National Guard rehearsed show of force against immigration raid protesters, general testifies
Maj. Gen. Scott Sherman, who commanded Guard troops in Los Angeles, was testifying at a trial to determine whether the Trump administration violated federal law when it deployed the soldiers and U.S. Marines to Southern California this summer.
Sherman said the deployment of federal agents on horseback and on foot to MacArthur Park in the heart of a neighborhood with a large immigrant population was initially planned for Father's Day, June 15. But the operation was moved to July 7 after he raised concerns the park could be crowded, he said.
'We assessed that there could be a large amount of people in the park (on Father's Day), which could quickly overwhelm Border Patrol,' Sherman testified.
Sherman said the decision to shift the timing of the operation came after discussion among the National Guard, the U.S. Northern Command, the Border Patrol, Department of Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth and Department of Homeland Security Kristi Noem.
The Guard troops were deployed to protect the perimeter and were instructed only to exit their vehicles if there was a direct threat to federal agents, he said.
All troops remained in their vehicles during the brief but mighty show of force . Sherman said the operation took just 20 minutes because it had been rehearsed multiple times. The Department of Homeland Security hasn't said if anyone was arrested.
Sherman testified during the second day of a three-day trial on whether President Donald Trump's deployment of armed forces to Los Angeles following protests over immigration raids this summer violated the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act. The law generally prohibits a president from using the military to police domestic affairs. All but about 300 Guard troops have since left Los Angeles.
Sherman testified that he also raised concerns that military vehicles would park along Wilshire Boulevard, which traverses the park, instead of staying in the park's perimeter.
After he raised his concerns, Gregory Bovino, the Border Patrol's El Centro sector chief in charge of the immigration crackdown in Los Angeles, questioned his loyalty, Sherman told the court Monday.
On July 7, federal agents, many of them in tactical gear, walked and rode their horses around the park, which was nearly empty since word had spread of a potential raid.
LA Mayor Karen Bass and Gov. Gavin Newsom called it a political stunt and spectacle meant to intimidate the city's immigrant communities.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Newsom is ready to redraw California's maps. Here's an overview of where we stand
In less than three months, California voters may be tasked with determining whether the state moves forward with a mid-decade redistricting, a move proponents say is combating Texas Republican lawmakers' efforts to secure more party seats in the 2026 midterms as the nation teeters on a gerrymander war. Gov. Gavin Newsom reiterated his plans in a letter to President Donald Trump on Monday, Aug. 11, in which he requested that the president call on Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and the leaders of other red states to cease their efforts. 'If you will not stand down, I will be forced to lead an effort to redraw the maps in California to offset the rigging of maps in red states,' Newsom said. 'But if the other states call off their redistricting efforts, we will happily do the same.' The letter comes the same week state Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas said he anticipated the proposed maps would be released after lawmakers were pressed about when the public would see them. 'Once these maps are released, voters will have the opportunity to digest these maps, review them for weeks and months leading to this election,' Rivas said during a press conference on Aug. 8. For weeks, Newsom and California Democratic lawmakers have been floating plans for a mid-decade redistricting. It's in response to Trump and White House officials who've urged Texas Republican leaders to redraw voting maps to gain five new Republican-friendly seats to the U.S. House of Representatives, USA TODAY reported. In California, congressional district maps are drawn by the independent California Citizens Redistricting Commission — not legislators — which was created when voters passed the Voters First Act in 2008. Here's the latest on redistricting efforts in California, based on Newsom and other lawmakers' recent public comments, and what to know moving forward. What is Newsom proposing? Here's what you should know Newsom and California lawmakers plan to call for a special election in the first week of November, in which voters will determine whether California will move forward with redistricting — a move that would pick up five Democratic seats. Lawmakers have until Aug. 22 to get this measure on the ballot, Newsom said during a press conference on Aug. 8. The assembly and state senate have adjourned until Aug. 18. Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat whose district includes San Benito County and parts of other central coast counties, said that leaders found that they could create a map for California that 'eliminated five Republican districts' yet 'was true to the Voting Rights Act' following Texas's efforts during the Aug. 8 press conference. The California governor has previously described the proposal being advanced with the legislature as having a 'trigger.' If Texas moves forward with its mid-decade redistricting, then California would act. Recently, many Democratic Texas representatives have left the state to stall redistricting efforts. 