Rob Bonta

Honestly, he was having a hard time. He had his arguments though, but the judge was pushing and she was not happy. She was saying, you are an officer of the court, sir, and tell me why this doesn't violate my order from yesterday. His argument was that this is not the Oregon National Guard, that's what you're

order yesterday applied to. This is the California National Guard. They've already been federalized and they're just being repositioned from Los Angeles and California to Portland. And she was having none of that and not buying any of that hyper technical approach. She was getting to the substance and I think she was likely offended, though she didn't show it. She was very professional and had outstanding demeanor.

En, ja katsokaa, 8.1. Trumpi laittoi 300 National Guarda 90 päivää myöhemmin Los Angelesissa, jossa puhuttiin siitä, että ne ovat tarpeellisia ja tärkeässä, jotta voidaan vahvistaa kansallisia lakia ja pysyä ihmisiä turvassa.

Today he's like, nah, maybe I'll send all of them to Portland. They don't need to be in L.A. It completely undercuts his position in our case in L.A. We're going to make that known to the court. These Federalized National Guard are so essential and so necessary to keep the peace and keep public safety that they were all sent away. A thousand miles away to another city. You were given a gift, A.G. Bonta.

I thought she did a great job and tons of credit to her. I hope she's not, I hope this isn't true, going to get political pressure from the right, from MAGA world and from Trump and his people. But she is a true public servant who believes in the law, who knows what law enforcement is, has worked with it and for it and is not going to get pulled into these silly ideological fights and these

Ymmärtää, mitä tapahtuu sopimuksessa, joka on vain Donald Trumpin ajatuksena, jota hän laittaa Truth Socialissa, kun hän sanoo, että se on vallattomuus. Hän mainitsi erityisesti, että Trumpin päätöksentekoon sopimuksessa sopimuksessa sopimuksessa sopimuksessa sopimuksessa sopimuksessa sopimuksessa sopimuksessa

I don't think she thought she was divested of jurisdiction, though she did ask this question, what if the appeal to the Ninth Circuit on yesterday's TRO, the first TRO, is granted and the TRO is overturned. Would that affect today's TRO, should she issue one? She was kind of thinking out loud and asking the attorneys their input, and I think that the attorneys from California and Oregon

made it very clear that today is a separate TRO on a separate issue with a separate movement of National Guard. And whatever the court does in the first TRO shouldn't affect the TRO today. And she was broadening her scope today. And so we have two very powerful and poignant TROs. But she did connect them. I think she's going to incorporate by reference in the TRO that she's issued today the rationale and the factual

Me luulemme, että 100 ihmisiä on jo olemassa Portlandissa. He olivat L.A.-alueella. Toinen 100 ihmisiä tulee tänään, ja viimeinen 100 ihmisiä tulee huomenna. Oletko heitä todennäköisesti toiminnassa toisella TROlla?

I do. They shouldn't be performing any official duties. I don't know if they're going to be put on ice somewhere, just staying in the background and not conducting any official activity, or if they're going to be sent back to California. Whatever it is, they need to comply with the court order, and they cannot be deployed to engage in any official duties in Portland.

Absolutely. And first, I'm grateful that Democratic attorneys general across the nation are working together to make sure that we have a president who follows the law and complies with the Constitution. Unfortunately, we have a president who is acting in a way that's been unacceptable and abnormal. He's violated the law at a very fast pace, high volume, high speed of actions.

Absolutely. And first, I'm grateful that Democratic attorneys general across the nation are working together to make sure that we have a president who follows the law and complies with the Constitution. Unfortunately, we have a president who is acting in a way that's been unacceptable and abnormal. He's violated the law at a very fast pace, high volume, high speed of actions.

Absolutely. And first, I'm grateful that Democratic attorneys general across the nation are working together to make sure that we have a president who follows the law and complies with the Constitution. Unfortunately, we have a president who is acting in a way that's been unacceptable and abnormal. He's violated the law at a very fast pace, high volume, high speed of actions.

And we've brought 19 lawsuits in 15 weeks, more than one a week. And yesterday, within a matter of hours, we got two preliminary injunctions ordered by courts stopping some of the unlawful conduct. One is the case you were mentioning where the president sought to withhold already congressionally appropriated funding for museums, for libraries, for other agencies, critical and essential services.

And we've brought 19 lawsuits in 15 weeks, more than one a week. And yesterday, within a matter of hours, we got two preliminary injunctions ordered by courts stopping some of the unlawful conduct. One is the case you were mentioning where the president sought to withhold already congressionally appropriated funding for museums, for libraries, for other agencies, critical and essential services.

And we've brought 19 lawsuits in 15 weeks, more than one a week. And yesterday, within a matter of hours, we got two preliminary injunctions ordered by courts stopping some of the unlawful conduct. One is the case you were mentioning where the president sought to withhold already congressionally appropriated funding for museums, for libraries, for other agencies, critical and essential services.

And in a separate case, we got our preliminary injunction yesterday that enjoined stock prevented the president from withholding critical COVID-19 funding that went to schools to address some of the challenges that arose out of COVID-19, like learning loss and mental health issues, also technological capacity.

And in a separate case, we got our preliminary injunction yesterday that enjoined stock prevented the president from withholding critical COVID-19 funding that went to schools to address some of the challenges that arose out of COVID-19, like learning loss and mental health issues, also technological capacity.

And in a separate case, we got our preliminary injunction yesterday that enjoined stock prevented the president from withholding critical COVID-19 funding that went to schools to address some of the challenges that arose out of COVID-19, like learning loss and mental health issues, also technological capacity.

That funding was also congressionally appropriated, and the president does not have the right to stop it. from being sent to the states after it's already been appropriated. So some good wins yesterday. And that's been our hallmark so far.