NV Democratic officials condemn Trump's tactics in Los Angeles
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA - JUNE 11: Protesters march downtown as protests against ICE immigration raids continue in the city on June 11, 2025 in Los Angeles, California. Tensions in the city remain high with daily protests after the Trump administration called in the National Guard and the Marines against the wishes of Gov. Gavin Newsom and city leaders. (Photo by)
Donald Trump's decision to deploy the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles is 'unlawful, unconstitutional, and undemocratic,' Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford and 17 other Democratic state attorneys general said in a statement Wednesday.
Democratic U.S. Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen, as well as Democratic Reps. Dina Titus and Steven Horsford are also condemning Trump's actions that have escalated conflict in Los Angeles.
Ford criticized Trump's decision to federalize and deploy California's National Guard without the consent of California state leaders, including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, saying the action would 'sow chaos, inflame tensions and put people's lives at risk — including those of our law enforcement officers.'
'The federal administration should be working with local leaders to keep everyone safe, not mobilizing the military against the American people,' Ford said in a statement.
Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over the activation of the state's National Guard without the coordination of state leadership, asking a court to declare the order unlawful.
'As the chief law enforcement officers of our states, we are proud to protect our communities and oppose violence in any form. We support Attorney General Bonta in his challenge to the Trump administration's illegal conduct,' Ford continued.
The statement was also joined by the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Arizona, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon and Vermont.
Protests began in downtown Los Angeles on Friday, June 6 after Immigration Customs Enforcement officers carried out raids in three locations across the city, where dozens of people were taken into custody.
That evening the Los Angeles Police Department declared the protests an unlawful assembly, ordering demonstrators to leave the area. The department followed by breaking up protests using tear gas and rubber bullets, but protests continued throughout the weekend with reports of vandalism and burning self-driving cars.
Trump responded on June 7 by deploying 2,000 California National Guard members to Los Angeles. After Newsom objected to Trump sending in the National Guard without his consent, Trump ordered an additional 700 Marines into the city.
In a statement, Rosen echoed Ford's comments on the illegality of federalizing the National Guard as protest enforcement, calling it an 'unnecessary escalation.'
'Calling up the National Guard without the consent of state officials is unprecedented in recent history, and sending active-duty military troops to go after Americans on U.S. soil is unconscionable and illegal,' Rosen said.
The last time a president federalized the National Guard over the objection of a state governor was in 1967 when former President Lyndon B. Johnson deployed the National Guard during the Civil Rights Movement's campaign in Alabama.
'This unnecessary escalation is just an attempt by the Administration to distract from Congressional Republicans' extreme tax spending bill that'll cut Medicaid and SNAP to give billionaires more tax giveaways,' Rosen said.
In a post on X, Cortez Masto said she supports 'people's right to make their voices heard' through 'peaceful protests without violence or harming law enforcement.'
'The Trump administration should be working with local authorities to de-escalate the situation in Los Angeles, not inflaming it by sending in the National Guard without a request from state or local officials,' Cortez Masto continued.
Over the weekend, Horsford also condemned the arrest of David Huerta, the 58-year-old president of Service Employees International Union California. Huerta was arrested Friday while protesting outside a business during an immigration enforcement operation. Huerta was injured during the arrest and was treated at a local hospital before being transported to the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown L.A.
Huerta 'was illegally arrested and injured by ICE in CA. He remains in custody today. Illegal ICE raids are a danger to every community. We must speak out against actions like these,' Horsford wrote on X.
In response to the deployment of the National Guard, Titus wrote on X Monday that Trump's 'immigration policies are sowing chaos and division in our communities throughout the country. Federalizing the National Guard, mobilizing the Marines, and calling for the arrest of a Governor will escalate an already tense situation.'
On Tuesday Nevada State Democratic Party Chair Daniele Monroe-Moreno released a statement calling the decision to deploy California's National Guard 'unlawful,' adding that state and local leaders' authority should 'not be subverted by the federal government' through 'federal interference and intimidation.'
Monroe-Moreno also called on protests to 'remain peaceful' and condemned 'violence of any kind.'
