Sell California!

An Immodest Proposal

Hardly a day goes by that we don’t see another headline out of the once-Golden State further establishing it as ground zero for the Anti-Trump resistance.

"Thousands Rally in Los Angeles, Shut Down 101 Freeway to Protest Trump’s Immigration Crackdown"

"California Approves $50 Million Fund to Shield Immigrants and Counter Trump Administration"

"Sacramento Protesters Chant ‘No King’ on Presidents Day, Decry Trump’s Executive Overreach"

"Newsom Meets Trump in D.C., Leaves Empty-Handed, Then Signs Bills to Resist Federal Policies"

"L.A. Students Walk Out, Join Three Days of Protests Against Trump’s Deportation Plans"

Grok turns these up and then adds:

Context and Trends

These headlines align with California’s long-standing resistance to Trump, seen during his first term (2017–2021) through sanctuary state laws, climate lawsuits, and public dissent. Recent X posts and news snippets from early February 2025 indicate this pattern has intensified with Trump’s return to office in January 2025, particularly around immigration and federal overreach. Protests in cities like Los Angeles and Sacramento, alongside state-level actions under Newsom, underscore a dual strategy of street-level activism and legislative defiance. The absence of specific headlines post-February 15 is due to my data cutoff, but the momentum suggests continued resistance through February 20, 2025.

And that doesn’t even bring up the various federal court bastions of anti-Trump lawfare situated throughout the state which have been a perpetual thorn in his administration’s backside from the very beginning.

First Term (2017–2021)

During Trump’s first administration, California was a hotspot for legal challenges, filing 123 lawsuits against his policies, with federal judges in the state issuing several key injunctions and restraining orders. Here are notable examples:

Judge William Alsup (Northern District of California)

Case: Regents of the University of California v. DHS (DACA)

Date: January 9, 2018

Action: Issued a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration’s attempt to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Alsup ruled that the decision to end DACA was "arbitrary and capricious" under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

Impact: The injunction forced the administration to continue processing DACA renewals, a major win for California and immigrant rights groups.

Judge James Robart (visiting judge in Northern District of California, based in Washington)

Case: San Francisco v. Trump (Sanctuary Cities Funding)

Date: April 25, 2017 (temporary restraining order); November 20, 2017 (permanent injunction)

Action: Issued a temporary restraining order, later converted to a permanent injunction, blocking Trump’s executive order to withhold federal funds from sanctuary cities like San Francisco. Robart, though based in Seattle, presided over this case in San Francisco.

Impact: Protected California’s sanctuary policies and funding for law enforcement programs.

Judge Dolly M. Gee (Central District of California)

Case: Flores v. Sessions (Family Separation)

Date: June 26, 2018

Action: Issued an injunction enforcing the Flores Settlement Agreement, ordering the Trump administration to stop detaining migrant children for more than 20 days and to reunite separated families.

Impact: Directly countered Trump’s "zero tolerance" policy, which led to widespread family separations at the border.

Judge Jon S. Tigar (Northern District of California)

Case: East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump (Asylum Restrictions)

Date: November 19, 2018 (temporary restraining order); December 19, 2018 (preliminary injunction)

Action: Issued a temporary restraining order, followed by a nationwide preliminary injunction, blocking Trump’s rule barring migrants who crossed the border illegally from applying for asylum. Tigar found the rule violated the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Impact: Halted a key Trump immigration restriction, with the injunction upheld by the 9th Circuit in part.

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. (Northern District of California)

Case: Sierra Club v. Trump (Border Wall Funding)

Date: May 24, 2019 (preliminary injunction)

Action: Issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration from redirecting $2.5 billion in military funds to build a border wall, ruling it exceeded executive authority under the Constitution’s appropriations clause.

Impact: Temporarily stopped wall construction in California and other states, though later Supreme Court action allowed funding to proceed.

Second Term (2025–Present, as of February 20, 2025)

Trump’s second term began on January 20, 2025, and California has already seen judicial resistance to his early executive actions. While specific cases from the past two months are still emerging, here are examples based on reported trends and ongoing litigation:

Judge Jon S. Tigar (Northern District of California)

Case: Hypothetical Immigrant Rights Groups v. Trump (Birthright Citizenship)

Date: Potentially early February 2025 (e.g., February 5–10)

Action: While no California judge has yet been explicitly named in 2025 reports for blocking Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order, Tigar’s history with asylum cases makes him a likely candidate. Nationwide injunctions have been issued by judges in Maryland, Washington, and New Hampshire, but X posts and news suggest California-based challenges are active. If Tigar acted, it would align with his prior anti-Trump rulings.

Impact: Would temporarily halt Trump’s order redefining the 14th Amendment, pending appeal.

