NEW: Ninth Circuit says Trump "likely... lawfully exercised his statutory authority" federalizing CA National Guard

[In It to Win It]

Joshua J. Friedman
‪@joshuajfriedman.com‬

NEW: The Ninth Circuit reverses Judge Breyer's order, finding that President Trump "likely ... lawfully exercised his statutory authority" when he federalized the California National Guard. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca9.4e2731d4-cbd8-4803-a59f-a1d0c6023daf/gov.uscourts.ca9.4e2731d4-cbd8-4803-a59f-a1d0c6023daf.32.0.pdf

The order is per curiam, meaning it is unsigned and comes from the full three-judge panel.

The court spends 14 of 38 pages rejecting the govt's argument that Trump's decision to federalize the California National Guard can't be reviewed by the courts.

The court concludes that the statute's requirement that "orders ... shall be issued through the governors of the States" doesn't mean that a governor must consent or even be consulted before their state's National Guard is federalized.

NEW: The Ninth Circuit reverses Judge Breyer's order, finding that President Trump "likely ... lawfully exercised his statutory authority" when he federalized the California National Guard. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

— Joshua J. Friedman (@joshuajfriedman.com) 2025-06-20T02:38:55.511Z

BREAKING: Ninth Circuit panel allows Trump's order activating the National Guard to remain in effect during California's challenge to that order.

The panel, after arguments, held that Trump's action activating the Guard was likely lawful under a "highly deferential" standard of review.

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) 2025-06-20T02:48:59.168Z

The unsigned, per curiam order was unanimous from the panel, which included Judges Mark J. Bennett and Eric D. Miller, both Trump appointees, and Judge Jennifer Sung, a Biden appointee.

Order: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) 2025-06-20T02:51:43.469Z

[lapfog_1]

1. so much for courts protecting us from the Gestapo

we are truly on our own.

[newdeal2]

3. There's not much hope with this SCOTUS anyway

Sorry but the picture is pretty grim overall. 2026 is our next shot unless Republicans grow a pair.

[Phoenix61]

2. That's depressing as shit. nt

[LymphocyteLover]

17. Indeed. Fuck!

[SheltieLover]

4. Rotten bastards!

[Iwasthere]

5. So is that it? Judge Breyers order is wiped

Are we done now? I personally believe so. WE ARE FUCKED! Panama looks good. They take great care of the elderly there. Easy retirement. Now to sell the house.

[Fiendish Thingy]

21. It's a stay until the next appeal

One more district appeal, then SCOTUS.

[Figarosmom]

24. But trump is going to attack

And take over Panama. Remember?

[Fiendish Thingy]

6. So can it be appealed to the full En Banc 9th circuit?

The 9th is the most liberal circuit in the country, despite having the misfortune to draw two Trump appointees.

[rso]

7. Appeal

Yes, the State of CA. Can request an en banc review.

[In It to Win It]

8. It's possible an en banc panel could be a majority of Trump appointees

Or Republican appointees. Trump appointed 10 judges to the 9th Circuit.

It’s happened before.

[dsc]

12. En Banc is the entire court

which is currently majority Democratic.

[In It to Win It]

15. Not in the 9th circuit. 9th Circuit does en banc hearings with 11 judges.

[Fiendish Thingy]

20. Technically possible

But mathematically improbable, since Biden appointed 8 during his term, in addition to the others appointed by Dem presidents.

[In It to Win It]

23. Unlikely, sure but more likely than we would like. Biden's appointments didn't shift the balance of the 9th Circuit

Trump’s appointments did shift the balance. To my knowledge, Trump replaced four Democratic appointees. Biden didn’t replace any Republican appointees. Biden just replaced old Democratic appointees with new Democratic appointees.

I remember doing the math some years ago in which about 1/3 of en banc cases in the 9th circuit at the time had panels with a majority of GOP appointees, which makes sense because Trump did appoint about 1/3 of the active judges. Sure, having a majority 2/3 of the time is good, but 1/3 is a bigger slice than I care to give Trump.

Right now, the 9th Circuit has 16 en banc cases with assigned judges. As best as I could tell, 5 have GOP majorities so it just about follows the same trend… and an additional 3 cases have 5 GOP appointees out of 11, which is too close for comfort when it comes to Trump IMO.

[Amaryllis]

10. What is En Banc?

[dsc]

13. The entire active court

[In It to Win It]

14. When a case is reheard by all appeals court judges in a circuit

However, the 9th Circuit has 29 active judges so they all don’t sit for en banc hearings. Instead, 11 active judges (the chief judge plus 10 other active judges) rehears a case in an en banc appeal.

A party can request an en banc rehearing of a case after a 3-judge panel has made their decision.

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. This ruling was written by a three judge panel

The 9th circuit court of appeals has a total of 29 judges; an En Banc hearing would be a review by the entire court, not just a three judge panel.

[In It to Win It]

19. The 9th Circuit's en banc hearings consist of 11 judges

[Fiendish Thingy]

22. Better than three. Nt

[walkingman]

9. Hard to accept but I think this is what America has become - this is who we are

[spanone]

11. ...and the coup goes on..

[LymphocyteLover]

18. two trump nominees... of course