Reporter hit as LA officers fire rubber bullets at protesters
An Australian news correspondent was hit as Los Angeles police fired rubber bullets Sunday as tensions with immigration raid protesters escalated.
'After hours of standing off, this situation has now rapidly deteriorated,' Lauren Tomasi, the U.S. correspondent for Australia's 9News, said in a live report from downtown Los Angeles shortly before she was hit.
'The LAPD moving in on horseback, firing rubber bullets at protesters, moving them on through the heart of LA,' she continued.
Moments later, Tomasi audibly exclaimed as she grabbed her calf, apparently in pain, as the camera panned away from the incident.
'You just f‑‑‑ing shot the reporter,' an individual was heard saying off camera.
Another individual asked Tomasi if she was OK, and she said, 'I'm good.'
Tomasi returned to her reporting spot hours later, and a 9News anchor in Australia asked the U.S.-based correspondent for an update on her condition.
'I'm OK. My cameraman Jimmy and I are both safe. This is just one of the unfortunate realities of reporting on these kinds of incidents. It has been a really volatile day on the streets of Los Angeles,' Tomasi said, before reporting that downtown Los Angeles had mostly cleared out by nightfall.
9News issued a similar statement after the incident.
'Lauren Tomasi was struck by a rubber bullet. Lauren and her camera operator are safe and will continue their essential work covering these events,' the statement read, according to the outlet's reporting of the incident.
'This incident serves as a stark reminder of the inherent dangers journalists can face while reporting from the frontlines of protests, underscoring the importance of their role in providing vital information,' the statement continued.
A British news photographer, Nick Stern, was also struck while reporting on the anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles over the weekend, according to numerous British outlets. He is now recovering from emergency surgery.
'My initial concern was, were they firing live rounds?' Stern told a news agency, noting he was struck by a 14 mm 'sponge bullet' in his thigh.
'Some of the protesters came and helped me, and they ended up carrying me, and I noticed that there was blood pouring down my leg,' he added.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Most-Followed TikToker Khaby Lame Detained, Released by ICE Over Visa Issue
Khaby Lame, the most-followed TikToker in the world, was detained and released by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on June 6. On Monday, an ICE spokesperson confirmed that the Italian-Senegalese star had been detained at Las Vegas airport for alleged immigration violations. According to ICE, the 25-year-old TikToker, whose real name is Seringe Khabane Lame, had 'overstayed the terms of his visa' and was later granted voluntary departure. More from Rolling Stone Trump Continues Inflaming L.A. Protests: 'BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!' Republicans Say They're Cool With Trump Deploying Troops Against Protesters Trump's Response to L.A. Protests: What We Know 'U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detained Seringe Khabane Lame, 25, a citizen of Italy, June 6, at the Harry Reid International Airport, Las Vegas, Nevada, for immigration violations,' an ICE spokesperson said in a statement. 'Lame entered the United States [on] April 30 and overstayed the terms of his visa.' According to ICE, Lame has since left the country. The influencer shared a photo of himself in São Paulo, Brazil, on Monday morning. A rep for Lame did not immediately respond to Rolling Stone's request for comment. The detainment of Lame comes as the Trump administration called for the military to be deployed against anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles. The protests, which began in response to raids on Friday, escalated over the weekend after Trump ordered the deployment of National Guard troops into the city. Gov. Gavin Newsom requested on Sunday that Trump revoke his federalization of the National Guard and withdraw them from the city. 'The decision to deploy the National Guard, without appropriate training or orders, risks seriously escalating the situation,' he wrote. 'There is currently no need for the National Guard to be deployed in Los Angeles, and to do so in this unlawful manner and for such a lengthy period is a serious breach of state sovereignty that seems intentionally designed to inflame the situation.' Lame's detainment also comes as numerous artists and celebrities have faced visa issues under the Trump administration, including Grupo Firme and Julión Álvarez. Best of Rolling Stone Every Super Bowl Halftime Show, Ranked From Worst to Best The United States of Weed Gaming Levels Up
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Liberals, anti-Trump figures bash ABC for suspending Terry Moran over social media rant
