The Trump administration has announced the withdrawal of 2,000 National Guard troops from Los Angeles, reducing by half the forces deployed in early June as part of a sweeping federal operation to “protect” federal buildings during a wave of immigration raids and mass arrests. But with 2,000 Guardsmen and 700 Marines still on the ground—stationed at locations like the Wilshire Federal Building in Westwood and the downtown federal courthouse—the city remains under de facto military occupation.

The deployment, ordered by President Trump under Title 10 of the U.S. Code, bypassed California Governor Gavin Newsom and placed the state’s National Guard under federal control. Although the stated rationale was to ensure the security of federal properties, the action has functioned as a domestic military response to growing public opposition to immigration enforcement and the city’s status as a sanctuary jurisdiction.

Legal challenges to the deployment were swift. In Newsom v. Trump, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer ruled in June that the federalization of California’s National Guard violated the Tenth Amendment, which limits the federal government’s ability to commandeer state resources. The court also found that the operation likely breached the Posse Comitatus Act, which bars the use of military forces for domestic law enforcement purposes without congressional approval. Breyer concluded that Trump’s order lacked both statutory justification and constitutional grounding.

However, that ruling was quickly stayed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which allowed the deployment to continue while the federal government appeals. The court argued that the president possesses broad—though not unlimited—authority to deploy military forces under Title 10 in defense of federal interests. The stay effectively extended the occupation of Los Angeles, even as federal officials began publicly describing the mission as a success.

Meanwhile, protests have continued without pause. Outside the Wilshire Federal Building in Westwood, where military vehicles and barricades have become fixtures since June, demonstrators have reported seeing immigrant families—including children—being taken into custody. According to eyewitness accounts published by LA Taco, “women and children in handcuffs were being unloaded from vans inside the parking garage of the federal building.” A separate LA Taco report described protestors witnessing detained children entering the downtown federal courthouse, also under federal military guard.

Despite claims by Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell that the situation has “stabilized,” community organizers, civil rights advocates, and immigrant families say the withdrawal is largely symbolic. The sustained military presence, they argue, continues to chill dissent and escalate fear in immigrant neighborhoods. Legal scholars have warned that the case raises fundamental questions about the limits of federal power. Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC Berkeley School of Law, has noted that the deployment could set a dangerous precedent for future administrations seeking to override state authority in politically motivated domestic missions.