'We tried to play by a higher set of standards and rules with our independent redistricting, and we believe in that, and we are not talking about eliminating that commission,' Newsom said on Aug. 8. 'We are talking about emergency measures to respond to what's happening in Texas and we will nullify what happens in Texas. We will pick up five seats with the consent of the people.' Newsom has described the mid-decade redistricting as occurring 'just for congressional maps in '26, '28 and '30.' California has 52 congressional districts, nine of which are currently represented by Republican congressmen: Doug LaMalfa, 1st Congressional District of California Kevin Kiley, 3rd Congressional District of California Tom McClintock, 5th Congressional District of California Vince Fong, 20th Congressional District of California David Valadao, 22nd Congressional District of California Jay Obernolte, 23rd Congressional District of California Young Kim, 40th Congressional District of California Ken Calvert, 41st Congressional District of California Darrell Issa, 48th Congressional District of California These lawmakers said in a joint statement in late July that they'd 'fight any attempt to disenfranchise California voters by whatever means necessary to ensure the will of the people continues to be reflected in redistricting and in our elections.' 'The Commission received feedback from tens of thousands of Californians as to their communities of interest, which shaped the current set of congressional districts,' they said. 'Districts that represent the local communities that they live in, rather than the whims of one political party. A partisan political gerrymander is NOT what the voters of California want, as they clearly stated when they passed the VOTERS FIRST Act and participated in the Citizens Redistricting Commission process.' Who does redistricting in California? The California Citizens Redistricting Commission, comprised of five Democrats, five Republicans, and four people not affiliated with either party, redraws the boundaries of the state's congressional, state senate, state assembly, and State Board of Equalization districts. The redrawing of districts comes after every decennial U.S. Census so that the districts 'correctly reflect the state's population,' according to the commission. With the commission created through the Voters First Act, redistricting was removed from legislators' hands. When asked to comment on lawmakers' plans to redistrict and whether they'd pursue any efforts to defend the current congressional maps, the commission said in an email to the Desert Sun that it 'has no response at this time.' Sara Sadhwani, an assistant professor of politics at Pomona College and a California Citizens Redistricting Commission commissioner, told the Desert Sun that among what sets the commission apart is 'the extreme transparency that we use.' Sadhwani described the ways in which maps could be drawn, whether it be a single person behind the scenes or writing code for a computer to draw lines based on a set of criteria. 'We collected nearly 40,000 pieces of public testimony from across the state in which people called in to share with us where their community lies, what ties their communities together and the rationale for why their community ought to be in a district together,' Sadhwani said, explaining that is the basis of their line drawing. But whether a successful mid-decade redistricting sets up a future in which the commission could be weakened by lawmakers— or even more drastically, dismantled — Sadhwani said: 'I think that would come down to how the ballot measure is written. My understanding is what Gov. Newsom has been proposing is that this would be a one-time immediate action and would keep the commission process for 2031.' Sadhwani added, 'If we can take the governor at his word, then it would not diminish the power of the commission in general; it would just be a one-time stepping out of the process.' When would we vote on redistricting in California? Special election may be called Newsom said on Aug. 4 that the goal is to get this proposal on the Nov. 4 ballot, which coincides with other municipal elections. 'Counties have 30 days after Election Day to certify their election results,' the California Secretary of State's Office press team said in an email to the Desert Sun. 'The Secretary of State will certify the official Statement of Vote 38 days after the election.' By the end of this year, Californians will generally know whether the 2026 midterms will be shaped by new maps or not. But in the weeks leading up to a possible special election, county officials will be obtaining places for voting to occur, as well as to count the votes, said Jim Patrick, spokesperson for the California Secretary of State, in an email. 'They'll hire and train staff to work before, during, and after the election,' Patrick said. 'And they'll make sure they have the materials (primarily envelopes and ballots) they need to run an election.' Shaun Bowler, a professor of political science at UC Riverside, said in an email to the Desert Sun that 'pretty much any map of seats' is subject to legal challenge. 'This will be no different,' he said. This effort is unusual because it's a response to events happening in other states, Bowler said. Rather than it being a step to counter GOP efforts in California, it's an attempt to offset what lawmakers are trying in Texas, the UC Riverside professor said. He shared what he thought were wider implications for Congress. Should redistricting in Texas ultimately help keep Republican control of Congress, then anything they pass is 'going to be suspect and open to criticism and complaint' because it wouldn't reflect the will of voters, Bowler said. When asked whether leaders have a backup plan should people vote against this effort, Newsom said voters will approve it. 'I think the voters understand what's at stake,' he said. Paris Barraza is a trending reporter covering California news at The Desert Sun. Reach her at pbarraza@ This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: California redistricting: Here's Newsom's plan and what happens next Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Severe consequences': Trump warns Putin ahead of Alaska summit
