Trump admin sues Los Angeles, claims it's hindering immigration enforcement
U.S. President Donald Trump's administration filed suit Monday against Los Angeles, claiming the city is obstructing the enforcement of immigration laws and creating a lawless environment with its sanctuary policies that bar local police from sharing information on people without legal status.
The lawsuit in U.S. District Court says Los Angeles' ' sanctuary city' ordinance hinders White House efforts to crack down on what it calls a 'crisis of illegal immigration.'
It is the latest in a string of lawsuits against so-called sanctuary jurisdictions — including New York, New Jersey and Colorado — that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
The Los Angeles policy bars city resources from being used for immigration enforcement. The court filing calls the city ordinance 'illegal' and asks that it be blocked from being enforced.
Chad Mizelle, chief of staff for U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, said in announcing the latest lawsuit that the administration will not tolerate any interference with the federal government's crackdown.
Story continues below advertisement
'We will keep enforcing federal immigration law in Los Angeles, whether or not the city's government or residents agree with it,' Mizelle said in a social media post on the platform X.
3:07
'These aren't the criminals': L.A. mayor urges Trump administration to stop ICE raids
Messages seeking comment on the lawsuit were sent to the offices of Mayor Karen Bass and City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto.
Get daily National news
Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up
By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy
Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martinez, a co-author of the Los Angeles sanctuary law, said Monday that the city would do everything in its power to protect its residents.
He said in a statement that 'Trump is tearing families apart' and trying to force cities and towns across the country to help him carry out his agenda.
'We refuse to stand by and let Donald Trump deport innocent families,' he added.
Story continues below advertisement
The Los Angeles lawsuit claims Trump 'won the presidential election on a platform of deporting the millions of illegal immigrants.' Over the past three weeks, immigration agents have swarmed Southern California, arresting hundreds of people and prompting protests.
Tens of thousands of people participated in rallies over immigration raids and the subsequent deployment of the National Guard and Marines. Los Angeles police have arrested over 100 people on various charges from throwing rocks at federal officers to setting fire to Waymo cars equipped with self-driving technology.
'The practical upshot of Los Angeles' refusal to cooperate with federal immigration authorities has, since June 6, 2025, been lawlessness, rioting, looting, and vandalism,' the court filing says.
On June 18, the mayor lifted a curfew she had imposed a week earlier to prevent vandalism and break-ins during nighttime protests. The demonstrations had been largely concentrated in a few downtown blocks that are home to several federal and local government buildings.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
27 minutes ago
- CBC
Ottawa avoided a trade setback. But Trump could come for supply management next
Social Sharing Dreams do come true. U.S. President Donald Trump wished for Canada's tax on U.S. tech companies to disappear on Friday, and by Sunday, it had. Mostly, there was a sense of surprise that the federal government would play such a valuable card this soon. The digital services tax (DST), which Ottawa was supposed to start collecting on Monday, was unpopular with the U.S. government and the tech giants it targeted — Meta and Amazon, for example — and, conveniently, not was especially liked by business groups at home. By quashing it, Canadian negotiators paid a kind of toll on the road to a trade deal with the U.S. — in that it kept talks rolling. But the move could back Canada against the wall on the far thornier issue of supply management. "I think we can expect that they will be coming after us on [supply management] as well, because it has been a longstanding irritant," said Fen Hampson, a professor of international affairs and a co-chair of the expert group on Canada-U.S. relations at Carleton University in Ottawa. Trump has long objected to Canada's supply-managed dairy system, complaining about what he characterizes as high tariff rates on U.S. dairy exports to Canada (more on that later). He made it an issue leading up to the 2018 negotiation of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), but ultimately allowed that free trade deal to pass without addressing it. Now, Trump is back to making a stink about our cheese. He claimed on Friday that Canada has charged U.S. farmers a 400 per cent tariff "for years" on dairy products. WATCH | Why Trump hates dairy supply management: How Canada's dairy supply management system works — and why Trump hates it 5 months ago Duration 8:11 Donald Trump is not a fan of Canada's