seven news starts right now.

>> san francisco takes center stage today in california's fight against president trump's deployment of national guard troops to protect ice agents in los angeles. good afternoon. i'm kristen z. thanks for joining us. the arguments in court just ended moments ago, and the judge says he does expect to make a decision shortly, hopefully today. so as soon as that comes down, we will certainly bring it to you. now, california attorney general rob bonta sued the president and the department of defense for ordering the national guard to la without a request from governor gavin newsom. attorneys for the state asking u.s. district court judge charles breyer to issue a temporary restraining order blocking trump from using those troops for law enforcement. >> we argue that the president is engaged in an unlawful power grab, that he's trying to exercise authority that he doesn't have. >> the hearing began with federal attorneys defending the president's order, centering their arguments on how mr. trump

communicated his order to deploy the national guard, and that the president has ultimate discretion. now, the state argued the president didn't follow proper statute in doing that, and therefore he didn't have authority to deploy troops without the request of the governor or local authorities. the judge, as we mentioned, just wrapped it up. he said that a decision may come down soon. abc news reporter monica madden was inside the courtroom. she'll join us live at 4:00 today with the very latest. a stark example today of just how tense the conflict surrounding these immigration arrests is getting among political leaders. >> to the rioters and to the politicians in los angeles. >> a half a dozen violent criminals that you're getting on your on your. >> i also want to talk. >> about that was california's u.s. senator, alex padilla, who was forcibly removed from a news conference held by homeland security secretary kristi noem in los angeles. padilla entered the room saying he had questions

for noem, which then prompted, you can see several men to physically push him out. >> that wasn't appropriate, that if you wanted to have a civil discussion, especially as a leader, a public official, that you would reach out and try to have a conversation. >> if this is how the department of homeland security responds to a senator with a question. you can only imagine what they're doing to farmworkers, to cooks, to day laborers. >> padilla's office shared a video of the incident. it shows him being taken into a hallway outside afterwards and actually pushed to the ground. you can see what happens here. that's where officers in fbi vests then put the senator in handcuffs. they did not arrest him. so did senator padilla have the right to be in that room? was his removal and handcuffing legal? and what now? after the federal court hearing on california's lawsuit to stop president trump

from sending and keeping national guard troops and marines in los angeles. joining us live now to look closely at the law, uc school of law, san francisco's professor rory little, who specializes in constitutional law. professor little, thanks for your time. >> thank you. >> i know, you know, you've been following this. we're all waiting for the judge's decision, which could come any moment now. and if it does happen, we'll of course, bring you that, and you can help us dissect that. but i want to start with the padilla video. we saw it, homeland security secretary kristi noem holding that news conference, and senator padilla goes into that room. he was in the federal building to be briefed on something else. but he heard about this, goes in, asked a question, and then noem's security quickly pushed him out of there, even after he identified himself as a u.s. senator. and then they handcuffed him. they didn't arrest him. what is going on here? who's got the legal ground to stand on here? if you just look at the legal aspects of what happened in this incident. >> well, you know, supposedly people have the right to go into public hearings. it looked like

anybody could get in the door. uh- senator padilla went in uh- and started to ask a question. and, you know, some people do that. they interrupt. it's a first amendment issue. it's really a stark example for the american people to see how people are handled in these situations. there's a really rough handling. it doesn't matter whether he's a senator or not. they're basically breaking his arms as they twist them behind him on the floor there. you know, those officers in a normal time would probably be put on leave and investigated for use of force. what exactly happened? did he have the right to interrupt? did they know he was a senator, or did they just try to prevent a threat? those would be issues for the future, but it's pretty stunning. >> yeah, i've been listening to the right and the left dissect that. and of course, you know how you view it and who's in the right and wrong depends on where you are politically, which is very unfortunate. but let me just ask you, you know, kristi noem said he shouldn't have, you

know, approached her like he was assaulting her, like he was coming at her, like coming at her. does it change anything that he was taking a step towards her podium as he was asking that question? >> well, it sort of depends what the what the legal question is. i mean, certainly if somebody is approaching the podium of a public official, the security people have a right to intervene. do they then have to force him out of the room and throw him on the floor and handcuff him? well, that's a different question. often they do not do such things. i think there's a really good question of excessive force here, but the idea that you can interrupt somebody and not be physically blocked, i think they have the right to do that. you know, this is this is not so much going to be a big legal case as it is a sign of our times, much like the hearing in front of judge breyer, which just ended. >> yeah, let's talk about that. the hearing is over for now. the state's suit to stop trump's deployment of national guard troops, which is supposed to be under normally customarily under state jurisdiction. talk about

