Immigrants, supporters march to California Capitol in protest of Trump administration's deportation arrests
A group of North Bay immigrants and their supporters began a march this weekend from Vacaville to the California State Capitol to add their voices to a growing wave of defiance toward the Trump administration's deportation arrests.
"It shows that the movement continues to grow because, despite Trump's failed attempts to try to scare the community, we're out here. We're taking to the streets," said Danny Selaya, an activist from Oakland.
They embarked on the journey on Saturday and by Sunday afternoon, they were walking along the rural roads near UC Davis. In all, about 350 people will have joined the march at various times in the roughly 35-mile trek to Sacramento.
"I really disagree with the perception that we have no power," Selaya said. "But here we have folks from all walks of life telling Trump that we won't take his attacks and we are fighting back."
Though it was planned far in advance, the protest march gained new significance as it came during a weekend of clashes in Los Angeles prompted by a large-scale arrest and deportation operation in the city involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal agencies.
Renee Saucedo is a North Bay immigrant rights activist who said many of the people in the march were taking a gamble by even being there.
"What courage they have to do this long walk, to attend peaceful protests, knowing that they could be picked up at any minute," she said. "I think that this walk and the protests that are happening in L.A. and other parts of the country are really a culmination of many months of endurance and suffering."
In Palo Alto, Congressmember Sam Liccardo added his voice to a group of California lawmakers criticizing the president for sending National Guard troops to Los Angeles without a request from the governor.
"Leave urban policing to the experts. We don't need the military involved," he said at a press conference. "This deployment of National Guard troops is a reckless use of the very good and well-intentioned citizens who serve in our National Guard."
Back at the march, Bernice Espinosa saw what was happening as a crisis of the law. The former public defender said she is disturbed by the reports of ICE is arresting people at courthouses as they show up for their immigration hearings.
"This makes no sense. We ask for us to be a country of law and order, and yet when we follow the laws and do all the things that are supposed to be done, there is no due process," Espinoza said. "As an attorney, I swore to defend the Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic. And that includes the president."
When the marchers reach the state capitol on Monday, they will be speaking to a largely sympathetic audience. But they will be adding their voices to a movement that they hope will reach a tipping point. But it could be a long journey to get there.
"So, I think you're going to have a lot more protests," Saucedo said. "I think people are going to stand up more and more and say, this is not right."
President Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric helped him increase his vote across California when he won re-election last year, even though the Democrats still won the state. But opinion polls also show continuing high levels of support for immigrants in California as well as opposition to his administration's efforts to increase deportations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
34 minutes ago
- CNN
Newsom and California confront Trump with a potential blueprint for Democrats
Democratic politicians have spent the last few months talking about standing up to President Donald Trump in his second term. California Gov. Gavin Newsom is among the first faced with figuring out what standing up actually looks like. Allies and opponents agree how Newsom handles the protests – including Trump's calling in the National Guard and sending in active-duty Marines over the governor's objections – will reverberate far beyond California, and long after this week. That's how Newsom is approaching what has become a fight on the streets and in the courts, only a few days after he was responding to a Trump administration effort to identify federal grants going to the state that can be canceled. Other Democratic governors have been calling Newsom, checking in, ticking through scenarios in their minds of how what's happened in California could play out at home for them, according to multiple people briefed on the conversations. Every Democratic governor signed onto a statement over the weekend calling Trump's call-up of the National Guard an 'alarming abuse of power,' but they have been treading carefully since then, their eyes on both the politics of potentially triggering Trump and on the legal concerns of how their words might be used in lawsuits they might have to bring. Newsom, people familiar with his thinking say, wants California to hold the line after some universities and law firms facing White House pressure reached concession deals with the administration. 'What Donald Trump wants most is your fealty. Your silence. To be complicit in this moment,' Newsom said in remarks released Tuesday evening. 'Do not give into him.' 'If some of us can be snatched off the streets without a warrant – based only on suspicion or skin color – then none of us are safe. Authoritarian regimes begin by targeting people who are least able to defend themselves. But they do not stop there,' Newsom said, reiterating accusations that Trump officials instigated and inflamed what started as peaceful protests, though there have been skirmishes and occasional violence that Newsom and others have condemned. 'This is about all of us. This is about you,' he said. 