dairy supply management system — repeatedly attacking it in his first term and going after it again as he prepares to return to the White House. CBC's Ellen Mauro meets concerned Canadian dairy farmers and explains why the system has the U.S. president-elect so riled up. But when it comes to dairy, Trump's wish won't come true so easily, thanks to the recently passed Bill C-202, which forbids supply management from being used as a bargaining chip in trade negotiations. The bill has been criticized because it potentially ties Ottawa's hands if the U.S. president issues an ultimatum aimed at Canadian dairy — by extension, threatening to disturb Parliament which has, since the federal election, mostly set aside partisan differences in the face of Trump's threats. The added difficulty "has certainly registered with the White House," said Hampson. 'Tremendous' power Down south, the scrapped DST was hailed as a victory. Trump's trade representative Howard Lutnick thanked Canada for removing it, calling it a "deal-breaker for any trade deal" with the United States, while White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett said removing the tax paved the way for to renew talks. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt seemed to gloat, saying that Carney "caved" to Trump's demands and that it was a mistake for Canada to promise the tax in the first place. Canada and U.S. restarted negotiations Monday morning, Carney says 14 hours ago Duration 1:15 But if there was any indication of what's to come next, it was from Pete Hoekstra. The U.S. ambassador to Canada, speaking on CBC's Power & Politics on Monday evening, said he believes Carney would push Parliament to put supply management back on the table if a deal between the U.S. and Canada depended on it. "I have a strong belief that if ... the prime minister and the president got to a trade agreement, and for whatever reason it included something that Parliament said 'You can't do that,' the prime minister probably could find a way to get Parliament to do [his] will," he said. "Prime ministers and presidents, they've got a tremendous amount of power." If Trump really wanted to put economic pressure on Canada, "he could try this exact same tactic and say, 'I'm going to walk away until supply management is gone,'" said Asa McKercher, a professor at the Mulroney Institute at St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, N.S. Trump's numerous claims about Canada's supply managed dairy systems are frequently inaccurate. High tariff rates on U.S. dairy only apply if exports exceed set quotas, and the U.S. has never come close to exceeding them (one U.S. dairy lobbying organization argues that this is because of the " protectionist measures" imposed by Canada). Below the quotas, U.S. dairy products are tariff-free under CUSMA. While Canada's dairy lobby welcomed C-202's passage, some agricultural industry leaders argue that it stifles their industries in favour of bolstering dairy, and gives the country little wiggle room should Trump come knocking for more concessions. "I think the Carney government is now getting into a position where the rubber is really going to hit the road," said McKercher. "If you've given in on the digital tax, is that a concession that Mr. Trump will see as a concession and accept, or will Mr. Trump continue to push Canada and say, well, now what about supply management?" WATCH | Supply management 'off the table,' says Leblanc: Canada's dairy supply management 'not negotiable' in trade war with U.S.: LeBlanc 4 months ago Duration 27:01 'Existential' issue for Liberals He says this is "dangerous territory," for the minority Carney government, which needs the support of other parties to pass its agenda. "If the current government looks like it's going to introduce a bill threatening supply management, this could create a lot of political headaches." Bill C-202 was sponsored by Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet as a nod to the party's base in Quebec where the dairy farming industry is heavily concentrated. The Conservatives are also looking to expand in the province, while maintaining their rural base in Ontario. "This is where the issue becomes existential for the political fortunes of Carney's Liberal government," said Hampson. "So that's going to be a tough one. And I'm not sure there's really any way to square that circle if the Americans decide to go after us on it." With three weeks left until the July 21 deadline for a new Canada-U.S. trade deal, it's possible that talks between Trump and Carney will reach the finish line, says Lori Turnbull, a professor of political science at Dalhousie University. But with Trump upset about supply management, "it's a question of is this going to be enough for him for a little while? How long?" she said. "Now that we've made a concession and Trump sees that as a win for him, is there an opportunity right now in this short period of time [where Canada can] move some things through where Trump feels like … a real free trade relationship and a new economic and security pact for Canada and the US is in the American's interest too."