what legal arguments the two sides, the lawyers for both sides made today in court, and how they seem to have been received? >> well, i'd be happy to do that, of course. i just was reading a twitter feed about this. i could not get access to the zoom because it was limited to 1000 people, and it was blocked by a thousand people hours before the hearing. it looks to me like judge breyer may grant an injunction very temporarily on the very narrow ground that the statute requires that any orders to federalize the national guard must go through. that's the word through the governor of the state. it's very clear that no orders went through governor newsom. president trump did this without any notice or warning to newsom, even though he says later, oh, i told him, that seems to be false. and so i think breyer is inclined to say, you have to follow the statute perfectly if you're going to use such extreme measures. and he made the

comparison to the british government and the rebellion of the people that wrote the constitution who were rebelling against the monarchy. he made this reference and said, you can't just let the president do whatever he wants or we have a monarchy. the constitution is designed to prevent the monarchy. i'm going to require strict compliance with the statute. if he issues the order on that basis, it didn't go through the governor. it can be cured pretty quickly by the president. you know, sending governor newsom an email saying, i'm going to do this, which could put us right back in front of judge breyer a day from now. it'll really depend on how the white house responds. and he hasn't issued the order yet. it's going to come out. i would bet it comes out in writing before the end of the day, and then we'll have to see how the white house reacts to that. >> all right. can i just ask you, though, you know, the government, the federal government, trump administration's lawyer, said when the president makes a decision, states are subservient. uh- tell us if that is the case in the constitution,

or is this sort of expanding federal executive power, you know, with or without precedent, really? >> well, you know, the constitution, does it ever answer anything with perfect clarity? it has a supremacy clause. it says the federal law is supreme to state law. there's no dispute about that. but congress has given the authority to regulate the military. meanwhile, the president is given the authority to be commander in chief. the president here is arguing, hey, commander in chief means i can do anything i want for any reason. judge breyer rejected that idea. and meanwhile, congress wrote a statute, and the statute needs to be followed. how much deference you give the president when he invokes the statute, is probably not going to be decided immediately by judge breyer. and it's an open question. the constitution, you know, is written to protect our rights, individual rights. that's what the bill of rights is all about. it's also meant to allocate authority between the branches. and here you have the third

branch trying to figure out which of the branches he needs to follow. >> this is very complicated. and we're certainly in times that are were a little unfamiliar. before i let you go real quickly, if he does rule on such a narrow ground, if you will, about the communication and whether that was done properly. and as you said, if they just send the email, you know, the restraining order could be gone. i'm just asking you practically, how does that work when you have thousands of troops actually there? do they just keep going out there and back and out and back and it doesn't seem very feasible? >> well, it is not an efficient process by any means, and that's because it's being conducted for political theater as much as anything else. the california assistant attorney general today in court said, we think troops are going to be deployed tonight. they're actually no troops actually deployed on the ground, apparently. but he says we think they're going to be deployed tonight. the judge responded, well, that's a hypothetical. and when that happens, you come back to me so

we could be back in front of judge breyer, you know, in the middle of the night. judge breyer is an experienced judge, and he handles a lot of hard cases, and he'll make himself available 24 over seven if he has to. >> and the brother, i should mention of retired u.s. supreme court justice stephen breyer, uc school of law's rory rory little, i was going to say rory law. you may as well be that. thank you very much for joining us today. >> i really appreciate it so much. >> all right, moving on. oakland police are now reporting that they arrested four people in connection with vandalism that took place after a protest against the trump administration tuesday night. police say about 100 people gathered in the area of 34th and international boulevard, about 40 minutes after a peaceful protest ended. likely from a sideshow that had taken place in a different part of the town. an officer who responded to the accident had rocks thrown at him. >> the vehicle sustained damage to the windshield. the officer had to move back out of the area until additional resources could

arrive, at which point one of the vehicles was set on fire. >> police say. as more officers got there, a mob gathered and then broke through the front door of a shoe store and stole merchandise. investigators are combing through hours of surveillance video to identify the vandals. the death toll continues to rise. hours after an air india flight crashed shortly after takeoff. it happened in the western city of ahmedabad. right now, officials say at least 240 people were killed, including medical students, in a college hostel hospital hit by the boeing 787. abc news reporter christiane cordero shows us what happened. >> it was in the air for roughly 30s, as seen in the airport surveillance video. this air india flight took off from the country's northwest region, with 242 people on board. you can see it clearly struggling to gain altitude, getting just about 600ft up before gliding into its

