Michael Dell Pledges $6.25 Billion to Boost Children’s Investment Accounts Under Trump Initiative 
Peru’s Ex-President Martín Vizcarra Sentenced to 14 Years in Prison for Corruption 
U.S. Repatriation Flight Carrying 266 Venezuelan Migrants Lands in Caracas 
Judge Dismisses Charges Against Comey and Letitia James After Ruling on Prosecutor’s Appointment 
Tunisian Opposition Figure Chaima Issa Arrested Amid Rising Crackdown 
Drones Spotted Near Zelenskiy’s Flight Path in Ireland Trigger Security Alert 
U.S. to Reduce Import Duties on South Korean Autos Under New Trade Agreement 
U.S.–Russia Peace Talks Stall as Kremlin Rejects Key Proposals 
Yellow Corp Reaches Major Settlement With Pension Plans Amid Ongoing Bankruptcy Case 
U.S. Expected to Expand Travel Ban to More Than 30 Countries 
Hikvision Challenges FCC Rule Tightening Restrictions on Chinese Telecom Equipment 
UN General Assembly Demands Russia Return Ukrainian Children Amid Ongoing Conflict 
U.S. Justice Department Orders Intensified Probe Into Antifa and Domestic Extremist Groups 
Germany Moves to Approve €2.9 Billion Defense Procurement Package 
UN Chief Says Gaza Operation “Fundamentally Wrong” as Concerns Over War Crimes Grow 
Key Witness Seeks to Block Evidence in Potential Revival of Comey Case 
Bolsonaro Detained Over Alleged Escape Risk After Ankle Monitor Tampering 
A U.S. appeals court has allowed President Donald Trump to retain control over California’s National Guard, despite an ongoing legal challenge by Governor Gavin Newsom. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals extended a pause on a lower court ruling that deemed Trump’s federalization of the Guard unlawful.
The dispute stems from Trump’s June 7, 2025, decision to deploy 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 U.S. Marines to Los Angeles amid immigration-related protests. The action was taken without Governor Newsom’s consent, sparking a lawsuit arguing Trump violated the Insurrection Act by bypassing the legal requirement to coordinate with the state governor and failing to justify that the conditions for federalizing troops—such as a rebellion—existed.
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer initially ruled in favor of California, ordering the return of control to Newsom. However, the 9th Circuit quickly stayed that decision, with two Trump-appointed judges and one Biden appointee now weighing whether courts can review presidential authority in such emergencies.
The Justice Department insists Trump’s actions are unreviewable once an emergency is declared. In contrast, California argues that the protests, while marked by sporadic violence, never amounted to a rebellion and were manageable by local authorities. The deployment, California says, violated both state sovereignty and federal law barring military involvement in civilian law enforcement.
The Trump administration maintains that the troops were deployed solely to protect federal property and personnel, not to enforce civilian law. The controversy has reignited a national debate over the limits of presidential power and the use of military force on U.S. soil.
This legal clash could set a critical precedent for future federal use of state National Guard forces during domestic unrest. A final ruling is pending.