Liberal pundits and anti-Trump figures slammed ABC News for suspending longtime correspondent Terry Moran after he ranted on social media about President Donald Trump and Stephen Miller. "They can clutch their pearls and act mad but this is spot on from Moran," Tommy Vietor, a co-host of "Pod Save America," wrote, reacting to Moran's deleted social media post that referred to both men as "world-class hater[s]." Moran called out Trump and Miller on social media early Sunday morning and proceeded to delete the post. An ABC News spokesperson told Fox News Digital in a statement that Moran was suspended, saying, "The post does not reflect the views of ABC News and violated our standards." Abc News' Terry Moran's History Of Attacking Trump Dates Back To First Term In 2017 "MAGA, I thought you all defended free speech and the First Amendment, right? Why are you so upset about Terry Moran's comments? Stop being such snowflakes, right? Stop looking for safe spaces. Man up," posted left-wing writer Wajahat Ali, who edits "The Left Hook" Substack. Joe Walsh, a former GOP congressman who joined the Democratic Party this year, said, "shame on you, @abcnews." Read On The Fox News App "Way to NOT stand up for a free press," he added. In another post on X, Walsh called the suspension of Moran "utter b-------," and said, "You're the free press. You don't do what the authoritarian in the White House tells you to do. Thank you @TerryMoran for having the courage to speak the truth." "What Moran reported was demonstrable fact. Indisputable fact. Yet they suspend him. This is the advantage that Trump and his ilk have. They are so beyond the moral pale, so beyond normality, that it is considered impolite, impolitic, or intemperate to describe them as they are," Lincoln Project co-founder George Conway wrote. Abc's Terry Moran Panned For Suggesting Gop Would End Filibuster 'In A Heartbeat' After Refraining Under Trump Medhi Hasan, a former MSNBC host who started his own publication, Zeteo, directed his criticism at the Trump officials who defended the president and Miller. "Snowflakes. Pretend free speech warriors. Getting journalists suspended and calling for their firing. Hypocrites," Hasan wrote. Hasan also posted on Bluesky that Moran's suspension was "'ironic given Moran went out of his way to not embarrass Trump over the president's delusion about the doctored MS13 photo, repeatedly saying 'let's agree to disagree' and 'let's move on' but they still got him suspended. You can't appease these people ever." Moran interviewed Trump about his first 100 days in office, during which Trump repeatedly called out Moran and ABC News. Trump accused Moran of "not being very nice" during an exchange about the deportation of illegal immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia. "They're giving you the big break of a lifetime," Trump told Moran. "You're doing the interview, I picked you because, frankly, I never heard of you, but that's OK. I picked you, Terry, but you're not being very nice." Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture Far-left former MSNBC host Keith Olbermann re-posted Moran's attacks on Miller and Trump, and called out Bob Iger, the CEO of Disney, which owns ABC News. "Another coward named @RobertIger responded by letting ABC News suspend Terry indefinitely for telling the truth," Olbermann wrote. "I have copied Terry's words here and I encourage everybody, journalists especially, to do the same, or cut and paste what I've written, and put it out under your name." Others also called on their followers to share Moran's deleted post. Ron Filipkowski, editor-in-chief of MeidasTouch, a liberal website, said Moran's suspension was a product of corporate journalism. "Independent journalism is when you can write what Terry Moran wrote without getting in trouble. Corporate journalism is when you can't," he wrote. ABC News did not immediately return a request for comment. Moran's suspension for airing his thoughts comes as public trust in the media continues to steadily erode. A Gallup survey last year showed a record-low 31 percent of Americans expressed at least a "fair amount" of trust in the media to accurately report the news. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt responded to Moran's post on X, Sunday, calling it "unhinged and unacceptable."Original article source: Liberals, anti-Trump figures bash ABC for suspending Terry Moran over social media rant
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Contributor: Federalizing the state National Guard is a chilling push past the law
