logo
California to sue Donald Trump over National Guard deployment in LA protests

California to sue Donald Trump over National Guard deployment in LA protests

The Australian10-06-2025
Roughly 700 Marines are deploying to the Los Angeles area to protect federal buildings and personnel in the wake of weekend protests over immigration that have already led President Trump to federalise National Guard troops, defence and congressional officials said.
The troops, which are assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, 1st Marine Division out of Twentynine Palms, Calif., won't engage with protesters, US Northern Command, which is responsible for U.S. military operations in North America, said in a statement.
A senior administration official told reporters on Monday evening that the move came in light of increased threats against federal officers and federal buildings.
The unusual decision marks the first time in more than three decades that Marines have been sent into a US city to address civil unrest.
It came over the objections of California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has called the federal intervention an intrusion on state sovereignty and vowed to sue in response. 'They shouldn't be deployed on American soil facing their own countrymen to fulfil the deranged fantasy of a dictatorial President,' Newsom wrote in a message on X.
The troops, which could arrive in the Los Angeles area as soon as tonight, will be under the US Northern Command, which is responsible for US military operations in North America.
The Marines are among the troops Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said over the weekend were prepared to deploy on orders.
It is unclear how long the Marines will deploy, what kind of weapons they are authorised to carry or their specific orders.
A statement by the US Northern Command said that 2,100 National Guard soldiers and 700 Marines will protect federal personnel and property under the command of Task Force 51, the headquarters that has been assigned the mission. The forces have been trained in de-escalation, crowd control, and standing rules for the use of force, the command said.
On Monday night, the president approved the deployment of an additional 2,000 California National Guardsmen in response to the protests, the Pentagon said in a post on X. Once the troops are all in place, there will be roughly 4,000 federalised National Guard members in California.
A presidential order issued Saturday by Trump directed the Pentagon to use the National Guard and 'other members of the Regular Armed Forces as necessary' to protect federal 'functions and property.'
The last time Marines deployed to quell civil unrest was during the 1992 Los Angeles riots, which erupted after four police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King.
President George H.W. Bush acted after he received a request from California Gov. Pete Wilson to help contain the violence that erupted after the acquittal of the police officers.
Bush invoked the Insurrection Act, federalising the California National Guard. He then deployed roughly 2,000 Army soldiers from nearby Fort Ord and 1,500 Marines from Camp Pendleton.
In this instance, Trump didn't invoke the Insurrection Act, a 1792 law that allows the president to deploy the US military domestically in some instances, such as putting down civil disorder or a rebellion, but instead appeared to authorise the deployment under the weekend executive order.
National Guard troops are part-time soldiers assigned to a state and are usually under the governor's authority. Active-duty troops answer solely to the commander in chief and their focus is on defending the US
Trump, who won his re-election campaign on a pledge to crack down on illegal immigration, has embraced fights with Democrats who have said his tactics go beyond his constitutional limits.
Though US officials have said the role of the National Guard and Marine forces in Los Angeles will be limited, the broad nature of the order has spurred concerns that it could also be laying the foundations for future military actions against protesters elsewhere in the country. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 bars the armed forces from law enforcement except under certain circumstances.
California Governor Gavin Newsom has dared border tsar Tom Homan to arrest him as he threatened to. Picture: AP.
The Los Angeles deployment also comes on the heels of other steps in which Trump has used his executive authority to push the boundaries of using troops on US soil. Those include authorising active‑duty troops to detain migrants in newly created military zones along the southern border, using U.S. bases as detention areas and flying detainees out of the country on US Air Force planes.
'This is Trump's dream,' Rep. Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat who as a Marine officer served multiple tours during the war in Iraq, said Monday. 'This is exactly what he has wanted to do: turn the military against the American people. Donald Trump has never respected what Marines do overseas, but has always wanted to use them to force his political agenda at home.'
It is rare for a president to send National Guard troops or active-duty military to a state without an explicit request from a governor or invoking the Insurrection Act.
President Lyndon Johnson federalised the National Guard and sent them to Alabama to protect protesters marching from Selma to Montgomery in 1965 without a request from the state's governor. Johnson invoked the Insurrection Act.
Active-duty troops were used by President Dwight Eisenhower in 1957 without permission of the state's governor. They were used to uphold a Supreme Court ruling that segregated schools were inherently unequal, which enabled Black children to enrol at a previously segregated school in Little Rock, Ark. Eisenhower also relied on the Insurrection Act.
Dow Jones
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

White House to host cage fight on July 4: UFC boss
White House to host cage fight on July 4: UFC boss