'California may be first – but it clearly won't end here. Other states are next. Democracy is next.' Prev Next As obvious as Newsom's presidential ambitions are, several top Democrats say this is much more America over the next few months than any talk of the 2028 presidential primary. Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, another potential 2028 candidate, has become one of the most outspoken Democrats calling attention to what he says is Trump's direct threat to democracy in his second term. Trump 'is clearly trying to scare his opposition into silence, and that is definitely one of the ways that democracies die: when people fear that they are going to face physical harm if they turn out for protests, it often causes people to stay home. That is a tried and true path for democracies to be converted into autocracies. Elections still happen, but the opposition can never amount to any kind of numbers because people fear they'll get the shit kicked out of them if they show up,' Murphy told CNN. New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, who acknowledged his record-breaking 25-hour Senate speech came during a different phase both for Trump and for Democrats' response, saw the faceoff the same way. 'With this president's clear authoritarian bent, lack of respect for separation of powers and violations of the law, we're in dangerous territory with still three-plus years to go. That's what California has me concerned about,' Booker said. For months, Newsom angered many Democrats by inviting Trump-friendly figures onto his podcast or taking shots at his own party for going too far on the issue of transgender athletes playing in women's sports. He tried to connect with Trump in an effort to get more federal money to rebuild after the devastation of the Los Angeles wildfires at the beginning of the year and suggested he'd work with Trump on tariffs aimed at bucking up the film industry that has been fleeing California, even as other leading Democrats called for more intense pushback, like when Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker said in a fiery speech in New Hampshire in April that, 'never before in my life have I called for mass protests, for mobilization, for disruption. But I am now.' But the events of the last few days have rekindled the long-simmering rivalry between Trump and Newsom. Newsom dared the Trump administration in one television interview to arrest him rather than targeting immigrant children. Trump then suggested in response to a reporter's question that Newsom should be arrested. The only rationale Trump has offered for making the threat of arresting a sitting governor is because 'his primary crime is running for governor, because he's done such a bad job.' 'I like the fact that when one of Trump's henchmen threatened Newsom with arrest, he said, 'Well, come and get me, here I am.' We're not going to be afraid of Donald Trump because we have the rule of law on our side. We're standing up for the Constitution. The states are not the pawns of the federal government. The states have an independent constitutional and political existence,' said Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin, who taught constitutional law before being elected to the House. 'Other governors should stand up for the rule of law and stand up for the rights of their people.' With some looters also taking to the streets while Trump and his deputy chief of staff refer to an 'insurrection,' the situation hasn't gone over well with every Democrat, including those who worry about playing into Trump's hands on a signature issue. Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman is among members of the party who have called for a more forceful condemnation of violent protesters. Newsom himself has said that those engaged in violence or attacking police officers would be prosecuted and noted that law enforcement is already reviewing videos of the events to track down more perpetrators. Even before Trump already threatened 'very heavy force' if any protesters disrupt the massive military parade he is hosting this Saturday in Washington on his 79th birthday, leaders in other centers of immigrants were expressing concern about what happens if federal agents target their communities. 'I would hope that New Yorkers will speak up and do whatever they believe is their constitutional right in a non-violent way, and if Trump tried to tamp it up, I think the people would see it for what it is,' said New York Rep. Greg Meeks. 'I would say to New Yorkers and others, 'We know what he's trying to do.'' A few Republicans have joined Democrats in expressing concern, including swing district California GOP Rep. David Valadao, who tweeted Tuesday that he is 'concerned about ongoing ICE operations through CA.' But for now, most Republican leaders have either been expressing support for Trump or staying quiet about the situation. House Speaker Mike Johnson said he couldn't speak to the legal argument about arresting Newsom, but 'he ought to be tarred and feathered.' While some Democratic strategists, including some who have kicked in with advice to Newsom in recent days, have urged a more defensive position that echoes Trump's hardline approach to immigration so that they don't give the president a fight he clearly wants, others are glad to see Newsom taking a more forceful lead on his own terms. 'Democrats need to recognize that voters are appalled by Trump's overreach on immigration – not just Democratic voters, but independent voters, libertarian leaning voters don't believe in arresting random peaceful people and separating families,' said Texas Rep. Greg Casar, the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. 'So we shouldn't be scared of going toe-to-toe with Trump on his overreach and abuse of people's rights.'
