Transcription
Joining me now is the attorney general for California, Rob Bonsa. Thank you so much for joining me. I asked the federal judge to issue a restraining order right away, which I think is understandable for anybody who's not a lawyer, just watching and any and all the concerns we all have about the military being there on the ground.
Um, the judge seemed to side with the defense's request for 24 hours to respond, and the hearing is now on Thursday, which means basically two more days of the National Guard and Marines operating in communities around LA. I mean, how concerning is that delay of two days to you?
You? It's concerning, but it's not unreasonable or frankly unexpected for this judge who, if whatever he decides or certainly if he finds with us, expects the federal government to appeal the case. So he wants to be thoughtful. He wants to consider the different arguments and the factual presentations. So we asked for an order on very short notice—just a few hours. The judge wanted to spend a few more hours than that to review the opposition of the US government and then have a hearing on it.
Um, that's completely appropriate. Uh, but we believe that the harm is imminent. It's irreparable. It's irreversible. So that's why we're moving quickly and aggressively to get an order as soon as possible.
One of the things you argue is that Trump and Hegsth have made clear publicly and privately that the National Guard and Marines are in Los Angeles to accompany ICE officers on raids and that they will quote physically interact with or detain civilians. I think that is something we all have concerns about. You cite a declaration from a California military official who says he became aware that the defense department was planning to change their mission starting today. Uh, we've seen a range of reporting, including from NBC News, about deploying additional groups out to other states, but tell us more about what you know about what they're planning in California and what specifically you're presenting in your argument there.
The deployed National Guards people as well as the Marines, they have a mission to protect federal property, operations and functions, and personnel. So that necessarily means they will be out in the field in neighborhoods in communities with ICE agents, protecting the ICE immigration enforcement operations and protecting those personnel. Um, we believe that that, as with respect to the Marines, is a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. We have made a decision and we have a law that requires civilian law enforcement in on American soil and civilian areas, not military law enforcement. That's the heart and soul of the Posse Comitatus Act. We also believe that the National Guard was called in without authority and that this is an unlawful power grab attempt by President Trump. He does not have the authority. There is no rebellion. Uh, there is no invasion. That's obvious. There is no inability for the federal government to execute the laws. Although Mr. Hegsth seems to claim all three exist.
Um, and what's more, the governor's consent was not provided, which is also required under the law that is relied upon by the federal government. So, the National Guard should be returned to the command of the commander-in-chief, who is Governor Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, and the Marines should be restricted to only lawful operations, which means they cannot go out and accompany and participate in civilian law enforcement activity in the communities and neighborhoods of Los Angeles.
You said earlier today, and you seem to allude to this a little bit in your answer there, that if the judge rules in your favor the National Guard and Marines would go back to proper command. Um, for people who are trying to understand what that means—maybe people who are watching who are in the LA area—would that compel them to stand down altogether immediately? I mean, do you expect that ruling could happen on Thursday? What is your expectation overall?
Yeah, you know, the judge will hear the arguments of the state and of the federal government. We believe we have really strong, compelling arguments, and we are hopeful and we believe we'll secure a temporary restraining order on Thursday once the judge hears all of the facts and all of the legal presentations.
Um, the California National Guard is a joint operation that generally is under the command of Governor Gavin Newsom. There's a specific statute that allows the president to take over command, and they're rare and they're infrequent; then he may, but those conditions are not present here. So these are National Guard people who were on the San Diego-Mexico border combating fentanyl inflow. They were tackling wildfires and involved in wildfire suppression work. Now that we're in wildfire season, they're doing important work. They will likely be returned to that work if that's what Governor Gavin wants them to do. The Marines do not—they're not under the command of Governor Gavin Newsom, but they cannot conduct civilian law enforcement activity in on American soil. So, if the one of the most elite fighting forces are—if it's the decision of the president to use them to guard federal property, um, perhaps that is something that they could do consistent with the Posse Comitatus Act. Um, but they can't be in communities accompanying ICE and ICE agents in their operations of civil immigration enforcement. Huge difference between those two, as you very helpfully explain.
I just outline what I see as kind of both an effort to run a PR-style campaign of creating and painting a picture of chaos along with an effort to lay the groundwork for legal justification, which is obviously what you're navigating for invoking the Insurrection Act. Do you see the Insurrection Act and invoking it as Trump's endgame?
Yes, it's lurking, and the words they use suggest it's coming. Uh, this very deliberate and intentional adoption of the use of "insurrection" when there's no insurrection, but they're trying to lay the groundwork and prepare and socialize an idea that's not true. And, you know, this idea that Los Angeles would be burning that Trump is suggesting if it weren't for him, even though the National Guard had nothing to do with tackling the incidents of crime and vandalism that were occurring. That credit goes to local law enforcement—the sheriff's department, the biggest in the nation; the police department, the third biggest in the nation. So Trump likes to call non-emergencies emergencies and things that aren't insurrections insurrections. And things that aren't rebellions or invasions, rebellions or invasions. Why? Because those are the trigger words. Those are the legal requirements that give him more power. His endgame is to claim and usurp more power that is not his and that he is not owed because those factual conditions don't exist on the ground. But he's a salesman. Um, he has a very complicated and difficult relationship with the truth, and um, you can ask the people of Los Angeles if they think there's a rebellion happening right now or if they are under invasion. I'm not sure who the invasion would be from. President Shai of Mexico might be very surprised to hear that some people are suggesting that they are invading the United States of America right now. Uh, but it matters what the facts actually are, not what the president, with his lay terms and his manipulations of language, calls things. And so there's no insurrection, but it doesn't mean he's not going to try to claim an insurrection and invoke the Insurrection Act because he desperately wants the power that it would give him. And if he claims an insurrection when there isn't one—and there isn't one now, and we don't believe there will be—we'll take him to court. Berke.