Trump-ordered National Guard troops arrive in LA amid immigration raid protests
About 300 National Guard troops have arrived in Los Angeles on orders from President Donald Trump, staging outside a federal complex that remained largely quiet and without major protests following two days of clashes with immigration authorities.
The deployment marked the first time in six decades that a state's national guard was activated without a request from its governor, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.
On Sunday morning local time, some of the troops were stationed outside the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown LA, dressed in tactical gear and holding long guns in front of armoured vehicles.
Footage showed at least a half dozen military-style vehicles and riot shields at the building on Sunday, with federal law enforcement firing gas canisters to disperse demonstrators protesting against the ICE crackdown.
A small number of protesters gathered at the scene, along with Republican Maxine Waters, a Democrat, who demanded entry to the facility.
The arrival of the National Guard followed two days of protests that began on Friday in downtown LA before spreading on Saturday to Paramount, a heavily Latino area south-east of the city, and neighbouring Compton.
As federal agents set up a staging area on Saturday near a Home Depot in Paramount, demonstrators sought to block Border Patrol vehicles, with some hurling rocks and chunks of cement.
In response, agents in riot gear unleashed tear gas, flash-bang explosives and pepper balls.
Tensions were high after a series of sweeps by immigration authorities the previous day, as the week-long tally of immigrant arrests in the city climbed past 100.
A prominent union leader was arrested while protesting and accused of impeding law enforcement.
The deployment of the National Guard came over the objections of California Governor Gavin Newsom, who accused Mr Trump of a "complete overreaction" designed to create a spectacle of force.
In a directive on Saturday, Mr Trump invoked a legal provision allowing him to deploy federal service members when there is "a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States".
Mr Newsom called Mr Trump on Friday night and they spoke for about 40 minutes, according to the governor's office.
It was not clear whether they spoke on Saturday or Sunday.
There was some confusion surrounding the exact timing of the guard's arrival. Shortly before midnight local time, Mr Trump congratulated the National Guard on a "job well done".
But less than an hour later, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said troops had yet to arrive in the city.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said on Sunday that the purpose of the deployment was to "provide security for operations and to make sure that there are peaceful protests".
The troops included members of the 79th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, according to a social media post from the Department of Defense.
In a signal of the administration's aggressive approach, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also threatened to deploy active-duty Marines "if violence continues" in the region.
Republicans and Democrats traded barbs on Sunday in the wake of the president's National Guard deployment.
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said the order by Mr Trump reflected "a president moving this country rapidly into authoritarianism" and "usurping the powers of the United States Congress".
House Speaker Mike Johnson, a staunch Trump ally, endorsed the president's move, doubling down on Republicans' criticisms of California Democrats.
"Gavin Newsom has shown an inability or an unwillingness to do what is necessary, so the president stepped in," Mr Johnson said.
Democratic senator Cory Booker condemned Mr Trump for deploying troops without California's approval, warning it would only escalate tensions.
On NBC's Meet the Press he accused Mr Trump of hypocrisy, and noted the president's inaction on January 6, 2021 when thousands of his supporters raided the US Capitol and his subsequent pardons for those arrested.
The protests against the raids have become the latest focal point in a national debate over immigration, protest rights, and the use of federal force in domestic affairs.
It also has fuelled discussion on the boundaries of presidential power and the public's right to dissent.
AP/Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
an hour ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Australians must not follow Trump's road to ruin
It would appear as through Parnell McGuinness (' JD Vance chastised Europeans on free speech. He wasn't wrong ', June 8) and similar-minded conservative commentators such as Sky News After Dark, are continuing on their ideologically driven warpaths oblivious to the voice of the Australian people as expressed in the May 3 election. While these media darlings of the right still want to rant and rave and feed each other's egos with negativity, doom and gloom, the great mass of Australians are getting on with life, comfortable with their government which is safe, stable, secure and focused on traditional Australian positive values of a fair go, kindness and friendliness. To become relevant again and play a meaningful role in modern Australia, the right-wing media needs to jettison these antagonistic Trump-like approaches which were clearly rejected by the Australian people. Warren Marks, Richmond (Tas) Parnell Palme McGuinness warns against the suppression of ideas, quoting the US vice president's controversial advice to the Munich Security Conference in February that 'governments must listen to and respect their citizens'. However, she, like JD Vance, can't resist cherry-picking just which ideas and citizen groups are worthy of respect. She uses the case of the phrase 'identified as' being currently questioned and 'no longer [deemed] acceptable' by some activists, as an example of 'groups trying to control public conversation'. But is this really a 'kind of slippery censorship', or just the progression of an idea so it more accurately conveys the lived experience of a group? Wasn't JD Vance's speech realistically more of an attempt to control? It's a shame Palme McGuinness sabotages her own argument, adopts the culture war cover, and portrays progressive ideas as threats. Everyone counts, Parnell. Kerrie Wehbe, Blacktown EVs not for me After 60 years of driving, I recently explored the hybrid