Clashes escalate in Los Angeles after Trump sends in National Guard
Listen to article
Tensions escalated in downtown Los Angeles after US President Donald Trump deployed National Guard troops to confront demonstrators protesting against sweeping immigration raids.
Security forces fired tear gas, flash bangs, and rubber bullets near the Edward R Roybal Federal Building, the Metropolitan Detention Centre, and the 101 Freeway.
The clashes marked the third consecutive day of unrest following the administration's intensified immigration crackdown, which has seen dozens of undocumented migrants detained across the city.
One demonstrator was seen waving a Mexican flag as smoke billowed from a burning Waymo self-driving vehicle, and another nearby was heavily vandalised. Protesters also blocked traffic along the 101, a major artery through downtown, while some clashed directly with mounted LAPD officers.
The move sparked immediate backlash from California's Democratic leadership. Governor Gavin Newsom condemned the deployment as unconstitutional and vowed legal action after the White House rejected his formal request to rescind the order.
Despite protests already being managed by @LAPDHQ, President Trump is escalating the situation by threatening to deploy roughly 500 active-duty Marines to the streets of Los Angeles.
Los Angeles: Remain peaceful. Don't fall into the trap that extremists are hoping for. — Governor Gavin Newsom (@CAgovernor) June 9, 2025
'These are the acts of a dictator, not a president,' Newsom said in an MSNBC interview, accusing Trump of "manufacturing a crisis" and violating state sovereignty.
Australian journalist among those injured
Amid the chaos, Australian reporter Lauren Tomasi of Nine News was struck by a rubber bullet while filming a live report. The incident, captured on video, showed an officer firing directly in the direction of Tomasi and her crew as police advanced on protesters.
'You just fucking shot the reporter!' a bystander can be heard shouting, as Tomasi grabbed her leg in pain. Despite the injury, she later confirmed she was not seriously hurt, saying, 'I'm good.'
Over 100 arrested across California
In addition to the arrests made in Los Angeles—where police said at least 10 people were detained Sunday—San Francisco saw further unrest. Authorities there declared an unlawful assembly and arrested around 60 people after some demonstrators turned violent, allegedly assaulting officers and damaging property.
Protests were sparked by aggressive Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) sweeps reportedly targeting up to 3,000 migrants per day under a new federal directive. Critics, including immigrant rights groups and local leaders, say legal residents and permanent visa holders have also been caught up in the detentions.
Vanessa Cárdenas, head of America's Voice, accused the administration of 'deliberately stoking confrontation' and using immigration enforcement as a political weapon.
Legal questions over deployment
Trump's justification for the National Guard deployment rests on Title 10 of the US Code, which allows federal activation in cases of rebellion or federal threats. But legal experts point out that Title 10 also requires orders to be issued through state governors—something Newsom did not authorise.
So far, US Northern Command has confirmed that 300 Guard members are active at three sites in Los Angeles, with a further 500 Marines on standby at Camp Pendleton. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the Pentagon was prepared to escalate if violence continues.
Mexico condemns US actions
The raids and resulting violence also drew condemnation from Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, who said immigration challenges 'cannot be resolved through force.'
'The phenomenon will not be addressed with raids or violence,' Sheinbaum said. 'It will be by sitting down and working on comprehensive reform.'
