California AG Rob Bonta reacts to Late Night Court Victory

Interactive Transcript

spk_0 We got some breaking news here on the Midas Touch Network for those that have been following

spk_0 it.

spk_0 Judge, uh, Immogut has just issued her second temporary restraining order in favor of

spk_0 the state of Oregon and California about Donald Trump's attempts to send now the California

spk_0 National Guard into Oregon in full defiance of Judge Immogut's earlier ruling from Saturday

spk_0 late afternoon in which she said that Donald Trump did not have the power or the authority under

spk_0 the statute to commandeer and federalize the Oregon National Guard because the, uh, the elements

spk_0 that are necessary in order to do that were missing, such as there's no rebellion going on,

spk_0 and he doesn't need federal troops or the, um, or the commandeer National Guard troops in order

spk_0 to execute federal law.

spk_0 Donald Trump didn't like that and decided to start sending in 200 or more, uh, uh, national

spk_0 guardsmen from California into Oregon, which led to a quick unity between Oregon and California

spk_0 and joining in a new temporary restraining order.

spk_0 And within hours, Judge Immogut set an emergency hearing and ruled from the bench and who

spk_0 better to tell us about this than the attorney general of California, who's joining us here at

spk_0 Rob Bonta, at AG Bonta. Thank you for joining. Might as touch.

spk_0 Great for me with you as always.

spk_0 Thanks.

spk_0 Yes.

spk_0 So, uh, let's take it from your perspective.

spk_0 This was an Oregon case until about a half a day ago and then it became a California

spk_0 in Oregon case.

spk_0 Uh, you were on the hearing.

spk_0 It was by phone, mainly tell our audience what happened today and what Judge Immogut did.

spk_0 And uh, why do you think it was correct?

spk_0 Yeah, you know, well, it was an Oregon case until today, though California, you know,

spk_0 I speaking directly with with, uh, AG Rayfield and my team talking to them have been very closely

spk_0 communicating with them about what happened in LA with California since we were first.

spk_0 We've been supporting our fellow AGs as they face deployments of National Guard, whether

spk_0 it be DC or Oregon.

spk_0 And then today we got, you know, directly brought it to the case with, uh, 300,

spk_0 federalized California National Guard's people being moved, um, a thousand miles up north to

spk_0 Portland, uh, where a judge had already said yesterday that the conditions on the ground

spk_0 absolutely do not justify the federalization of National Guard. They don't justify the,

spk_0 the federalization of Oregon National Guard. And so the federal government in, in its, uh,

spk_0 ingenious thinking said, well, she, her order, uh, though it said there were no conditions to bring

spk_0 the National Guard to, uh, federalized National Guard to Oregon, applied to the Oregon National Guard.

spk_0 How about, uh, we bring in California National Guard.

spk_0 Why don't you just work?

spk_0 And she was completely missed. I, I, I just, uh, listened in on entire hearing. First of all,

spk_0 thank you to my incredible team, the incredible teams in Oregon. And Portland is a team effort.

spk_0 Uh, folks working overtime, obviously today is a Sunday. Um, and democracy needs to be

spk_0 protected every day and the rule of law does as well. Um, and she was really missed her first

spk_0 set of questions of the federal government where how does this not violate my order from yesterday?

spk_0 And, uh, I think she's right. You know, that this sort of super technical approach to try to

spk_0 bring National Guard in that's from another, uh, state and, and, and, and just minutes before

spk_0 the hearing commenced, we got word, uh, through a, a memorandum from Secretary Higgseth,

spk_0 that the Texas National Guard has been federalized. 2000 of them with 400 of them being deployed

spk_0 to both Portland and, and, um, and Chicago. So, uh, it is clear that, uh, it, it's a sort of

spk_0 whack-a-mole approach from the federal government. You stopped the Oregon National Guard from being

spk_0 federalized. We'll bring up the California National Guard. You stopped the California National

spk_0 Guard from being brought up north. We'll bring in the Texas National Guard. You stopped them. Uh,

spk_0 we got, you know, who's got next? Uh, we know we got a bunch of others we can bring in. And so we

spk_0 asked her, uh, the judge, uh, to issue a broad order that says that applies to every national guard

spk_0 in every state and the District of Columbia. And that none of them can be deployed, uh,

spk_0 community federalized and deployed to, uh, Oregon. And she issued that order from the bench. Uh,

spk_0 she's going to back it up with the written order as well. But she was concerned based on the

spk_0 behavior of the federal government, uh, about what the scope of her order should be and believed.

