Gov. Newsom returns to Trump resistance rhetoric amid Los Angeles protests clash
On Thursday, lawyers for Newsom and the State of California will go up against Pres. Trump and his administration.
LOS ANGELES (KGO) -- After months of recalibrating his progressive firebrand image, Gov. Gavin Newsom is once again emerging as the leader of Democrats' resistance to President Donald Trump.
With California and the White House now in a legal standoff over Trump's deployment of federal troops in Los Angeles, Newsom is no longer holding back in his fierce criticism of the Trump administration.
"Democracy is under assault before our eyes," Newsom said in a public address Tuesday evening. "This moment we have feared has arrived."
After largely steering clear of direct public fights with Trump in recent months, Newsom's latest rhetoric marks a shift away from what many in his party view as a moderate rebranding - as speculation about his 2028 presidential ambition grows.
Earlier this year, Newsom welcomed MAGA leaders like Steve Bannon and Charlie Kirk on his podcast to the dismay of other Democrats. There in a conversation with Kirk, the governor said he agreed with Republicans that it's "deeply unfair" for transgender athletes to compete in girls' sports. At times, the Democratic leader even decried his own party's brand as "toxic."
In recent days, Newsom has seized the opportunity to antagonize Trump - daring border czar Tom Homan to "come and get me," after Homan threatened to arrest the California governor if he obstructs federal immigration enforcement.
The governor's tone currently, is more reminiscent of the combative style he took during the president's first term, and something political consultant Jim Ross says is likely more true to Newsom's own beliefs.
"My experience with Gavin Newsom is he usually gets to doing the right thing, even if he gets there in the wrong way," Ross said. "I think this is that situation where I think he was always going to end up being an opposition to Trump, but it just took him a circuitous route to get there."
In addition to presidential hopes, Ross suggests Newsom's Trump-friendly strategy was rooted in California's need for federal support after the LA wildfires.
"Everybody knows that the best way to get (Trump) to do something is to suck up to him," he said.
But Republican strategists see it differently.
"We've got someone who is now flip-flopping back and forth," said GOP consultant Hector Barajas.
"Wherever the political wind takes him, that's where Gavin Newsom is going to be," Barajas said. "If it's convenient to have Charlie Kirk back on his podcast, he's going to do that."
Politics aside, the deployment of troops in Los Angeles is raising real constitutional questions about the president's ability to deploy military forces without a governor's approval.
Newsom lawsuit against Trump goes to court in San Francisco
That issue is now heading to federal court in San Francisco Thursday, where U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer will consider issuing a temporary restraining order to halt Trump's deployment of the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles.
Newsom sued Trump and the Department of Defense for what he calls, "an illegal takeover of the California National Guard" when he called them to Los Angeles without a request from the governor.
"But the current text of the law says that the President can call it up whenever he can't enforce federal law with current resources, and I just think it's going to be difficult to get a court to second guess that," said UC Law San Francisco professor Matt Coles. "Tomorrow is the hearing on the temporary restraining order. I think the temporary restraining order was aimed at un-federalizing the National Guard, and I think that's tough."
Coles references a Supreme Court case from the 1800s. That case gave power to the President's judgement in a situation like this.
But it's not clear if there will even be a decision here, says constitutional law professor Rory Little.
"I guess I would predict you're not going to get a ruling tomorrow on anything," he said. "You're not going to get a definitive ruling like you can't do this, or you definitely can do this. I think it's more likely to be a sort of can we just move things along here and be calm. That is Judge Breyer's general style."
Little believes if the soldiers stay or are used to enforce law and order, than that could lead to a stronger case for California leaders.
"I think if the troops are used to do things that aren't just protecting federal buildings from damage or protecting ICE agents from physical assault. If they're doing more than that, then I think you'll be right back in front of Judge Breyer. I think Judge Breyer will try to put things off. I think he'll try to just calm the waters and say, you know, there doesn't seem to be anything that's a rebellion happening today. And mister you know, federal lawyer, whoever it is - do you really still think you need to have those troops there?" said Little.
The court hearing will start at 1:30 p.m. Thursday. California Attorney General Rob Bonta says they are asking the court to immediately block the Trump Administration from ordering the military or federalized national guard from patrolling our communities or otherwise engaging in general law enforcement activities beyond federal property.
