A recent White House press conference underscored mounting tensions between President Donald Trump and California Governor Gavin Newsom regarding National Guard deployment and redistricting strategies.
The discord between Trump and Newsom intensified during a news conference on Monday, August 11, 2025, when Trump criticized the Democratic governor in an expletive-filled tirade while answering questions from the press.
Addressing the media, Trump declared, “Gavin Newscum is incompetent. He’s got a good line of bulls**t but that’s about it. He’s incompetent.“ The remarks were prominent enough that Fox News briefly interrupted its scheduled programming to cover the conference live.
This confrontation arises as both leaders prepare for a federal court case to determine if Trump breached a 147-year-old statute by deploying the National Guard to manage protests against immigration raids in Los Angeles, California.
In June 2025, numerous individuals gathered in Los Angeles, California, protesting a sequence of workplace immigration raids that led to multiple detentions and deportations. Trump invoked an infrequently used law that permits the president to federalize the National Guard in times of actual or threatened rebellion or invasion, or when regular forces are insufficient to enforce U.S. laws. Despite Governor Newsom’s objections, 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 U.S. Marines were sent to Los Angeles.
On June 9, 2025, Newsom filed a lawsuit against Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, alleging violations of the Posse Comitatus Act and the 10th Amendment. The Posse Comitatus Act largely restricts the president from using the military as a domestic law enforcement entity.
The trial, held in San Francisco, California, is overseen by Judge Charles Breyer of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. California contends that troops accompanied immigration agents on raids and formed security perimeters, effectively causing a “military occupation” in Los Angeles. The federal government counters these claims, asserting the president’s authority to use troops for enforcing federal laws, including immigration laws.
A military general involved in the deployment testified that the protests had never been labeled as a “rebellion,” a necessary condition for justifying the deployment under the cited law.
The conflict has extended beyond the courtroom. In response to Trump’s redistricting efforts in Texas and other Republican-led states, Newsom issued a stern warning. Via Instagram, he urged Trump to “call your lapdogs off.”
In his social media post, Newsom emphasized the need for Trump to instruct Governor Greg Abbott to cease actions, stressing that Trump was not “entitled” to five congressional seats. Newsom warned of a swift and decisive electoral response from California if Trump failed to control his allies, asserting that California would actively defend democracy.
The redistricting issue began two weeks ago when Trump urged Texas Governor Greg Abbott to secure five congressional seats through mid-decade gerrymandering, a practice typically done every ten years following the U.S. Census. Texas Democrats have thwarted the redistricting by leaving the state to prevent the Texas GOP from reaching a quorum.
Newsom has pledged to advocate for redrawing California’s district lines in response to any Republican advancements in Texas, which would involve asking California voters to reject the current maps created by an independent commission. New York Governor Kathy Hochul and Illinois Governor JB Pritzker have expressed similar intentions in their Democratic-led statehouses.
With only 300 National Guard troops remaining in Los Angeles, California, Newsom’s legal team seeks mainly symbolic relief: a declaration that the memorandum used for federalizing the National Guard and Hegseth’s orders were unauthorized and illegal. According to Newsom, the remaining troops are stationed at Joint Forces Training Base in Los Alamitos, California, “without a clear mission, direction, or a timeline for returning to their state duties.”
The trial’s outcome could have significant implications for the president’s ability to use the military for domestic law enforcement and may set a precedent for future National Guard deployments by Trump in California or other states. This case also highlights the escalating conflict between Trump and Newsom, as both leaders continue to engage in increasingly heated exchanges over federal versus state authority.
