District Court The suit was brought on June 9, 2025, in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of California, where it was assigned to
Charles Breyer, the brother of former
United States Supreme Court justice
Stephen Breyer. State attorney general
Rob Bonta represented California and sought emergency relief. California argued that the Trump administration memorandum concerning the partial federalization of the
California National Guard under was invalid for not following the proper procedure of issuance through the governor and that even if procedure was followed, the memorandum was issued over a "manufactured crisis." Judge Breyer denied the June 9 request for emergency relief to give the Trump administration time to respond. In a hearing on June 12, Breyer sharply disagreed with the Trump administration's arguments that the memorandum's issuance was an unreviewable discretionary action or that the memorandum had been properly issued, stating: 'I'm trying to figure out how something can be ‘through’ somebody if, in fact, you didn't give it to him.'" Later that same day, Breyer ruled in favor of California and granted temporary relief, but that ruling was stayed hours later when the Trump administration appealed to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Court of Appeals After staying Breyer’s ruling, a three-judge panel of the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, composed of circuit judges
Mark J. Bennett,
Eric D. Miller, and
Jennifer Sung, scheduled an expedited hearing for June 17, considering whether to extend the stay further. In that hearing, California emphasized alleged harm to the state from the federalization of California National Guard members, while the Trump administration reasserted its earlier arguments that the federalization was a discretionary action and not subject to judicial review. On June 19, in a unanimous
per curiam decision, the three-judge panel extended the stay, disagreeing with the Trump administration's argument that issuing the memorandum was a discretionary action, and instead held that the
standard of review was "highly deferential" and that "it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority."
District Court ruling After a three-day bench trial, Breyer ruled on September 2, 2025, that the Trump administration had violated the
Posse Comitatus Act and ordered the administration not to use National Guard or military troops for civilian law enforcement in California. Breyer issued an injunction covering all of California, blocking the use of the National Guard, though he stayed the injunction until September 12 to give time for the government to appeal. The government appealed on September 3. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted an administrative stay on September 4. The decision allowed the Trump administration to retain federal control over California National Guard troops. Ten judges, including Senior Judge
Marsha Berzon and Judge
Ronald M. Gould, issued statements dissenting from the denial of en banc review.
Second District Court ruling On December 10, 2025, Breyer ordered Trump to cease the National Guard deployment in Los Angeles. In addition, Breyer would have issued a preliminary injunction which had been sought by California, but put an official ruling on that matter on hold until December 15, 2025. == Aftermath ==