A federal judge ruled Thursday that the Trump Defense Department illegally exceeded its authority by deploying 2,000 local and foreign National Guard members to Washington, DC, as part of President Trump’s crackdown on blue cities.
Elsewhere in the country, state lawsuits against Trump’s deployments are in limbo as the Supreme Court considers an appeal of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals’ order blocking troop deployments to Chicago.
The administration’s position in the case appeared to weaken Thursday as federal prosecutors moved to dismiss charges against two drivers they had accused of trying to harm federal immigration enforcement agents — a key part of the administration’s assertion that it needed National Guard support.
Read the judge’s decision here:
Cobb suspended his order until Dec. 11 to allow the Trump administration to appeal.
Elsewhere in the country, state lawsuits against Trump’s deployments are in limbo as the Supreme Court considers an appeal of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals’ order blocking troop deployments to Chicago.
The administration’s position in the case appeared to weaken Thursday as federal prosecutors moved to dismiss charges against two drivers they had accused of trying to harm federal immigration enforcement agents — a key part of the administration’s assertion that it needed National Guard support.
Read the judge’s decision here:
“Any incursion into the exercise of the District’s sovereign power would cause harm under Article III, but the Court observes that the magnitude of the offense here is no small matter,” she wrote.
“The deployments in question involve the daily presence of more than 2,000 National Guard troops, approximately two-thirds the size of the MPD, on the streets of the District. And there is also the risk that this incursion becomes permanent, or at least long-lasting, given the creation of a DCNG unit specifically created to maintain order in the District.”
Cobb suspended his order until Dec. 11 to allow the Trump administration to appeal.
Elsewhere in the country, state lawsuits against Trump’s deployments are in limbo as the Supreme Court considers an appeal of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals’ order blocking troop deployments to Chicago.
The administration’s position in the case appeared to weaken Thursday as federal prosecutors moved to dismiss charges against two drivers they had accused of trying to harm federal immigration enforcement agents — a key part of the administration’s assertion that it needed National Guard support.
Read the judge’s decision here:
She added that the presence of about 1,000 guardsmen from other states compounds the injuries inflicted on DC. The Guard has been stationed for months in high-visibility, low-crime areas of the city (including the National Mall).
“Any incursion into the exercise of the District’s sovereign power would cause harm under Article III, but the Court observes that the magnitude of the offense here is no small matter,” she wrote.
“The deployments in question involve the daily presence of more than 2,000 National Guard troops, approximately two-thirds the size of the MPD, on the streets of the District. And there is also the risk that this incursion becomes permanent, or at least long-lasting, given the creation of a DCNG unit specifically created to maintain order in the District.”
Cobb suspended his order until Dec. 11 to allow the Trump administration to appeal.
Elsewhere in the country, state lawsuits against Trump’s deployments are in limbo as the Supreme Court considers an appeal of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals’ order blocking troop deployments to Chicago.
The administration’s position in the case appeared to weaken Thursday as federal prosecutors moved to dismiss charges against two drivers they had accused of trying to harm federal immigration enforcement agents — a key part of the administration’s assertion that it needed National Guard support.
Read the judge’s decision here:
“The Court finds that the President does not have floating Article II authority to deploy the [D.C. National Guard] for the deterrence of crime,” she wrote.
She added that the presence of about 1,000 guardsmen from other states compounds the injuries inflicted on DC. The Guard has been stationed for months in high-visibility, low-crime areas of the city (including the National Mall).
“Any incursion into the exercise of the District’s sovereign power would cause harm under Article III, but the Court observes that the magnitude of the offense here is no small matter,” she wrote.
“The deployments in question involve the daily presence of more than 2,000 National Guard troops, approximately two-thirds the size of the MPD, on the streets of the District. And there is also the risk that this incursion becomes permanent, or at least long-lasting, given the creation of a DCNG unit specifically created to maintain order in the District.”
Cobb suspended his order until Dec. 11 to allow the Trump administration to appeal.
Elsewhere in the country, state lawsuits against Trump’s deployments are in limbo as the Supreme Court considers an appeal of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals’ order blocking troop deployments to Chicago.
The administration’s position in the case appeared to weaken Thursday as federal prosecutors moved to dismiss charges against two drivers they had accused of trying to harm federal immigration enforcement agents — a key part of the administration’s assertion that it needed National Guard support.
Read the judge’s decision here:
But Judge Jia Cobb, a Biden appointee, ruled that while Trump may have governor-like powers over his state’s National Guard, those powers are not absolute. She also rejected the administration’s assertion that the president’s broad power covers any loopholes that might otherwise be carved out in his authority over the district.
“The Court finds that the President does not have floating Article II authority to deploy the [D.C. National Guard] for the deterrence of crime,” she wrote.
She added that the presence of about 1,000 guardsmen from other states compounds the injuries inflicted on DC. The Guard has been stationed for months in high-visibility, low-crime areas of the city (including the National Mall).
“Any incursion into the exercise of the District’s sovereign power would cause harm under Article III, but the Court observes that the magnitude of the offense here is no small matter,” she wrote.
“The deployments in question involve the daily presence of more than 2,000 National Guard troops, approximately two-thirds the size of the MPD, on the streets of the District. And there is also the risk that this incursion becomes permanent, or at least long-lasting, given the creation of a DCNG unit specifically created to maintain order in the District.”
Cobb suspended his order until Dec. 11 to allow the Trump administration to appeal.
Elsewhere in the country, state lawsuits against Trump’s deployments are in limbo as the Supreme Court considers an appeal of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals’ order blocking troop deployments to Chicago.
The administration’s position in the case appeared to weaken Thursday as federal prosecutors moved to dismiss charges against two drivers they had accused of trying to harm federal immigration enforcement agents — a key part of the administration’s assertion that it needed National Guard support.