Despite growing pressure at home and abroad, President Trump has not invoked the Insurrection Act, a move that would allow him to deploy active-duty military forces. Asked on Sunday whether he was considering that step, Trump replied, 'It depends on whether or not there's an insurrection.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
12 minutes ago
- Express Tribune
US and China hold trade talks in London to ease tensions
London talks follow first public call between Trump and Xi since his return to the White House, held just days earlier. PHOTO: REUTERS Listen to article Top US and Chinese officials were meeting in London on Monday to try and defuse a high-stakes trade dispute that has widened from tariffs to restrictions over rare earths, threatening a global supply chain shock and slower economic growth. On the first of likely two days of talks, officials from the two superpowers were meeting at the ornate Lancaster House to try to get back on track with a preliminary agreement struck last month in Geneva that had briefly lowered the temperature between Washington and Beijing. Since then the US has accused China of slow-walking on its commitments, particularly around rare earths shipments. White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett said on Monday that the US team wanted a handshake from China on rare earths after Donald Trump said Xi Jinping had agreed to resume shipments in a rare call between the two presidents last week. "The purpose of the meeting today is to make sure that they're serious, but to literally get handshakes," Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, told CNBC in an interview. He said the U.S. would expect export controls to be eased and rare earths released in volume immediately afterwards. The talks come at a crucial time for both economies, which are showing signs of strain from Trump's cascade of tariff orders since his return to the White House in January. Customs data showed that China's exports to the US plunged 34.5% year-on-year in May in value terms, the sharpest drop since February 2020, when the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic upended global trade. In the US, business and household confidence has taken a pummelling, while first-quarter gross domestic product contracted due to a record surge in imports as Americans front-loaded purchases to beat anticipated price increases. But for now, the impact on inflation has been muted, and the jobs market has remained fairly resilient, though economists expect cracks to become more apparent over the summer. Attending the talks in London will be US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, and a Chinese contingent helmed by Vice Premier He Lifeng. The inclusion of Lutnick, whose agency oversees export controls for the US, is one indication of how central rare earths have become. China holds a near-monopoly on rare earth magnets, a crucial component in electric vehicle motors. Lutnick did not attend the Geneva talks at which the countries struck a 90-day deal to roll back some of the triple-digit tariffs they had placed on each other. Positive collection The second round of meetings comes four days after Trump and Xi spoke by phone, their first direct interaction since Trump's January 20 inauguration. During the more than one-hour-long call, Xi told Trump to back down from trade measures that roiled the global economy and warned him against threatening steps on Taiwan, according to a Chinese government summary. But Trump said on social media the talks focused primarily on trade led to "a very positive conclusion," setting the stage for Monday's meeting in the British capital. The next day, Trump said Xi had agreed to resume shipments to the US of rare earths minerals and magnets, and Reuters reported that China has granted temporary export licenses to rare-earth suppliers of the top three US automakers. China's decision in April to suspend exports of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets upended the supply chains central to automakers, aerospace manufacturers, semiconductor companies and military contractors around the world. White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told the Fox News program "Sunday Morning Futures" that the U.S. wanted the two sides to build on the progress made in Geneva in the hope they could move towards more comprehensive trade talks. The preliminary deal in Geneva sparked a global relief rally in stock markets, and U.S. indexes that had been in or near bear market levels have recouped the lion's share of their losses. But Ian Bremmer, president of the Eurasia Group, said while a temporary truce was possible, there was little prospect for the bilateral relationship to become constructive given broader decoupling trends and continued US pressure on other countries to take China out of their supply chains. "Everyone around Trump is still hawkish and so a breakthrough US-China trade deal is unlikely, especially in the context of other deals that are further along and prioritized," he said in an analyst note.