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Senate Republicans search for support Trump's big bill in overnight session
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate is slogging through an overnight session that has dragged into Tuesday, with Republican leaders buying time as they search for ways to secure support for President Donald Trump's big bill of tax breaks and spending cuts while fending off proposed amendments, mostly from Democrats trying to defeat the package. An endgame was not immediately in sight. Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota is working for a last-minute agreement between those in his party worried the bill's reductions to Medicaid will leave millions without care and his most conservative flank, which wants even steeper cuts to hold down deficits ballooning with the tax cuts. Thune declared at one point they were in the 'homestretch' as he dashed through the halls at the Capitol, only to backtrack a short time later, suggesting any progress was 'elusive.' At the same time House Speaker Mike Johnson has signaled more potential problems ahead, warning the Senate package could run into trouble when it is sent back to the House for a final round of voting, as skeptical lawmakers are being called back to Washington ahead of Trump's Fourth of July deadline. 'I have prevailed upon my Senate colleagues to please, please, please keep it as close to the House product as possible,' said Johnson, the Louisiana Republican. House Republicans had already passed their version last month. It's a pivotal moment for the Republicans, who have control of Congress and are racing to wrap up work with just days to go before Trump's holiday deadline Friday. The 940-page 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' as it's formally titled, has consumed Congress as its shared priority with the president. In a midnight social media post urging them on, Trump called the bill 'perhaps the greatest and most important of its kind.' Vice President JD Vance summed up his own series of posts, simply imploring senators to 'Pass the bill.' The GOP leaders have no room to spare, with narrow majorities in both chambers. Thune can lose no more than three Republican senators, and already two — Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who warns people will lose access to Medicaid health care, and Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, who opposes raising the debt limit — have indicated opposition. Tillis abruptly announced over the weekend he would not seek reelection after Trump threatened to campaign against him. Attention quickly turned to key senators, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, who have also raised concerns about health care cuts, but also a loose coalition of four conservative GOP senators pushing for even steeper reductions. And on social media, billionaire Elon Musk was again lashing out at Republicans as 'the PORKY PIG PARTY!!' for including a provision that would raise the nation's debt limit by $5 trillion, which is needed to allow continued borrowing to pay the bills. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said his side was working to show 'how awful this is.' 'Republicans are in shambles because they know the bill is so unpopular,' Schumer said as he walked the halls. A new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law. The CBO said the package would increase the deficit by nearly $3.3 trillion over the decade. Senators to watch Few Republicans appear fully satisfied as the final package emerges, in either the House or Senate. Tillis said it is a betrayal of the president's promises not to kick people off health care, especially if rural hospitals close. Collins had proposed bolstering the $25 billion proposed rural hospital fund to $50 billion, but her amendment failed. And Murkowski was trying to secure provisions to spare people in her state from some health care and food stamp cuts while also working to beef up federal reimbursements to Alaska's hospitals. They have not said how they would vote for the final package. 'Radio silence,' Murkowski said when asked. At the same time, conservative Senate Republicans proposing steeper health care cuts, including Rick Scott of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, filed into Thune's office for a near-midnight meeting. The Senate has spent some 18 hours churning through more than two dozen amendments in what is called a vote-a-rama, a typically laborious process that went on longer than usual as negotiations happen on and off the chamber floor. The White House legislative team also was at the Capitol. A few of the amendments — to strike parts of the bill that would limit Medicaid funds to rural hospitals or shift the costs of food stamp benefits to the states — were winning support from a few Republicans, though almost none were passing. Sen. Mike Crapo, the GOP chairman of the Finance Committee, dismissed the dire predictions of health care cuts as Democrats trafficking in what he called the 'politics of fear.' What's in the big bill All told, the Senate bill includes $4.5 trillion in tax cuts, according to the latest CBO analysis, making permanent Trump's 2017 rates, which would expire at the end of the year if Congress fails to act, while adding the new ones he campaigned on, including no taxes on tips. The Senate package would roll back billions of dollars in green energy tax credits, which Democrats warn will wipe out wind and solar investments nationwide. It would impose $1.2 trillion in cuts, largely to Medicaid and food stamps, by imposing work requirements on able-bodied people, including some parents and older Americans, making sign-up eligibility more stringent and changing federal reimbursements to states. Additionally, the bill would provide a $350 billion infusion for border and national security, including for deportations, some of it paid for with new fees charged to immigrants. Democrats fighting all day and night Unable to stop the march toward passage, the Democrats as the minority party in Congress are using the tools at their disposal to delay and drag out the process. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. Democrats forced a full reading of the text, which took 16 hours, and they have a stream of amendments. Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, raised particular concern at the start of debate late Sunday about the accounting method being used by the Republicans, which says the tax breaks from Trump's first term are now 'current policy' and the cost of extending them should not be counted toward deficits. She said that kind of 'magic math' won't fly with Americans trying to balance their own household books. ___ Associated Press writers Ali Swenson, Fatima Hussein, Michelle L. Price, Kevin Freking, Matt Brown, Seung Min Kim and Chris Megerian contributed to this report.