descent. the boeing 787 dreamliner, fueled up for what would have been a nine hour flight to london, erupted in a fireball on impact. >> the hallmark of accident investigation as you rule nothing in and you rule nothing out. but by the same token, you'd have to be blind not to see that this aircraft did not have sufficient thrust to remain in the air. and that's going to be the question why. >> it crashed into a densely populated residential area. charred debris scattered part of the plane hit a local medical college. it's unclear if the crash injured or killed anyone on the ground. but miraculously, after police said there were no survivors, officials say one passenger survived the crash and is in the hospital, adding he was sitting in seat 11 a. the bbc reports the survivor is a british man who called his family to say he's fine and that he doesn't know where his brother is, who was also on board in the search for answers. a promising sign for investigators the plane's tail, where the crucial black boxes are stored, is intact, sticking out of the side of the medical

college building. >> we are going to do a fair and thorough investigation. we are not going to spare anyone. we are not going to leave any stone unturned. >> this is the first boeing 787 dreamliner crash ever. the plane was 11 years old. it had 41,000 hours of flying time. boeing and air india have each offered condolences and help with the investigation. the owner of air india has also offered financial compensation to the families of each victim. christiane cordero, abc news, washington. >> in boston, a jetblue flight from chicago rolled from the runway onto the grass after landing at logan international airport. the massachusetts port authority says nobody was hurt. you can see passengers exiting that airbus a220 by the stairs. the port authority bus passengers to the terminal and the runway was closed when officials assessed the plane. the faa is investigating. still to come. concerned families and

community members react to the detention of two palestinian men in the bay area on a humanitarian mission. plus, president trump's war on california hits another gear today, this time over

and it's not a celebration without you! ♪ with all the sights, and laughter, and fun— everyone's excited! [clears throat] everyone's excited!

come join this once-in-a-lifetime celebration at the happiest place on earth— only for a limited time. visit disneyland.com/70ticketoffer for details. two palestinian men are still detained nearly two days after they arrived in the bay area for what supporters say was a humanitarian mission. the two had their visas denied even before they got to sfo, as abc seven news reporter zach fuentes shows us. concerned families and community members expressed concern. at a news conference today. >> more than a dozen community members from faith groups and other organizations rallying in support of two west bank

humanitarian activists after they say the two were detained by customs and border patrol. >> they were here on a humanitarian mission alongside a lot of the individuals here who had invited them and sponsored them at jewish synagogues and churches on a humanitarian mission to raise money and awareness for children suffering in the middle east. >> san francisco supervisor bilal mahmoud said he found out about the situation from the public defender's office. >> and they informed me that they have not heard of a cause like this on an incident in over ten years at sfo. >> mahmoud and the faith group say that lynn and lynn are an educator and artist. >> they are men of peace. they are community leaders. they are tools and weapons are a camera and the written word. >> they've had a long standing relationship with kehilla community synagogue in piedmont, where they were set to visit this week. >> they wanted to come here to thank us for our help and to do further fundraising for these humanitarian causes, and we were

very happy to welcome them here. >> members of the synagogue waited at the airport for eight hours. they say they got in touch with customs and border patrol, who told them that the visas were canceled? >> the most the border patrol has told us after we initiated contact was that they had valid visas when they got here, and they were revoked on entry. >> by midday thursday, it had been 18 hours since the two had been staying at sfo. their hosts say they've had no direct contact with them. now, supporters from all faiths and backgrounds say they're uniting to send a message and calling on the support of more government representatives. >> urging cbp to immediately reconsider and change their decision here. our two visitors are still wanted, needed and welcomed tonight. >> supervisor mahmoud said he's been in touch with congress members nancy pelosi and lateefah simon. now we reached out to u.s. customs and border patrol and are still waiting to

get more information from them. at sfo, zach fuentes, abc seven news. >> we also have a statement from supervisor mahmoud. it reads in part, this is an unconscionable act of censorship and discrimination, an attack on peaceful dialog in our constitutional first amendment rights, the suppression of voices working toward peace and justice, especially those that represent co-existence between palestinians and jews, must not be tolerated. the war between california and president trump hit another gear today, this time over gasoline powered vehicles. this morning, trump signed a congressional resolution ending california's ban on the sale of gas powered cars by 2035. the president is targeting state policies that regulate tailpipe emissions in vehicles and trucks. earlier, the government accountability office said congress does not have the legal authority to prevent states from enforcing climate rules. california is suing to keep the waiver. >> the clean air act explicitly allows california to set its own