The use of the military to quell protests is something associated with dictators in foreign countries, and as of Saturday night, with a president of the United States. When President Trump federalized 2,000 members of the California National Guard, deploying them because of protests against federal immigration authorities, he sent a chilling signal about his willingness to use the military against demonstrators. There are two relevant aspects of federal law: One allows the president to federalize a state's National Guard and the other permits the president to use the military in domestic situations. Neither, at this point, provides legal authority for Saturday's action. As for the former, a federal statute, 10 U.S.C. section 12406, authorizes the president to take over a state's National Guard if 'the United States, or any of the Commonwealths or possessions, is invaded or is in danger of invasion by a foreign nation; there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States; the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.' This is the statutory provision Trump has invoked. But it is highly questionable that the protests against ICE agents rise to the level of a 'rebellion against the authority of the Government.' This statute does not give the president the authority to use the troops. Another law, the Posse Comitatus Act, generally prohibits the military from being used within the United States. The 2,000 National Guard troops are only deployed to protect ICE officers. However, even this is legally questionable unless the president invokes the Insurrection Act of 1807, which creates a basis for using the military in domestic situations and an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act. On Sunday, Trump said he was considering invoking the Insurrection Act. The Insurrection Act allows a president to deploy troops domestically in three situations. One is if a governor or state legislature asks for the deployment to put down an insurrection. The last time this occurred was in 1992, when California Gov. Pete Wilson asked President George H.W. Bush to use the National Guard to stop the riots that occurred after police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King. With Gov. Gavin Newsom opposing the federalizing of the National Guard, this isn't the case in Los Angeles today. A second part of the Insurrection Act allows deployment in order to 'enforce the laws' of the United States or to 'suppress rebellion' whenever 'unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion' make it 'impracticable' to enforce federal law by the 'ordinary course of judicial proceedings.' Since no one disputes the courts are fully functioning, this provision has no relevance. It is the third part of the Insurrection Act that is more likely to be cited by the Trump administration. It allows the president to use military troops in a state to suppress 'any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy' that 'so hinders the execution of the laws' that any portion of the state's inhabitants are deprived of a constitutional right and state authorities are unable or unwilling to protect that right. President Eisenhower used this power to send federal troops to help desegregate the Little Rock, Ark., public schools when the governor defied federal court orders. This section of the law has additional language: The president may deploy troops in a state that 'opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.' This broad language is what I would expect Trump to invoke to use the troops directly against the anti-ICE protests. The Insurrection Act does not define crucial terms such as 'insurrection,' 'rebellion' or 'domestic violence.' In 1827, in Martin vs. Mott, the Supreme Court said that 'the authority to decide whether [an exigency requiring the militia to be called out] has arisen belongs exclusively to the President, and ... his decision is conclusive upon all other persons.' There have been many calls over the years to modify the expansive language of the Insurrection Act. But since presidents have rarely used it, and not in a very long time, reform efforts seemed unnecessary. The broad presidential authority under the Insurrection Act thus has remained on the books as a loaded weapon. There is a strong set of norms that has restrained presidents from using federal troops in domestic situations, especially absent a request from a state governor. But Trump shows no respect for norms. Any use of the military in domestic situations should be regarded as a last resort in the United States. The readiness of the administration to quickly invoke any aspect of this authority is frightening, a message about the willingness of a remade federal government to quell demonstrations. The protests in Los Angeles do not rise to the conditions that warrant the federalization of the National Guard. This is not to deny that some of the anti-ICE protests have turned violent. However, they have been limited in size and there is no reason to believe that law enforcement could not control them absent military force. But the statutes Trump can invoke give presidents broad powers. In the context of everything that we have seen from the Trump administration, nationalizing the California National Guard should make us even more afraid. Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, is an Opinion Voices contributing writer. If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