CNN
34 minutes ago
- CNN
US citizens and legal immigrants would be swept up in GOP drive to keep ‘illegal aliens' from getting government benefits
House Republicans are touting that their sweeping tax and spending cuts package would kick many 'illegal immigrants' off federal assistance, fulfilling one of President Donald Trump's top priorities. House Speaker Mike Johnson has repeatedly emphasized that the bill would stop 1.4 million 'illegal aliens' from accessing Medicaid. The tax portion of the package has a section on 'removing taxpayer benefits from illegal immigrants.' And the House Agriculture Committee crafted a provision to restrict food stamp eligibility for 'illegal aliens.' However, undocumented immigrants in the US won't be as heavily affected by the legislation since they already can't access nearly all federal government assistance programs, experts say. Those more in danger of losing some benefits are millions of legal immigrants, as well as children who are citizens but whose parents may be undocumented or have various legal statuses. 'It's part of a campaign of misinformation,' said Tanya Broder, senior counsel of health and economic justice at the National Immigration Law Center. 'This bill would deny eligibility to lawfully residing immigrants who have authorization to live and work in the US and who pay taxes that support the services that we all depend on.' The legislation, which is now in the Senate, where it may be changed, would greatly limit the categories of legal immigrants who can qualify for a variety of federal benefits, including the child tax credit, food stamps, Affordable Care Act subsidies and Medicare. It also takes aim at states that provide Medicaid-like coverage to undocumented immigrants with their own funds. Currently, immigrants' eligibility for federal benefits depends on their status, of which there are many categories. Among those authorized to be in the US, certain groups can qualify right away, others must wait several years. Some immigrant children and pregnant women can access Medicaid sooner if states opt to allow them. But immigrants with other legal statuses do not qualify for any public assistance. (All of them must also meet the other eligibility criteria for the benefit programs, including income limits.) Undocumented immigrants generally only qualify for what's known as Emergency Medicaid, which reimburses hospitals for the emergency care they are required to provide. These patients would have to be eligible for Medicaid were it not for their immigration status. Separately, some states provide health coverage to certain undocumented immigrants, most commonly children, using only state funds. At least one advocate for tighter controls on immigration thinks the House GOP bill misses the mark. Taking away benefits from immigrants already in the US does not address the underlying problem of illegal immigration, said Steven Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies. 'This bill nibbles around the edges,' said Camarota. 'Will it have that much of an effect? That's the question.' The proposed changes could have devastating consequences for vulnerable immigrant communities, particularly those who rely on public benefits to survive, said Beatriz Ortiz, a senior staff attorney at the International Rescue Committee. Prior to joining IRC, Ortiz worked at Ayuda, where she represented immigrants as a staff attorney. 'If you don't give people the possibility … the tools, they won't have a dignified life,' Ortiz said. One of the most consequential changes involves the child tax credit, which House Republicans want to temporarily boost to $2,500 per child, from $2,000. Under the bill, a child's parents would have to have Social Security numbers, in addition to the child. Currently, families can receive the credit if the parents file their tax returns with an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number, or ITIN, which is used by some legal and undocumented immigrants — as long as the child has a Social Security number. This provision could leave about 2 million children ineligible for the child tax credit, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, which analyzed the bill. The Center for Migration Studies estimates the number is closer to 4.5 million children who are US citizens or lawful permanent residents, otherwise known as green card holders. 'It singles out and disadvantages US citizen children because of their parents' immigration status,' said Shelby Gonzales, vice president for immigration policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, noting that research shows the credit has a positive impact on children's health, educational attainment and, eventually, earnings. 'That's really alarming.' Similarly, the 'Trump accounts' that the legislation would create would require both parents to have Social Security numbers to be eligible to claim the $1,000 federal contribution for their US-born citizen babies. Fewer immigrants would be eligible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the formal name for food stamps, if the House bill becomes law. Refugees, people approved for asylum, domestic violence victims and survivors of labor or sex trafficking would no longer qualify. Only citizens, green card holders, certain Cuban parolees and migrants from certain Pacific Ocean island nations would be able to receive food stamps. Between 120,000 and 250,000 people would lose access to this food assistance over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Families with citizen children would also feel the pinch – even if the kids would continue to qualify, the household would receive less assistance each month if the parents are no longer eligible. Gloria, who fled gang violence in El Salvador in 2010 hoping for safety in the US, worries that she could lose a portion of the food stamps that she and her five children, who are citizens, depend on. The family receives a total of $900 a month in benefits. 