Winnipeg Free Press
3 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Iowa's civil rights protections no longer include gender identity as new law takes effect
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Iowa became the first state to remove gender identity from its civil rights code under a law that took effect Tuesday, meaning transgender and nonbinary residents are no longer protected from discrimination in their job, housing and other aspects of life. The law also explicitly defines female and male based on reproductive organs at birth and removes the ability for people to change the sex designation on their birth certificate. An unprecedented take-back of legal rights after nearly two decades in Iowa code leaves transgender, nonbinary and potentially even intersex Iowans more vulnerable now than they were before. It's a governing doctrine now widely adopted by President Donald Trump and Republican-led states despite the mainstream medical view that sex and gender are better understood as a spectrum than as an either-or definition. When Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds signed Iowa's new law, she said the state's previous civil rights code 'blurred the biological line between the sexes.' 'It's common sense to acknowledge the obvious biological differences between men and women. In fact, it's necessary to secure genuine equal protection for women and girls,' she said in a video statement. Also taking effect Tuesday are provisions in the state's health and human services budget that say Medicaid recipients are no longer covered for gender-affirming surgery or hormone therapy. A national movement Iowa's state Capitol filled with protesters as the law went through the Republican-controlled Legislature and to Reynolds' desk in just one week in February. Iowa Republicans said laws passed in recent years to restrict transgender students' use of bathrooms and locker rooms, and their participation on sports teams, could not coexist with a civil rights code that includes gender identity protections. About two dozen other states and the Trump administration have advanced restrictions on transgender people. Republicans say such laws and executive actions protect spaces for women, rejecting the idea that people can transition to another gender. Many face court challenges. About two-thirds of U.S. adults believe that whether a person is a man or woman is determined by biological characteristics at birth, an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll conducted in May found. But there's less consensus on policies that target transgender and nonbinary people. Transgender people say those kinds of policies deny their existence and capitalize on prejudice for political gain. In a major setback for transgender rights nationwide, the U.S. Supreme Court last month upheld Tennessee's ban on puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender minors. The court's conservative majority said it doesn't violate the Constitution's equal protection clause, which requires the government to treat similarly situated people the same. Not every state includes gender identity in their civil rights code, but Iowa was the first to remove nondiscrimination protections based on gender identity, according to the Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ+ rights think tank. Incidents of discrimination in Iowa, before and after July 1 Iowans will still have time to file a complaint with the state Office of Civil Rights about discrimination based on gender identity that occurred before the law took effect. State law requires a complaint to be submitted within 300 days after the most recent incident of alleged discrimination. That means people have until April 27 to file a complaint about discrimination based on gender identity, according to Kristen Stiffler, the office's executive director. Sixty-five such complaints were filed and accepted for investigation from July 2023 through the end of June 2024, according to Stiffler. Forty-three were filed and accepted from July 1, 2024, through June 19 of this year. Iowa state Rep. Aime Wichtendahl, a Democrat and the state's first openly transgender lawmaker, fears the law will lead to an increase in discrimination for transgender Iowans. 'Anytime someone has to check your ID and they see that the gender marker doesn't match the appearance, then that opens up hostility, discrimination as possibilities,' Wichtendahl said, naming examples such as applying for a job, going through the airport, buying beer or getting pulled over in a traffic stop. 'That instantly outs you. That instantly puts you on the spot.' About half of U.S. states include gender identity in their civil rights code to protect against discrimination in housing and public places, such as stores or restaurants, according to the Movement Advancement Project. Some additional states do not explicitly protect against such discrimination, but it is included in legal interpretations of statutes. Five years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled LGBTQ people are protected by a landmark federal civil rights law that prohibits sex discrimination in the workplace. But Iowa's Supreme Court has expressly rejected the argument that discrimination based on sex includes discrimination based on gender identity. Changing Iowa birth certificates before the law took effect The months between when the bill was signed into law and when it took effect gave transgender Iowans time to pursue amended birth certificates before that option was eliminated. Keenan Crow, with LGBTQ+ advocacy group One Iowa, said the group has long cosponsored legal clinics to assist with that process. 'The last one that we had was by far the biggest,' Crow said. Iowa's Department of Transportation still has a process by which people can change the gender designation on their license or identification card but has proposed administrative rules to eliminate that option. Wichtendahl also said she has talked to some families who are looking to move out of state as a result of the new law. 'It's heartbreaking because this is people's lives we're talking about,' Wichtendahl added. 'These are families that have trans loved ones and it's keeping their loved ones away, it's putting their loved ones into uncertain future, putting their health and safety at risk.'