spk_0 And I agree, uh, uh, uh, that a broad order, uh, uh, that is broad and scope is appropriate. So, um,

spk_0 the conditions have not changed in 24 hours. Uh, National Guard being deployed in Oregon was

spk_0 unlawful yesterday. It's unlawful today as well. It doesn't matter where the National Guard comes from

spk_0 whether they're Oregon's National Guard or California's or Texas's guard. And so I think the judge

spk_0 nailed it. Um, the Trump-appointed judge, uh, nailed it and looked at the facts, looked at the law,

spk_0 issued an order, um, expeditiously and, um, uh, appropriately stopped Trump from this unlawful

spk_0 conduct. And thank you, A. G. Bonta. And what we've known from the past is there were about seven

spk_0 red states that sent their National Guard into DC. And I'm sure this is the same group that Donald

spk_0 Trump is trying to cycle through to try to find a new, I don't even think he's trying to do, uh,

spk_0 find a loophole. I think he's just openly defiant of judge Immergutten. It sounds like she might,

spk_0 she thinks that might have happened as well. Just to frame the issue, we have a judge who, yes,

spk_0 was appointed back in the, uh, the, uh, first term of Donald Trump. But he's already blaming whoever

spk_0 the people were, you know, at the Federalist Society or Leonard Leo or whoever let him stray

spk_0 because he doesn't like her particular rulings. Um, and she framed the issue in her order on Saturday.

spk_0 So perfectly, uh, in my, to my audience, I said, it's 31 pages, but you really just need to read

spk_0 the first paragraph and, uh, one of her last paragraphs to understand it. In her first paragraph

spk_0 for our audience, she said on, on Saturday, and this, like you said, it was illegal then,

spk_0 it's illegal now. She said, this case involves the intersection of three of the most fundamental

spk_0 principles and our constitutional democracy. The first concerns, the relationship between the

spk_0 federal government and the states, the second concerns, the relationship between the United States

spk_0 armed forces and domestic law enforcement and the third concerns, the proper role of the judicial

spk_0 branch in ensuring that the executive branch complies with the laws and limitations imposed by

spk_0 the legislative branch, whether we choose to follow what the Constitution mandates with respect to

spk_0 these three relationships goes to the heart of what it means to live under the rule of law in the

spk_0 United States. And then she ended it this way. And I'm sure this is sort of the animating force

spk_0 in, in her decision making. She said at the end of her order on page 30 from Saturday, this country

spk_0 has a longstanding and foundational tradition of resistance to government overreach, especially

spk_0 in the form of military intrusion into civil affairs, quoting from James Madison, addressed to

spk_0 the Constitutional Convention, a standing military force with an overgrown executive. Well,

spk_0 we've got an overgrown executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defense

spk_0 against foreign danger have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. This historical

spk_0 tradition boils down to a simple proposition. This is a nation of constitutional law, not martial

spk_0 law, defendants have made a range of arguments that have accepted risk blurring the line between

spk_0 civil and military federal power to the detriment of this nation. That's the judge.

spk_0 She nails it. She knows what that state. She knows what the issues are here.

spk_0 This Trump-appointed judge is doing her duty. She's following the facts, following the law, let them

spk_0 chips fall where they may. You apply the law to the facts and make decisions, not influenced by

spk_0 ideology, political ideology, or who the president is or who appointed you.

spk_0 She's doing what her job is. What was the department? I didn't interrupt you. Sorry about that.

spk_0 What was the response? I mean, we always like to know our opponent. What was the response?

spk_0 What's the government's position as to why they believe in good faith? They could send in

spk_0 California, Texas or any other national card given her earlier. What did they say?

spk_0 I didn't envy the federal attorney. I did try to defend this conduct.

