A federal judge has, for the third time, ruled against the Trump administration in its monthslong deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles, ordering the troops out of the city.

Trump still hasn't gotten tired of ordering around the National Guard and deploying them in Democrat-led cities at his whim, under the guise of "protecting federal property" — because that is the only legal basis for doing what he's been doing. And the same US District Court judge in San Francisco who has ruled against the administration twice in its effort to keep troops on the ground in Los Angeles has again ruled that the troops need to leave.

Judge Charles Breyer issued a 35-page ruling early Wednesday in response to the most recent injunction request from the state of California in November, and he basically says "enough is enough" with the remaining National Guard presence in LA — five months after the immigration-related unrest that triggered the initial deployment.

"The Founders designed our government to be a system of checks and balances," Judge Breyer writes in the opening of his ruling. "Defendants, however, make clear that the only check they want is a blank one."

The decision recounts the saga of the troop deployment, which the administration has consistently defended based on extant law that allows the president both to use troops to protect federal property and federal agents. And after winning their argument over this at the Ninth Circuit where California and Portland, Oregon concerned, the administration has essentially declared all further deployments of troops "unreviewable" by the courts. As Breyer writes, this is "shocking" and goes against everything the country's founders intended in terms of preventing the existence of a standing domestic army.

Judge Breyer further agreed with an earlier court ruling that "the public has a significant interest in having only well-trained law enforcement officers deployed in their communities and avoiding unnecessary shows of military force in their neighborhoods."

Breyer issued an emergency injunction to stop the initial deployment of troops in LA in June, but that was immediately blocked by the Ninth Circuit, which later ruled in Trump's favor and validated the administration's argument about the scale of the unrest in the city at that time — though the appeals court did not suggest that this was applicable in every situation, only that the president was within his power to federalize the guard that once.

The back-and-forth continued after Breyer held a hearing on the matter and issued a complete ruling on the merits of the case in September, declaring that the deployment had been illegal in the first place. Today's ruling continues this dance, and it is stayed until Monday with the expectation that the administration will appeal again.

San Francisco just barely avoided having a National Guard deployment here, after Trump began deploying federal agents to Alameda in late October. But Guard troops remain deployed in Washington, DC, Chicago, Memphis, and Portland, in addition to the remaining 100 or so in Los Angeles.

After two National Guard members were shot in DC on November 26, Trump doubled down on the deployment, despite the fact that it has accomplished nothing, saying he was deploying 500 more troops in the city. Investigators, meanwhile, say that the shooting suspect is not a DC resident, but is an Afghan national who was living in Washington State and flew across the country to commit this act, in some sort of protest against the US government and the treatment of Afghans who helped the US in Afghanistan.

Previously: Deploying National Guard In Los Angeles Was Illegal, Rules Federal Judge In SF

Photo via Getty Images