'Donald Trump's move to federalize California's National Guard and deploy thousands of its members without consulting with the state's governor is a gross and unlawful abuse of power. This unnecessary move is a distraction from his price-raising agenda that eliminates the Department of Education, cuts Medicaid and SNAP benefits, and slashes affordable housing programs — all to give tax cuts to billionaires,' she said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans, some Democrats and even ex-Gov. Rod Blagojevich weigh in on ex-Speaker Michael Madigan's sentence
In what's become somewhat customary once an Illinois political titan falls, leaders throughout the state responded with condemnation and called for reforms upon hearing Friday that ex-Speaker Michael Madigan was sentenced to seven and a half years in federal prison and fined $2.5 million on federal corruption charges. House Republican leader Tony McCombie of Savanna and Senate Republican leader John Curran of Downers Grove called for bipartisan ethics reforms in the wake of the sentencing, with Curran specifically requesting committee hearings and votes on potential changes — something that didn't happen this session. Madigan's sentencing was 'a stark and shameful reminder of the corruption that has plagued Illinois government for far too long,' McCombie said in a statement. 'Justice was served — but the damage to public trust runs deep.' But Illinois' last prominent statewide politician who went to federal prison, former Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich, held back on the chance to take a swipe at a bitter nemesis when Madigan was sentenced. Though the two were Democrats, they feuded for nearly all six years Blagojevich was in office between 2003 and 2009. 'When that guy, Madigan, was on the top of the mountain, they were all kissing his ass,' Blagojevich said. 'Now they're going to be stomping all over his grave. And it's really, it's really sort of an unappealing side of human nature.' Blagojevich said Madigan's conviction underscores the systemic problems in politics and government in the state Capitol. 'Is the system in Springfield corrupt, in many ways, absolutely,' Blagojevich said in an interview with the Tribune while insisting he didn't break the law. 'It's a system, I've been saying this from the beginning, it all too often works for itself on the backs of the people.' Blagojevich — whose 14-year federal prison sentence for corruption was commuted by President Donald Trump, who ultimately also pardoned Blagojevich — didn't want to celebrate Madigan's prison sentence despite the two's often-tense relationship. 'I just don't think it's right for me to kick a man when he's down,' Blagojevich said. 'What's happening now to him, I know what it's like. And it's really easy for these politicians to get on their high horses and start kicking someone, stomping on someone.' Senate President Don Harmon, a Democrat from Oak Park who is facing a potential fine of nearly $10 million from the Illinois State Board of Elections for improper political fundraising, said Friday's sentence represented 'a solemn reminder' that the duty of public office holders is to serve 'and that there is accountability for those who do not.'
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump signs resolutions killing California's zero-emissions rules
This story was originally published on Trucking Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Trucking Dive newsletter. President Donald Trump moved to sever California's EPA waivers by signing a series of joint resolutions Thursday, rolling back the Golden State's strict truck and auto emissions policies. The president's signing of joint resolutions under the Congressional Review Act reverses the Biden administration's approval of California's Advanced Clean Trucks rule. That earlier rule called for requiring 75% of Class 8 trucks sold in the state to be zero-emissions vehicles by 2035. Another resolution also prevents the state's low-nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions rule for heavy-duty trucks from being implemented, per a statement by the president. The NOx rule intended to regulate emissions from manufacturers by cutting heavy-duty NOx emissions by 90% and overhaul engine testing procedures. The Trump administration has described his predecessor's environmental policies as overreach and unjustified mandates. Trump said the congressional moves he signed further restrict California from implementing a similar policy in the future. "Under the Congressional Review Act, the EPA cannot approve any future waivers that are 'substantially the same' as those disapproved in the joint resolutions," Trump said in a statement. "Accordingly, the joint resolutions prohibit the EPA from approving future waivers for California that would impose California's policy goals across the entire country and violate fundamental constitutional principles of federalism, ending the electric vehicle mandate for good," the statement said. In response, California Gov. Gavin Newsom declared the federal measures illegal and moved to sue the federal government, seeking to pursue the state's zero-emission vehicle policy. Newsom signed an executive order on Thursday for the state to continue regulation requiring that 100% of sales of new vehicles be zero emission by 2035 for cars, pickup trucks and drayage trucks and by 2045 for medium- and heavy-duty trucks. Trucking leaders applauded Trump for the measures. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association said the news was a big win for both men and women behind the wheel. 'Our 150,000 small-business members have been saying it all along—electric trucks just aren't a realistic option right now. They're too expensive, the charging infrastructure isn't there,' OOIDA President Todd Spencer said in an emailed press release to Trucking Dive. Industry advocates, including the American Trucking Associations and the Washington Trucking Associations, also warned that electric truck technology and charging infrastructure were not caught up to accommodate California's ambitious EV policies. 'We've done our part to reduce carbon emissions while keeping America's economy moving,' ATA President and CEO Chris Spear said in a press release. 'But what we need is federal leadership to set realistic and achievable national emissions standards. And today brings us one step closer toward that goal,' he added. Werner Enterprises truck driver Gina Jones shared a similar sentiment, speaking as part of the signing ceremony at the White House. 'We cannot allow one state's regulations to disrupt our entire nation's supply chain,' Jones said. 'Allowing California to do so would have [negatively] impacted the hundreds of thousands of truck drivers who deliver critical goods across the country each and every day.' Recommended Reading Congress revokes Advanced Clean Trucks waiver, creating ambiguity for refuse fleets Inicia sesión para acceder a tu portafolio