spk_0 And honestly, he was having a hard time. He had his arguments, though, but the judge was pushing.

spk_0 And she was not happy. She was saying, you are an officer of the courts, sir. Tell me why this

spk_0 doesn't violate my order from yesterday. His argument was that this is not the original

spk_0 national guard. That's what your order yesterday applied to. This is the California National Guard.

spk_0 They've already been federalized. They're just being repositioned from Los Angeles and

spk_0 California to Portland. And she was having none of that. And not buying any of that hyper technical

spk_0 approach. She was getting to the substance. And I think she was likely offended, though she didn't

spk_0 show it. She was very professional and had outstanding demeanor by this effort to end run or just

spk_0 violate, blatantly, her order from yesterday. And such a weird, I mean, look at me. You and I don't

spk_0 have enough time on planet Earth to figure out the machinations of the Trump administration or

spk_0 their strategy or lack thereof. But everything reports up in these cases to the same

spk_0 ninth circuit court of appeals. And I would think they're not it strengthens your hand certainly

spk_0 in the California night circuit case to see how Donald Trump is interpreted. Unique set of facts

spk_0 that he was able to at one time convince the ninth circuit about now trying to take them on the road

spk_0 to go to any state that he that he says, well, I'm having trouble enforcing the law. Let me just

spk_0 take it. I don't think that's with a ninth circuit. Three judge panel had mind. Do you?

spk_0 I don't. And look at this. On August 8th, Trump deployed 300 National Guard for 90 days longer

spk_0 in Los Angeles arguing that they are necessary and essential to enforce the federal laws

spk_0 and to keep people safe. And then today he's like, nah, maybe I'll send all of them to Portland.

spk_0 They don't need to be in LA. So it completely undercuts his position in our case in LA. And we're

spk_0 going to make that known to the court that these federal federalized National Guard are so essential

spk_0 and so necessary to keep the peace and keep public safety that they were all sent away.

spk_0 Yeah. A thousand miles away to another to another city. You were given a gift,

spk_0 a G-bot. I mean, it is deplorable what happened and we are going to let the court know how it impacts

spk_0 the case that we have this. I like the fact that Immer got judge Immer got in her Saturday order

spk_0 actually tipped her hat to your judge in California, Judge Breyer and said, I like with the district court

spk_0 judge did about how you spot a rebellion. I think those five things. So once I saw that,

spk_0 I said, all right, because you know, he's taking a little bit of heat because he didn't get the

spk_0 entirety of his injunctions appelled at least for now. Although the Posse Comatatus one is still

spk_0 right there. The more I learn, and maybe you knew about her from her prior experience even in

spk_0 California, she has a very interesting body of work that's unique among federal judges. So you'd

spk_0 been a federal prosecutor in LA, I believe. She was a US attorney in Portland. She was a district

spk_0 attorney in the county in which Portland is in. She worked for a couple of years. She's a person

spk_0 that worked very closely with law enforcement and knows law enforcement well, especially in Portland

spk_0 and lives and works in Portland. And this whole Portland is war torn and we must send the military

spk_0 as she's getting drinking her local, you know, a brewed coffee. Where is this?

spk_0 Someone show me it immediately because I don't see it anywhere. And I am.

spk_0 So, you know, when Judge Simon gave up the case after I assume Trump's lawyers made some sort of

spk_0 argument that made him uncomfortable because his wife is a congresswoman from Portland. We were

spk_0 like, oh, who did it rotate to? But what's I did more exploration of her background? You've got

spk_0 a great judge for this. We, I thought you did a great job and you know, a ton's a credit to her.

spk_0 I'm sure she's I hope she's not. I hope this isn't true. I'm going to get political pressure from

spk_0 the right from from Maga world, Maga world and from Trump and his people. But she is a true

spk_0 public servant who believes in the law, who believe who knows what law enforcement is has worked

spk_0 with it and for it. And, and you know, is not going to get pulled into these these silly ideological

spk_0 fights and these, you know, depictions of what's happening on the ground that are only a

spk_0 figment of the imagination of Donald Trump that he posts on truth social when he says it's war

spk_0 torn. And she, I mean, she pointed out very specifically that Trump's determination

spk_0 to deploy the guard based on the facts on the ground was untethered from the.