'I'm about to have a baby; I'm a single mom. If this president decided to take it away, I would be very affected. I live off the SNAP benefits,' said Gloria, who lives in Washington DC and has a T-visa, a protection for trafficking survivors. Gloria, who asked that CNN not use her full name for fear of retribution, said she was trafficked by her own mother and aunt in Maryland — forced to work at a carpet factory, sleep on the floor and hand over all her wages under threats of deportation from her own family until she finally escaped. Gloria recently earned her GED, is studying to become a medical assistant and is also learning English. Still, she says she needs continued support to achieve her goals and become fully self-sufficient. One asylum recipient from Egypt, who asked to be identified only as H.E. so as not to jeopardize his immigration status, told CNN that he depends on food stamps. 'If I lose those benefits, it's going to be bad,' said H.E., who lives in a shelter in Virginia, is unemployed and has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. The package would also block many legal immigrants from receiving Affordable Care Act premium subsidies and Medicare coverage, making it harder for them to obtain health coverage from both the government and private insurers. Under the bill, asylees, refugees, temporary protected status holders and victims of domestic violence or sex trafficking, among others, would no longer be eligible for Obamacare subsidies or Medicare, even if they worked in the US for the 10-plus years it takes for senior citizens to qualify for the latter program. One million more people would be uninsured in 2034 if these immigrants lost access to the Affordable Care Act subsidies, according to CBO estimates. As for Medicaid, which House Republicans have targeted for steep spending cuts, the bill would not alter immigrants' eligibility for the federal program. However, it would levy steep penalties on states that have opted to expand coverage that's similar to Medicaid to a broader array of non-citizens, including undocumented immigrants, using their own funds. Some 14 states plus the District of Columbia cover at least some undocumented residents through these initiatives. The House bill would cut the share of federal matching funds these states receive for covering low-income adults under Medicaid expansion to 80%, from 90%, which would double states' costs. How states would react would likely vary, but experts fear that many would have to limit or end their programs covering undocumented residents. The CBO expects this provision would result in 1.4 million more people being uninsured in 2034 – the figure that Johnson often cites, even though these folks are not enrolled in the federal Medicaid program. The penalty could also hit the states that cover immigrant children and pregnant women with certain legal statuses – including those with temporary protected status and student visas – through a separate state Children's Health Insurance Program. Some 21 states have opted to do so for children and six for pregnant women. But since the penalty only applies to states that have expanded Medicaid, Pennsylvania and West Virginia would be hit, for instance, but not Florida or Texas, said Leonardo Cuello, research professor for the Center for Children and Families at Georgetown University. Most states would not be able to afford to continue these optional programs. 'The states are going to have a huge incentive to drop their coverage because the alternative is a massive increase in spending,' he said.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Which other US cities have joined LA's protests over immigration raids?
Protests have spread across America following days of demonstrations in Los Angeles against immigration raids by the federal government. Thousands of troops and hundreds of marines have been deployed to LA by US President Donald Trump to quell the demos, causing a row with state politicians. Days of unrest were sparked after federal immigration officers arrested large groups of unauthorised immigrants in areas with large Latino populations. Rallies have since taken place from coast to coast, with more planned over the coming days. LA police make 'mass arrests' as Trump vows to 'liberate' city Everything we know about the demonstrations Voters divided on Trump's LA protest crackdown Trump's deportation drive is perfect storm in city of immigrants Texas Governor Greg Abbott ordered the state's National Guard to deploy to San Antonio on Tuesday, ahead of planned demonstrations. He wrote on X: "Peaceful protest is legal. Harming a person or property is illegal & will lead to arrest." In Austin, hundreds of protesters gathered on Monday between the state capitol building and a federal building that houses an office for staff of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). State and local police used pepper spray and tear gas to disperse the crowd, while bottles, rocks and other objects were thrown towards officers. Demonstrators also gathered in Dallas on Monday, where at least one arrest was made. Thousands of protestors gathered in lower Manhattan on Tuesday. The New York City Police Department (NYPD) told the BBC that "multiple" arrests had been made at the largely peaceful protests. Mayor Eric Adams said protests like those in LA were "unacceptable and will not be tolerated if attempted in our city". LA is not the only Californian city that has been demonstrating. Thousands of people have protested in San Francisco - and more than 150 were arrested after a demonstration near another ICE office turned violent on Sunday. Buildings and vehicles were damaged, according to local police, while two officers were injured in the disorder. And on Tuesday, some 200 protesters gathered outside the San Francisco Immigration Court after activists said several arrests were made there. At least 15 people were arrested after around 150 protestors gathered in Philadelphia on Tuesday, according to the BBC's US partner CBS News. Local police said the crowd disrupted traffic and "endangered public safety". Several officers used force when making arrests, they added, saying this would be reviewed. Fireworks were thrown towards police and tear gas used to disperse protestors in Atlanta on Monday, according to local media, as hundreds gathered along the city's Buford Highway on Tuesday. At least six people were arrested. Thousands gathered near an immigration court in the city before marching through the city's downtown on Tuesday evening. Local media reported the crowd was largely peaceful. Several unions gathered in the US capital on Monday, marching past the Department of Justice (DoJ) building. They rallied against the detainment of union leader David Huerta during the raids in LA on Friday. He was released from federal custody later on Monday.