vehicle emission standards, standards that have repeatedly been supported by epa waivers granted over the past 50 years. >> republicans have complained that california's emissions law created a de facto nationwide electric vehicle mandate. ten other states are joining the lawsuit. a crackdown on illegal fireworks has netted quick results in santa cruz county. watsonville police seized nearly 1,000 pounds of illegal fireworks. they also recovered an illegal assault rifle and arrested several people who are suspected of selling fireworks in santa cruz, monterey and san benito counties. watsonville allows the sale of safe and sane fireworks from july 1st to the fourth. setting off illegal fireworks could result in a $1,000 fine. the weekend is in sight. will the weather be nice enough to hit the beach in santa cruz like you see in this live picture? or will we be seeing more gray? meteorologist

the weekend is just about here, so let's get a look at your forecast from meteorologist drew tuma. >> looking at the accuweather headlines, we have a minor warmup this afternoon. temperatures feeling nice out there as we head into the weekend. temperatures will be near average. sunday is the warmer of the two days this weekend. looking nice for father's day and then next week we have warmer weather. returning to the forecast, it looks like our pattern is going to change for the first half of this month. it has been quite chilly. it looks like next week we finally break that pattern. so looking at highs today versus average warmer than yesterday and temperatures in our warmest areas today are in the 80s like livermore, concord and santa rosa. as we take a look at the bay shoreline, a lot of us will be in the 70s. so looking nice out there. winds are gusty. once again that onshore flow 20 to about 35mph and we do it again tomorrow once we find warmer weather moving in next week.

with that pattern change, the winds are going to weaken, so we're not nearly as windy next week as we have been the past couple of days. your weather, wellness. throughout the day we are finding good air quality, moderate pollen levels and the uv index is a ten which is very high highs in our microclimates today. we're in the 70s and 80s in the south bay, 75 in santa clara, 84, in morgan hill, 82, in los gatos along the peninsula. we're cool along the coast in the 60s around the bay shoreline. we're in the 60s and 7070 for menlo park. breezy across the city today. temperatures pretty close to average for this time of year. highs in the 60s today in the north bay, it's cool along the coast, but as you head away from the coast into our valleys, we're warming up nicely in the 70s and 80s 86, in santa rosa, the same in cloverdale, about 84. in sonoma, san rafael, up to 79 degrees in the east bay. we'll go into the low and mid 70s this afternoon. 71 in oakland, 74 in fremont, 78. castro valley and inland will mainly be in the 80s later on today, with a bit of a breeze

picking up, especially through the delta. as we take a look at the evening planner, we keep it pretty sunny out there through the evening. once the sun goes down, the clouds are going to return and that is going to create some cloudy skies overnight tonight, especially around the bay shoreline and along the coast. we'll have some coastal drizzle to coolest areas will find us dipping into the 40s 50s around the bay shoreline. now, i do want to preview next week and show you those warmer temperatures moving in. here's a look at future tracker. we're closing in on 90 degrees inland next tuesday 70s and 80s, and it gets even warmer here on wednesday. widespread 80s and 90s in our warmest areas. and again, once we see this pattern change with warmer temperatures, we'll see a lot less wind in the forecast. so here's a look at the accuweather seven day. it's warmer this afternoon going into the weekend. saturday it's clouds to sun. sunday we have those warmer temperatures moving in nice for father's day. and that warm up begins to take off here, especially tuesday. we are really heating up and by

wednesday those temperatures will be above average again. 80s and 90s away from the coast. >> everything's cricket for oakland mayor barbara lee. up next, the big event at the coliseum that she and thousands of bay area

and cash in at cache creek casino resort. to rock and to roll. to go all out or go all in with four stars and rising stars. northern california's premier casino resort is the perfect place to do as much... or as little as you want. make your getaway now and cache in at cache creek casino resort.

happening today, history is set to be made at the oakland coliseum. the venue will host the first top level cricket match on the west coast at 6:00. it's a big deal for oakland, which stands to reap $3 million in economic benefits from hosting nine matches featuring all of major league cricket's six teams. it's also a big deal for san jose state university, which will get to see their student sanjay krishnamurthy,

take the field as a san francisco unicorn. the coliseum will be home to the local mlb team, the san francisco unicorns. >> now we're beginning to bring that global energy and that global focus to oakland in a way that has never been done before. >> you can walk through any park in the city of fremont on a weekend, and you will see that the fields are packed. you'll see that the families are gathering, the kids are in their jerseys, and people have their homemade wickets in the grass. >> cricket is the world's second most popular sport, right behind, you guessed it, soccer. abc seven news is streaming 24 seven. get the abc seven bay area app and join us whenever you want, wherever you are. that's going to do it for now. thanks for joining us. world news tonight with david muir starts now. and i'll see you back here at four. as we come on the