>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
Newsom publicly defended the move, saying:
“Trump’s ICE agents need to be reined in and held to the same standards as any other law enforcement agency.”
But critics immediately warned the laws were less about accountability and more about exposing federal officers to danger.
With anti-ICE protests intensifying across California, agents had already reported threats, harassment, and physical attacks. Demonstrators had shown up outside officers’ homes, raising fears for the safety of their spouses and children.
Many saw Newsom’s law as handing activists a roadmap to target federal personnel.
9th Circuit Says California Went Too Far
The three-judge panel did not mince words in its ruling.
According to the court, the No Vigilantes Act “attempts to directly regulate the United States in its performance of governmental functions.”
The judges added:
“The Supremacy Clause forbids the State from enforcing such legislation.”
That constitutional principle is clear: when state law conflicts with federal authority, federal law prevails.
In other words, Sacramento cannot dictate how the federal government carries out immigration enforcement.
Even more damaging for Newsom, the ruling was unanimous. The panel included two judges appointed by President Trump and one appointed by former President Barack Obama, undercutting any claim that the decision was politically motivated.
Trump Administration Celebrates Win
The ruling was quickly praised by officials tied to the Trump administration.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche called the outcome:
“another decisive victory in this administration’s effort to remove illegal aliens from this country.”
Harmeet Dhillon, head of the DOJ Civil Rights Division, reacted bluntly on X:
“Told ya!”
Former Acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf also praised the court, calling it:
“a good decision for common sense and strong immigration enforcement.”
For border security advocates, the ruling signals that courts are increasingly unwilling to tolerate state interference with federal immigration duties.
Newsom Camp Responds by Attacking ICE
Instead of acknowledging the legal loss, Newsom’s office reportedly doubled down.
A spokesperson told Fox News Digital that undercover ICE officers were “terrorizing” communities under the direction of Trump adviser Stephen Miller.
The spokesperson said:
“We shouldn’t have unidentified, masked men terrorizing our communities.”
That statement only reinforced what critics have argued all along: the real objective was never oversight, but making ICE operations politically toxic and operationally difficult inside California.
A federal judge had already paused California’s mask restriction earlier this year. Lawmakers then attempted to revise the legislation, but the appellate ruling may have ended those efforts entirely.
Another Warning Shot for Blue-State Governors
This case is bigger than Gavin Newsom.
Across the country, Democrat governors have attempted to slow or block immigration enforcement through executive actions, sanctuary policies, and state laws. Again and again, federal courts have reminded them that immigration authority rests with Washington.
California taxpayers now foot the bill for another failed legal experiment.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration gains something even more valuable: another court victory, stronger legal precedent, and expanded room to carry out immigration enforcement nationwide.
For Newsom, this was more than a loss.
It was a humiliating rebuke from the very 9th Circuit many assumed would side with him.
And for conservatives watching the border battle unfold, it was proof that the Constitution still matters—no matter how ambitious California Democrats become.