36 minutes ago
Trump clears path for Nippon Steel investment in US Steel, so long as it fits the government's terms
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump on Friday signed an executive order paving the way for a Nippon Steel investment in U.S. Steel, so long as the Japanese company complies with a 'national security agreement' submitted by the federal government. Trump's order didn't detail the terms of the national security agreement. But the iconic American steelmaker and Nippon Steel said in a joint statement that the agreement stipulates that approximately $11 billion in new investments will be made by 2028 and includes giving the U.S. government a ' golden share" — essentially veto power to ensure the country's national security interests are protected against cutbacks in steel production. 'We thank President Trump and his Administration for their bold leadership and strong support for our historic partnership," the two companies said. "This partnership will bring a massive investment that will support our communities and families for generations to come. We look forward to putting our commitments into action to make American steelmaking and manufacturing great again.' The companies have completed a U.S. Department of Justice review and received all necessary regulatory approvals, the statement said. 'The partnership is expected to be finalized promptly,' the statement said. U.S. Steel rose $2.66, or 5%, to $54.85 in afterhours trading Friday. Nippon Steel's original bid to buy the Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel in late 2023 had been valued at $55 per share. The companies offered few details on how the golden share would work, what other provisions are in the national security agreement and how specifically the $11 billion would be spent. White House spokesman Kush Desai said the order 'ensures U.S. Steel will remain in the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and be safeguarded as a critical element of America's national and economic security.' James Brower, a Morrison Foerster lawyer who represents clients in national security-related matters, said such agreements with the government typically are not disclosed to the public, particularly by the government. They can become public, but it's almost always disclosed by a party in the transaction, such as a company — like U.S. Steel — that is publicly held, Brower said. The mechanics of how a golden share would work will depend on the national security agreement, but in such agreements it isn't unusual to give the government approval rights over specific activities, Brower said. U.S. Steel made no filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Friday. Nippon Steel originally offered nearly $15 billion to purchase U.S. Steel in an acquisition that had been delayed on national security concerns starting during Joe Biden's presidency. As it sought to win over American officials, Nippon Steel gradually increased the amount of money it was pledging to invest into U.S. Steel. American officials now value the transaction at $28 billion, including the purchase bid and a new electric arc furnace — a more modern steel mill that melts down scrap — that they say Nippon Steel will build in the U.S. after 2028. Nippon Steel had pledged to maintain U.S. Steel's headquarters in Pittsburgh, put U.S. Steel under a board with a majority of American citizens and keep plants operating. It also said it would protect the interests of U.S. Steel in trade matters and it wouldn't import steel slabs that would compete with U.S. Steel's blast furnaces in Pennsylvania and Indiana. Trump opposed the purchase while campaigning for the White House, and using his authority Biden blocked the transaction on his way out of the White House. But Trump expressed openness to working out an arrangement once he returned to the White House in January. Trump said Thursday that he would as president have 'total control' of what U.S. Steel did as part of the investment. Trump said then that the deal would preserve '51% ownership by Americans,' although Nippon Steel has never backed off its stated intention of buying and controlling U.S. Steel as a wholly owned subsidiary. 'We have a golden share, which I control,' Trump said. Trump added that he was 'a little concerned' about what presidents other than him would do with their golden share, 'but that gives you total control.' The proposed merger had been under review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, during the Trump and Biden administrations. The order signed Friday by Trump said the CFIUS review provided 'credible evidence' that Nippon Steel 'might take action that threatens to impair the national security of the United States,' but such risks might be 'adequately mitigated' by approving the proposed national security agreement. The order doesn't detail the perceived national security risk and only provides a timeline for the national security agreement. The White House declined to provide details on the terms of the agreement. The order said the draft agreement was submitted to U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel on Friday. The two companies must successfully execute the agreement as decided by the Treasury Department and other federal agencies that are part CFIUS by the closing date of the transaction.
