Breyer to hear California's bid to block Trump's use of military in LA immigration raids

Senior U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer of San Francisco is the latest appointee of President Bill Clinton in the Northern District of California to be assigned a major legal challenge to President Donald Trump's actions.

Breyer scheduled a hearing for Thursday afternoon on arguments by Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta for a temporary restraining order to block Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth from federalizing the National Guard and using the Marines to assist ICE agents who are conducting immigration enforcement raids in Southern California.

Breyer, the 83-year-old younger brother of former Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer, granted a motion Tuesday by the U.S. Department of Justice for an opportunity to file a response brief, which is due Wednesday morning. The state can file a response Thursday morning, a few hours before the scheduled hearing on its motion for a restraining order.

"These unlawful deployments have already proven to be a deeply inflammatory and unnecessary provocation, anathema to our laws limiting the use of federal forces for law enforcement, rather than a means of restoring calm," Deputy Attorney General Nicholas D. Espiritu wrote in his motion.

"Federal antagonization, through the presence of soldiers in the streets, has already caused real and irreparable damage to the City of Los Angeles, the people who live there, and the State of California," he added. "They must be stopped, immediately." Newsom et al. v. Trump et al., 25-cv-04870 (N.D. Cal., filed June 9, 2025).

U.S. Department of Justice attorney Christopher D. Edelman opposed the state's proposed injunction, saying the governor "seeks an extraordinary, unprecedented, and dangerous court order" that would interfere with the federal government's ability to carry out its operations.

"Plaintiffs' request that this Court supervise the President and Secretary of Defense's management of military forces is itself highly unusual and indeed non-justiciable under constitutional principles," he wrote.

Breyer is the latest senior judge in the Northern District to tackle legal challenges to Trump's actions and executive orders.

The state's decision to file the challenge in San Francisco, and not Los Angeles - where the events are occurring - dramatically increased the odds that the case would be considered by a judge appointed by a Democrat, as all but one judge on the Northern District federal court- including those on senior status - was picked by a Democratic president.

By contrast, the Central District has many more Republican appointees on the federal bench, though still a decided minority, increasing the likelihood that Bonta could draw a less favorable jurist.

Arthur D. Hellman, a professor emeritus at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, said in an email that Bonta's decision to file in the Northern District was likely done "in the belief that he is almost certain to get a judge appointed by a Democratic president."

"He may also believe that judges who live and work in the Los Angeles area may have experienced some sort of disruption in their lives by reason of the activity that is the subject of the complaint," Hellman added.

In the Northern District, Breyer and other appointees of Democratic presidents have been dealing with most of the legal challenges to Trump's orders.

Jeremy D. Fogel, a former Northern District of California judge who now is executive director of the Berkeley Judicial Institute, said senior judges in the district have remained active, although they can choose to turn down some cases. Breyer, for example, dislikes patent litigation and opted out of them categorically.

"That's different from a situation in which a senior judge can pick and choose which assigned cases to hear," Fogel wrote in an email. "That's never been the practice in the district, at least going back to the beginning of my tenure (and Judge Breyer's) in 1998."

Otherwise, cases are assigned by lot, he added.

"The reason why senior judges are getting some of the more prominent cases in the Northern District of California is that the district has a large number of senior judges who have remained on the wheel," he wrote.

Senior U.S. District Judge Susan Y. Illston, another Clinton appointee, issued a preliminary injunction May 22 blocking the Trump administration from carrying out large-scale layoffs of federal employees - a decision that is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court after an application by U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer. Trump v. American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO et al., 24A1174 (S. Ct., filed June 2, 2025).

In March, Senior U.S. District Judge William Alsup - also a Clinton appointee - issued a preliminary injunction ordering the reinstatement of 16,000 probationary employees who were fired by various federal agencies. While that lawsuit is ongoing, the U.S. Supreme Court paused Alsup's injunction on April 8. Office of Personnel Management et al. v. American Federation of Government Employees et al., 24A904 (S. Ct., filed March 24, 2025).

Trump's executive order taking federal control over the National Guard and bringing in military troops cites a rarely invoked law last used in 1965 by President Lyndon Baines Johnson to protect a civil rights march after Alabama Gov. George Wallace refused to allow his state's National Guard to do so.

Justice Department attorneys could not be reached for comment.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where any appeal would likely be filed first, has a 16-13 majority of Democratic appointees. But many motions for a stay of a lower court order are filed with three-judge panels - which are drawn by lot.

Bonta has played the percentages when filing California's lawsuits against the Trump administration, avoiding the divided 9th Circuit in favor of filing cases whenever possible in the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where all five judges were appointed by Democratic presidents and most of the district courts in New England are dominated by Democratic appointees as well.

Other plaintiffs challenging Trump administration policies, including several other states led by Washington, have not avoided the 9th Circuit. One of three challenges to the president's executive order barring birthright citizenship was granted by Senior U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour of the Western District of Washington, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan.

A 9th Circuit panel heard oral arguments of the Trump administration's appeal on June 4. State of Washington et al. v. Trump et al., 25-807 (9th Circ., filed Feb. 7, 2025).