future implications of this ongoing political and legal battle.

Read the Full CNN Article at:
[ https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/19/politics/trump-continue-control-california-national-guard ]