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
America's immigration dilemma: Law, accountability, and the crisis within
For decades, America has prided itself as a land of opportunity—a magnet for dreamers, workers, and refugees. But today, under the aggressive implementation of ICE-led deportations, spearheaded by President Donald Trump's renewed enforcement drive, the country finds itself fractured. The issue is no longer just about legality—it has become a battleground of narratives, identity, and accountability. President Trump insists that 'millions and millions' of illegal immigrants—whom he categorizes as violent criminals, traffickers, sex offenders, and pedophiles—have 'invaded' the U.S. According to him, his administration's duty is to remove these threats through mass deportations, often carried out with military-style precision. ICE raids in cities like Los Angeles, where five individuals with criminal pasts were arrested on June 7, are presented as success stories. But a deeper question lurks behind these headlines: if such individuals are indeed dangerous and illegal, how did they get into the country in the first place? As a legal immigrant myself, my family and I embarked on a long and arduous journey. We applied in 2007 for family-sponsored immigration and were not approved until 2024. Seventeen years of background checks, verification of employment, travel history, character assessment, and criminal records—all under the scrutiny of U.S. immigration services. It is a stringent, sometimes grueling, system that leaves little room for error. If followed diligently, it is almost impossible for someone with a dubious past to pass through. This raises troubling questions. How do individuals with criminal records—those labeled as drug dealers, violent offenders, or sex criminals—make it into the U.S. undocumented? What loopholes exist? And more importantly, who allowed it? Beyond bureaucratic lapse, another profound and often overlooked truth must be acknowledged: every wave of immigration has often been triggered by destruction caused by the United States and its allies. The Syrian crisis, spurred by U.S.-led regime change attempts, created millions of refugees—many welcomed into the United States. The U.S. invasion of Iraq unleashed chaos, civil war, and displacement, compelling thousands of Iraqis to seek shelter abroad. Libya, after being bombed into anarchy, witnessed similar refugee outflows. Palestinians displaced by decades of unending Israeli occupation, often with U.S. political and military backing, have also found refuge in America. The collapse of Afghanistan after two decades of NATO occupation led to a mass exodus—especially of Afghans who worked with Western forces. Most arrived with no paperwork or formal identity verification, given the country's primitive recordkeeping systems. Yet, many were fast-tracked into the U.S., bypassing the very scrutiny imposed on legal immigrants from stable nations. This uncomfortable truth demands moral clarity: if undocumented immigrants are subject to the full weight of the law, then those policymakers and officials who created the conditions for their displacement, or allowed their entry without due diligence, must also be held accountable. It is a shared responsibility—one that begins not at the border, but in the war rooms and foreign policy chambers where these crises were ignited. There appears to be no structured inquiry or investigation into the root causes. No commissions, no accountability frameworks to identify the officials, agencies, or politicians who enabled mass illegal entry. Immigration enforcement in the U.S. has historically vacillated depending on who is in power. One administration turns a blind eye, quietly encouraging mass entry. The next tries to reverse it through high-profile crackdowns. But in the absence of institutional accountability, this cyclical dysfunction persists—feeding public anger and polarizing communities. ICE is now being weaponized not just to remove the undocumented, but to reassert political dominance. The use of unmarked vehicles, masked officers, and sudden, forceful detentions—often in front of children and elders—conveys a message of fear. It is not surprising that over 10,000 protesters recently marched through downtown Los Angeles against these raids. Many carried Mexican flags—none carried the American flag. This wasn't just a protest; it was a symptom of deeper social unrest. Critics argue that these ICE actions, while legal under the Supreme Court's allowance of 24-hour deportation notice, are being carried out in a manner that undermines constitutional due process. Rights of asylum seekers, refugees, and even undocumented residents with long-standing ties to communities are brushed aside in the name of executive orders. A nation built by immigrants is now turning its state machinery against them. Supporters of Trump's policy, on the other hand, insist that deporting illegals—especially criminals—is not just constitutional, but necessary. They point to the Clinton-era deportations of over 12 million people, Obama's deportation of 5 million, and Bush's expedited removal protocols. 'This is not new,' they argue. 