spk_0 Tethered to reality. No, I like that word. It was untethered.

spk_0 She, and she made good pressure. Look, as you and I are on the air, we got a house that's

spk_0 burned to the ground in South Carolina. Yeah, really terrible, terrible things are happening

spk_0 here in terms of political violence. But I think, you know, she's a very like you said, she's

spk_0 a dedicated public servant, her entire body of work leading to this case says that she's the perfect

spk_0 judge to handle a matter like this, even though Donald Trump is already attacking her and

spk_0 bemoaning it. So is the my understanding is I know you asked in the alternative either a new

spk_0 TRO or modify your old one. She went with the new one. Was that do you think because the other

spk_0 side was arguing that since the appeal was up with the ninth somehow she was divested of jurisdiction?

spk_0 I don't think she thought she was divested of jurisdiction though she did ask this question,

spk_0 what if the appeal to the night circuit on yesterday's TRO, the first TRO is granted and

spk_0 the TRO's overturned. Would that affect today's TRO should she issue one? She was kind of thinking

spk_0 out loud and asking the attorneys their input. And I think that the attorneys from California and

spk_0 Oregon made it very clear that today's a separate TRO on a separate issue with a separate

spk_0 movement of national guard and whatever the court does in the first TRO shouldn't affect the TRO

spk_0 today. So and she was broadened her scope today and so we have two very powerful and poignant TROs

spk_0 but she did connect them. I think she's going to incorporate by reference in the TRO that she's

spk_0 issued today, the rationale and the factual recitation in her. Yeah, I'm saying 31 page underpid.

spk_0 The quote that I read applies to what the analysis that she just did here and then Donald

spk_0 Trump can you know ask for his stays from whatever courts he wants to ask and file his appeals and

spk_0 you'll follow this to the ends of the earth for right now. So I guess the question is right now

spk_0 where are these two or 300 California national guards people? Where are they? We think that 100

spk_0 are already on the ground in Portland and they were in and around the LA area and then another

spk_0 hundred will be there by tonight and the final group of 200 will arrive by tomorrow.

spk_0 I mean are you expecting them to comply now with the second TRO and get them off the street?

spk_0 I do. I mean they shouldn't be performing any official duties. So I don't know if they're

spk_0 funded and not connecting any official activity or if they're going to be sent back to California

spk_0 whatever it is they need to comply with the court order and they cannot be deployed to engage in

spk_0 you know any official duties in in in Portland. A fast moving story but we're so fortunate to have

spk_0 the Attorney General for California Rob Monta joined the Midas Touch Network to give us the

spk_0 update about the case from basically within the courtroom. We'll continue to follow it. This is a

spk_0 fast moving story. It's got a lot of moving parts now but we've got two temporary restraining

spk_0 orders. There has not been a stay that's been issued about either one of them although appeals have

spk_0 been filed and we'll see what happens on the ground here and and throughout and we'll post this order

spk_0 and the orders that we have on the legal AF sub stack so that our audience can read it for

spk_0 themselves. A.G. Monta always a pleasure to have you here. Thank you for taking time to

spk_0 prepare our audience. I'm going to be with you thanks again for having me. It's always

spk_0 great to join you. Thank you. Want to stay plugged in? Become a subscriber for our sub stack at Midas

spk_0 Plus dot com. You'll get daily recaps from Ron Phil Kowski, add free episodes of our podcast

spk_0 and more exclusive content only available at Midas Plus dot com.

California AG Rob Bonta reacts to Late Night Court Victory

Interactive Transcript

Topics Covered

Related Episodes

Out on a Limb | Nov 2nd | Hillhurst United Church

How Do You Respond to Jesus? John 5:16–47 :Daily Devotional, Daily Bible Study

Episode 240: Otto Aerospace CEO Paul Touw talks teardrop, laminar flow, and Phantom 3500

Burnout, Breakthroughs, and the Power of Getting Back Outdoors | Gun Talk Hunt

Share Episode