President Donald Trump warned on Wednesday that Russia would face 'very severe consequences' if he determines during Friday's summit with Vladimir Putin that the Russian leader is still not serious about ending the war with Ukraine. Trump, who did not specify what those consequences might be, has been reluctant to increase economic sanctions or tariffs on Russia despite his mounting frustration with Putin's intensifying attacks on Ukrainian cities, civilians and indifference to peace talks. Lowering expectations that the sit-down with Putin in Alaska would yield a breakthrough, Trump said that he's hopeful this initial meeting could lead to another that includes Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and, potentially, Trump. 'First, I'll find out where we are,' Trump said. 'If the first [meeting] goes okay, we'll have a quick second one. I would like to do it almost immediately.' But, the president cautioned, he won't pursue a trilateral meeting if he doesn't think Putin is acting in good faith. 'There may be no second meeting because if I feel that it's not appropriate to have it because I didn't get the answers that we have to have, then we are not going to have a second meeting,' Trump said. Trump's comments came during an appearance at the Kennedy Center and shortly after an hour-long call with European leaders, including Zelenskyy, in preparation for Friday's summit. Trump described the call as 'very good,' and several European leaders were quick to issue statements about the call Wednesday morning to underscore their alignment. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that Trump 'largely shares' Europe's position on peace talks, and French President Emmanuel Macron stated that Trump is indeed pushing for a ceasefire, a top priority for Zelenskyy and NATO. Putin's stubborn refusal to entertain Trump's diplomatic entreaties so far has pushed the president into closer alignment with NATO allies and even Zelenskyy, who he dressed down in the Oval Office less than six months ago. Friday's sit-down with Putin, who many analysts believe is likely to try to repair his personal relationship with Trump in a private meeting while convincing him that Ukraine shares the blame for the prolonged conflict, will put the president's shifting convictions to a serious test. Even as he sought to put the onus on Putin to demonstrate new seriousness about ending the war, Trump downplayed expectations about his own ability to persuade the Russian president to do so. When asked whether he could convince Putin to 'stop targeting civilians in Ukraine,' he demurred. 'I guess the answer to that is probably no,' Trump said.
Yahoo
4 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Appeals court ruling will let Trump administration cut billions in foreign aid
A federal appeals court has reversed a lower court's ruling, clearing the way for the Trump administration to cut billions in foreign aid funding this year. In a 2-1 decision Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit overruled a lower court's decision that prohibited the Trump administration from making drastic cuts to USAID funding that had already approved by Congress. The court sidestepped the substantive question of whether the cuts were constitutional, instead deciding that the nonprofits that sued the Trump administration lacked the standing to bring a case. MORE: Supreme Court rules Trump administration must unfreeze foreign aid payments Judges Karen Henderson and Gregory Katsas -- appointed by Presidents George H. W. Bush and Donald Trump, respectively -- determined that only the head of the Government Accountability Office has the authority to sue under the Impoundment Control Act. "The district court erred in granting that relief because the grantees lack a cause of action to press their claims," the majority wrote. The lawsuit over USAID funding had been one of the first major legal successes for nonprofits challenging the Trump administration, which ordered the suspension of grants that didn't comply with the president's priorities. After U.S. District Judge Amir Ali issued a temporary restraining order in February blocking Trump's executive order from taking effect, both the D.C. circuit court and the United States Supreme Court sided with the nonprofits, denying a request from the Trump administration to block an order enforcing the TRO. In a dissenting opinion issued with Wednesday's ruling, Judge Florence Pan, a Biden appointee, criticized her colleagues for ignoring the concern that the funding cuts were unconstitutional and thus harmed "the rule of law and the very structure of our government." "At bottom, the court's acquiescence in and facilitation of the Executive's unlawful behavior derails the 'carefully crafted system of checked and balanced power' that serves as the 'greatest security against tyranny -- the accumulation of excessive authority in a single Branch," she wrote.