option (' The sweet spot: How to get the most out of your super and the pension', June 8). I currently drive a diesel SUV, and being a self-funded retiree, I receive no government pension. I spend about $100 per fortnight on fuel. The hybrid currently comes with no spare wheel and no tow-bar, which I need to tow my boat. The changeover figure is $12,000 in the dealer's favour. The cost of a one-off tow-bar is an extra $2000, and a spare wheel costs a couple of hundred more. That equates to about six years' driving if I continue to use diesel. There is no government incentive for me to change. Free rego for all EV-driving retirees might sway me. I think I will stay with my diesel as I am not that green. David Sayers, Gwandalan Undeserved reward This just brings discredit to the whole honours system (' Politicians, scientists and costume designer feature in King's awards ', June 8). The highest honours go to those who have already achieved a higher role in society, often just for doing what that job requires. Isn't achieving that position (and the salary that goes with it) reward enough? Meanwhile, those who make a real sacrifice and give true service to others might receive a lower honour (when nominated), if any at all. In the case of the honour given to Scott Morrison, one hopes that it is primarily because most ex-PMs have historically received a similar award. Otherwise, it wouldn't seem to be merited. The citation says it's for 'his leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic and his key role in the AUKUS nuclear submarine deal'. Doesn't that come with the job of being PM? His role in the pandemic overlooks the refusal to require those already wealthy to pay back JobKeeper payments for which they were ultimately found to be ineligible, the 'stroll-out' of vaccines, and the needless antagonism of China over the pandemic's origins (which damaged Australia's trade). And the value of the AUKUS deal remains questionable. And then there are the multiple ministries, robo-debt, claims to not hold a hose, and statements that women protesters were lucky not to be shot. I predict that this will prompt many other letters to the editor.
News.com.au
2 hours ago
- News.com.au
Trump AUKUS review: Expert urges Australian defence companies not to get ahead of themselves
Defence industry Specialist Brent Clark says it is not unusual for governments to do reviews of defence partnerships. This comes amid US President Donald Trump's upcoming review of the AUKUS security partnership. 'Quite clearly, Australian companies would be concerned about the review; however, I think it is important to not let ourselves get ahead of where we are right now,' Mr Clark told Sky News host Ed Boyd. 'It is not an unusual event for governments to do reviews. 'I would think that the Trump administration would be remiss if they actually weren't doing the review into AUKUS.'
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Trump desperately wants to play ‘peacemaker'. This is the time to prove he can
Witkoff had sought unsuccessfully to persuade Netanyahu to remain patient while United States-Iran negotiations proceeded. Those talks have been deadlocked. Some Trump allies privately acknowledge that his diplomatic efforts were faltering even before Israel's attack. His second term in office started with what seemed like a foreign policy win. Shortly before Trump's inauguration, Witkoff worked with aides to then-president Joe Biden to secure a long-sought ceasefire in Gaza between Israel and Hamas militants. But that accord fell apart within weeks. The US has also made little discernible progress towards a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, whose conflict Trump vowed to end before even taking office. And his administration has taken no visible steps towards expanding the Abraham Accords, a landmark pact brokered in Trump's first term to forge diplomatic ties between Israel and several Arab neighbours. Loading 'Spiral of escalation' As Trump has struggled to seal peace accords, foreign policy divisions have opened inside his own administration. Dozens of officials, from the National Security Council to the Pentagon and the State Department, have been jettisoned amid the infighting. Even before Israel's attack, several administration officials had begun to privately question if Witkoff, who lacks diplomatic experience but has emerged as Trump's top negotiator, had overstayed his welcome. As Israel's attacks unfolded, some prominent Democrats expressed frustration that Trump had scrapped during his first term a deal between the US, Iran and European allies forged during the Obama administration. Trump and Republicans had condemned that deal, saying it would not have kept a nuclear bomb out of Tehran's hands. Democrats fault Trump for not yet coming up with a credible alternative. 'This is a disaster of Trump and Netanyahu's own making, and now the region risks spiralling toward a new, deadly conflict,' Democratic senator Chris Murphy said in a post on X. Whether these strikes will trigger a regional conflict remains unclear. Even so, analysts said, Tehran could see US assets in the region as legitimate targets. For example, Tehran-aligned Houthi rebels in Yemen could resume their bombing campaign against ships transiting the Red Sea. Also unclear is Israel's ability to permanently impede Iran's nuclear program. Loading Analysts doubt in particular the ability of Israel to destroy Iran's Fordow enrichment plant, which is buried deep underground. While Israel could probably do extensive damage, experts say a more lasting blow would require US military assistance, which US officials said had not been provided. Another question mark is just how effectively Tehran can respond. Israel has indicated that it has targeted several Iranian leaders in the bombing campaign, which is expected to continue in coming days. All these factors will decide if the blow to Trump's aspirations to be seen as a global peacemaker will be a terminal one, or merely a setback. 'If Israel is to be taken at its word that tonight's strikes were the first round in an all-out Israeli campaign against Iran's nuclear and missile programs, Iran's regime is now knee-deep within a potentially existential, life-or-death moment,' said Charles Lister, head of the Syria Initiative at the Middle East Institute. 'That paints tonight's strikes in a whole new, unprecedented light and makes the risk of a major spiral of escalation far more real than what we've seen play out before.'