Judge Philip S. Gutierrez (Central District of California)

Case: Hypothetical California v. Trump (Federal Funding Freeze)

Date: Potentially late January–early February 2025

Action: Given California’s role in multi-state lawsuits against Trump’s funding freeze (e.g., alongside 22 states), a judge like Gutierrez could have issued a temporary restraining order. Gutierrez has presided over high-profile cases and could be involved in enforcing funding releases under the Inflation Reduction Act or Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

Impact: Would ensure California’s $107.5 billion in Medicaid funding and other federal aid continues flowing, countering Trump’s executive orders.

Notes on the Data

First Term: The list reflects well-documented cases where California judges directly issued injunctions or restraining orders. California’s Attorney General tracked 123 lawsuits, with about two-thirds succeeding, often involving federal courts in the Northern and Central Districts.

Second Term: As of February 20, 2025, specific California judge actions are less detailed due to my data cutoff and the rapid pace of litigation. Nationwide injunctions (e.g., birthright citizenship blocks by Judges Deborah Boardman in Maryland and John Coughenour in Seattle) have dominated headlines, but California’s active resistance suggests local judges like Tigar or Gutierrez are likely involved. I’ve inferred their potential roles based on jurisdiction and past behavior.

Verification: No California judge has been explicitly named in the past two months for an anti-Trump injunction in my data, but the state’s legal activity (e.g., Newsom’s $50 million fund, student protests) implies pending or unreported actions.

Given that California is locked in a mutual suicide pact of corruption, voter fraud, millions of illegal immivaders, communist progressivism, a rigged voting structure, and a number of other fail-safes designed to preserve that situation indefinitely, there’s not much the Trump administration can do about it, especially given that the national Democrat party will defend California’s plight to the death, for the simple reason that the Democrat ability on the national level to counter the GOP depends almost entirely on California remaining the primary wellspring of its power and influence.

Take California out of the equation, and the Democrats immediately lose 54 electoral votes, and the votes of 9.3 million Californians (or however many they decide to manufacture for any given election). Were that to happen, the Democrat party would instantly become almost unviable on the national level, given the loss of California’s 40 Democrat House seats and 2 Democrat Senators. The reapportionment process post-departure would probably do further damage to Democrat prospects.

But how, you protest, would the United States survive the loss of California’s massive economy? And it is massive, ranking, as an individual entity, either 4th, 5th, or 6th among global nation states, depending on what metrics you use. It’s not quite that simple, though, especially once you start picking through just how California (and the US, but that’s for another essay) calculate their GDPs.

I’m not going to reinvent the wheel by doing a deep dive on all of this, because the indispensable Alex Macris has already done much heavy lifting here, but suffice it to say that if he is correct - and I think he is - then we can probably lop 20% or so off California’s purported GDP numbers, especially given the non-stop, decades-long manipulation of housing and land values west of the I-5 by the demons of Sacramento, (one of the hidden levels of hell). They haven’t quite yet reached early-80s Japanese levels of insanity where a square meter of downtown Tokyo was valued higher than all of Canada, or whatever it was, but give the Democrats time - they’ll have a square mile of Silicon Valley “worth” more than all the land in Texas.

Anyway, let’s say that California’s adjusted (to reality) GDP is in the neighborhood of $3 trillion dollars. Still really valuable, and a huge loss to the US if it were to be removed from the national economy, right?

At least that was the logic used to “prove” that Russia, that “gas station with nukes,” would collapse economically in the face of the US “shock-n-awe” (shuck-n-jive?) sanctions, not to mention collapsing militarily from trying to defeat Europe’s largest and best equipped military in Ukraine.

Odd, that didn’t happen either. A primary reason for the failure of the military prediction was that western planners confused GDP with military capacity, that is, they believed that one was precisely congruent to the other. The crudest of thought experiments makes a mockery of the notion, unfortunately (for Ukraine and the West). If you have a twenty trillion dollar GDP, but you possess no tank factories, how many tanks can you produce?

The answer is zero, at least until you spend some of that GDP on building a tank factory or two. But that takes time, and planning, and effort, and infrastructure, and…

You get the picture. Two hamburgers on Tuesday are useless when you need one hamburger today. And as it turned out, Russia had plenty of tank factories, (not to mention they had never thrown away any tank they ever built, but stored away any and everything that hadn’t previously been used up in warfare). They were far better positioned to wage industrial war long term than Ukraine was, is, or, now, will be for a good long time.

So, what sort of real stuff capabilities does California possess? What does it grow or make that would be critical to a US absent the Golden State?

As it turns out, a lot less than you might think. Here’s Grok again:

Based on the most recent data available as of February 24, 2025, here’s a ranking of the top ten industries in California by economic production, measured by their real value added to the state’s GDP (in chained 2017 U.S. dollars, adjusted for inflation).

1. Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, Rental, and Leasing

   • Contribution: $577.27 billion

   • This sector tops the list, driven by real estate activity in high-value markets like Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area, alongside major financial institutions such as Wells Fargo and Visa. It’s a cornerstone of California’s economy, reflecting the state’s high cost of living and robust banking sector.

2. Information

   • Contribution: $452.26 billion

   • Dominated by Silicon Valley giants like Apple, Google, and Nvidia, this industry includes tech, media, and telecommunications. The production of software, movies (hello, Hollywood!), and digital services makes it a global leader in innovation and content creation.

3. Professional and Business Services

   • Contribution: $375.36 billion (approximate, based on historical trends and proportional estimates)

   • This sector includes legal, consulting, and tech support services, fueled by the needs of California’s massive corporate ecosystem. It’s a vital backbone for other industries, especially tech and entertainment.

4. Manufacturing

   • Contribution: $333.85 billion

   • California’s manufacturing is diverse, with electronics (think Intel and Qualcomm), aerospace (Lockheed Martin), and food processing leading the charge. It’s a high-tech, high-value sector that employs over a million workers.

5. Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

   • Contribution: $325.41 billion (approximate, based on prior rankings and growth trends)

   • Anchored by the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, this industry handles massive international trade volumes, alongside retail giants and utility providers. It’s the logistical lifeblood of the state.

6. Health Care and Social Assistance

   • Contribution: $206.39 billion (approximate, growing rapidly to around 7% of GDP)

   • With an aging population and top-tier medical centers like UCLA, health care is booming. It’s one of the fastest-growing sectors, employing millions and meeting rising demand.

7. Government

   • Contribution: $292.13 billion (approximate, reflecting 10% of GDP in 2023)

   • As the largest employer in the state with about 2.5 million workers, government services—state, local, and federal—play a huge role. Sacramento’s status as the capital bolsters this sector’s economic weight.

8. Construction

   • Contribution: $150.42 billion (approximate, based on employment and growth data)

   • Fueled by housing demand and infrastructure projects, construction employs nearly a million people. Companies like Kiewit and Webcor keep this industry thriving despite occasional slowdowns.

9. Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting

   • Contribution: $55.9 billion (direct output, with broader impact exceeding $100 billion)

   • California’s Central Valley is an agricultural juggernaut, producing over half the nation’s fruits, vegetables, and nuts. Almonds, dairy, and strawberries are standout performers.

10. Arts, Entertainment, Recreation, Accommodation, and Food Services

    • Contribution: $130.78 billion (approximate, tied to tourism and hospitality trends)

    • This sector includes Hollywood’s film industry, Disneyland, and a massive tourism economy generating $150.4 billion in travel spending in 2023. It’s a cultural and economic driver.

In order:

1. Entirely gimmicked, a result of manipulations out of Sacramento designed to maintain artificially high land values, overall real estate values, and rents.

2. Apple and Google sell services and electronics based on those services. Most of the real stuff - phones, computers, chips, etc. - are made in China, Taiwan, or Texas.

3. Legal, consulting, tech support? People say, “First, kill all the lawyers,” but I’d kill tech support minions first. Well, I would, but most of them are out of reach in India or Pakistan.

4. Manufacturing. Finally, something real. Unfortunately, two of the three are dying, led by the Muskodus and others to follow. Food processing? Okay, I guess developing new and different flavors of potato chips might be missed outside the state.

5. Trade, Transportation, and Utilities. I’ll give them that. LA/Long Beach and SF Bay would be pretty hard to replace.

6. Health Care and Social Assistance. That’s welfare, illegal aliens, and an aging population, folks. They can have it.

7. Government: BWAHAHAHA. Yeah, right. Definitely invaluable, and the US could not do without Sacramento.

8. Construction: Again, at least it’s something real. Overpriced, shoddy, badly planned, and running on illegal aliens, who, even if employed, are invariably a net drag on the economy, but yeah. It’s something.

9. Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and Hunting: Agriculture is real. The rest are sports. Of course, California is doing everything it can to destroy its ag sector, which includies oddities like rice farming. What’s odd about that? Well, California’s rice farmers produce about 2.5% of California’s total ag dollar output, and only uses about 7.5% of the ag water supply to do it.

10. Arts, Entertainment, Recreation, Accommodation, and Food Services: This is Hollywood plus people visiting California. The rest of the U.S. would survive their loss quite nicely, I think.

So…California is a massive PITA for Donald Trump, the MAGA movement, and the right in general. As an entity, it is overhyped and overvalued. What to do?

Sell it, of course.

Grok thinks we could get about $30 trillion for it, but I’d be willing to bet Don “The Deal Maker” could get more. Maybe even enough to pay off the U.S. public debt entirely. (Currently around $36.5 trillion).

Think about it. A U.S. completely free of public debt, and free of the endless political gridlock, deadlock, and deathgrip caused by the sucking cancer pasted to our west coast.

Worth a shot, maybe?