'It's enforcement overdue.' But many dissenters challenge this logic. They argue that Trump is not fixing immigration—he's weaponizing it. He's framing all undocumented migrants as threats, fueling fear for political gain. His critics claim that this dehumanization is less about justice and more about re-election. Trump's rhetoric plays to a base who feel left behind—using immigrants as scapegoats for economic and social frustrations. This divide is not only ideological—it's generational, racial, and geographic. Many immigrants, including legal ones like myself, find ourselves in a complicated space. On one hand, we support the rule of law. On the other, we reject the vilification of all migrants and the blanket criminalization of entire communities. Let us remember: America is a nation of immigrants. Even Donald Trump is the grandson of Friedrich Trump, a German immigrant who arrived in the U.S. in 1885. The German Chancellor once presented Trump with his grandfather's immigration file during a White House visit—a reminder that no one, not even the president, is far removed from the immigrant experience. The real issue is not race, religion, or ethnicity. The only legitimate distinction should be between legal and illegal entry. But even that must be addressed humanely, within the framework of rights and due process. It cannot become a pretext for racial profiling, family separation, or fear campaigns. The lack of systemic accountability is the root of this chaos. Who failed to enforce border laws? Who allowed the lapse? Was it intentional? Was there bribery? Was it negligence or political strategy? These are the questions no one in Washington wants to answer. The consequences of this negligence go beyond borders. As seen in the Los Angeles protest, foreign governments—like Mexico—may begin to leverage their diaspora as political tools. If unchecked, this tactic could be replicated by other countries, introducing a dangerous element of foreign interference in domestic American affairs. In my observation of reactions on X (formerly Twitter), two dominant narratives have emerged: one, defending ICE's actions and Trump's policies as lawful and overdue; the other, denouncing the excessive force and racial undertones as unconstitutional and inhumane. Some comments suggest this is less about criminals and more about silencing immigrants—legal and illegal alike—through fear and exclusion. What, then, is the way forward? First, no society or country elsewhere in the world may be destroyed, and no country, especially one as powerful as the United States, should ever tolerate illegal immigration. The law must be upheld. But enforcement must be precise, proportional, and humane. Second, there must be rigorous accountability. Politicians, departments, and border enforcement agencies that failed in their duty must face consequences. Only then can the system regain public trust. Third, investment must be made into technology, manpower, and processes that make it virtually impossible for undocumented migrants—especially those with criminal records—to enter undetected. The U.S. has done this before during the post-9/11 anti-terrorism era. It can do it again. This is not just about protecting borders. It's about preserving the spirit of America—a land where laws are enforced, but justice is never blind to humanity. If illegal immigration is the dragon, it must be slain at its roots. Not with brutality, but with policy, accountability, and moral clarity. Let us hope that sanity prevails. Let us hope that the United States rises above political theatrics and embraces a model of immigration that is lawful, just, and worthy of the ideals it claims to defend.
Business Recorder
5 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Chinese and Hong Kong stocks gain ahead of Sino-US trade talks
Hong Kong: Chinese and Hong Kong stocks edged higher on Monday, led by the rare earth and technology sectors, as investors awaited high-level U.S.-China trade negotiations in London. Investors were cautiously positive as the world's two largest economies seek to defuse their trade dispute, with China grappling with slow exports and deflation while the U.S. faces eroding confidence in its assets and economy. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will meet China's Vice Premier He Lifeng in the first meeting under the two countries' economic and trade consultation mechanism. China's blue-chip CSI300 Index closed up 0.3% and the Shanghai Composite Index ended 0.4% higher. Hong Kong's benchmark Hang Seng advanced 1.6% to the highest level since March 21. The offshore yuan struggled for direction and was last traded at 7.1852 per dollar. Monday's meeting follows a rare leader-to-leader call between Chinese leader Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday after tensions flared up again, with both sides accusing the other of violating a deal agreed last month. China, HK stocks close down as US-China call offers no clear progress on trade The two sides agreed a 90-day pause and a sharp reduction in tariffs after talks in Geneva in early May, which left U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods at 30% from May 14 to August 12 and Chinese duties on U.S. imports at 10%. That brought temporary relief from a trade war that could bring $600 billion in two-way trade to a standstill, disrupting supply chains and impacting the global economy. 'We think there could be some favourable outcomes from the meeting as Trump has hinted some positive signs,' analysts at China Securities said in a note, adding that any progress would offer markets some relief. Leading onshore markets higher on Monday, the strategically-important rare earths sector - expected to be a key focus of the talks - advanced 2.4% onshore in its best single-day performance in over a month. Technology shares led Hong Kong markets higher, with the Hang Seng Tech Index rising 2.8% to a one-month high. The subindex has gained over 20% since its April low, entering a technical bull market. Chinese stocks have been struggling for direction since April 2, when Trump announced sweeping 'reciprocal' tariffs that threatened to upend the global trade order. The CSI300 Index onshore has barely budged from the April 2 level, and the Hang Seng has gained around 4% during the period, both lagging the recovery among major global markets.