News.com.au

timean hour ago

  • News.com.au

White House to host cage fight on July 4: UFC boss

The White House is to play host to a mixed martial arts bout on July 4 next year, the day the United States marks the 250th anniversary of its founding, UFC boss Dana White said Tuesday. President Donald Trump has been a regular guest at the often-bloody contests, where fighters punch, kick and grapple with their opponent in a no-holds-barred battle to submission or knockout. Bringing the brutal combat sport to the center of US political power will mark a historic first. "It is definitely going to happen," White, a high-profile supporter of the US president, told CBS television. "I talked to him last night -- 'him' being the president -- and I'm flying out there at the end of this month, and I'm going to sit down and walk him through all the plans and the renderings, and we're going to start deciding what he wants and doesn't want." Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) is the largest and most successful organization in the burgeoning world of MMA, a blend of martial arts disciplines like jiu-jitsu, kickboxing, boxing and wrestling. Bouts take place in an eight-sided ring -- dubbed "The Octagon" -- bounded by a chainlink fence. With few exceptions -- like eye-gouging -- male and female fighters are allowed to employ almost any technique to attack their opponent. Fights often end with a prone fighter being pummeled in the face as they lie on the bloodied floor, before the referee steps in to stop the action. The shaven-headed White, who has regularly spoken warmly of Trump as both a friend and a political leader, said the president's daughter would be involved in organizing the Independence Day spectacle at the White House. "When (Trump) called me and asked me to do it, he said: 'I want Ivanka in the middle of this,'" White told CBS, whose parent company Paramount has just signed a $7.7 billion streaming deal with UFC. White took over the UFC in 2001 when it was a small, loss-making organization, shepherding it into one of the fastest-growing sports promotion companies in the world. The sport's popularity with young men -- a key demographic in the 2024 US election -- and Trump's long association with the UFC, have made the president a regular fixture at some of its more high-profile events, where he is greeted like a rock star. Its brutal nature and high injury rate mean the sport is controversial, with doctors decrying the potential for brain damage amongst fighters who are repeatedly hit in the head, though it has gained increasing mainstream acceptance in recent years. rg-hg/amz/aha

How Zelensky can save Ukraine
How Zelensky can save Ukraine

Sydney Morning Herald

time2 hours ago

  • Sydney Morning Herald

How Zelensky can save Ukraine

For this reason, when Washington and Moscow were exploring a deal that would bring about a ceasefire if Ukraine were to withdraw its troops from the Donbas regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, Zelensky was forced to speak out very loudly against it. Militarily, the Ukrainian president would have got nothing in return, other than a halt to the fighting, while Russia would have been allowed to bypass some of Ukraine's stiffest defences for free. There was some talk of Russian forces being made to withdraw from the northern region of Sumy and neighbouring Kharkiv. This strategy, according to Jaroslava Barbieri, a research fellow at Chatham House's Ukraine Forum, was designed by Putin to position Zelensky as the main blockage to peace in Trump's eyes. 'I'd say in demanding swathes of Ukrainian territory as part of a peace deal, Putin is aware the condition is unacceptable for most Ukrainians,' Barbieri said. Rejecting the offer could 'portray Ukraine's position as uncooperative and ungrateful to Trump's peace-brokering efforts,' she added. Barbieri said: 'It could drive a wedge between Trump and European allies, who have reiterated the importance of preserving Ukraine's sovereignty. 'And ... potentially destabilise Ukrainian society by mobilising grievances among the minority who are willing to accept concessions to end the war.' Polling by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology released in June found that just 38 per cent of Ukrainians were willing to accept territorial losses 'in order to achieve peace as soon as possible and preserve independence'. In comparison, 52 per cent said they were firmly against ceding land 'even if this makes the war last longer'. But Zelensky has accepted that some form of cession of territory will be necessary to end the war. Without it, he'd be likely to lose US support, and eventually European allies would start to fade away. Trump declared on Monday that there will be 'some swapping, some changes to land'. Sources have told Britain's Daily Telegraph that Zelensky could be ready to stop fighting, freeze the front line and hand over de facto control of territories occupied by Russian forces to Moscow as part of any settlement. These include swathes of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and Crimea. Loading Trump added: 'We're going to try to get some of that territory back for Ukraine.' The key to Zelensky managing the process and selling it back to his public will be in the language. De jure recognition of Russia's control would require a referendum and would be likely to stoke tensions in the population, enough to hurt Zelensky at the ballot box in any future election. Agreeing to de facto control, which is not legally recognised, in acceptance of the temporary reality of the situation on the ground is more likely. One possibility for this being discussed among war-watchers would be to replicate the Sino-British Joint Declaration signed between China and the United Kingdom to decide on Hong Kong's future. That deal saw London return sovereignty to Beijing in 1997, but under the condition that it would maintain Hong Kong's special status for 50 years. Loading Could Ukraine and Russia agree to recognise that the Donbas regions are legally Ukrainian but managed as if they belonged to Moscow for a set period of time? That would be likely to settle Zelensky's referendum problem by kicking any real decision into the long grass. The bloodshed would stop and the line in the sand would be drawn – for now. However, Moscow would use the time to sow anti-Ukrainian sentiment in the region, with the intention of making its eventual return almost impossible and unpalatable for Ukrainians, who have all lost a father, brother or friend in the war. Whatever the proposal, it would appear that Putin has covertly edged closer to one of his war aims by leaving Zelensky with a decision that will shape his future as president. And he has put the spotlight back on Ukraine's leader.

How Zelensky can save Ukraine
How Zelensky can save Ukraine

The Age

time2 hours ago

  • The Age

How Zelensky can save Ukraine

For this reason, when Washington and Moscow were exploring a deal that would bring about a ceasefire if Ukraine were to withdraw its troops from the Donbas regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, Zelensky was forced to speak out very loudly against it. Militarily, the Ukrainian president would have got nothing in return, other than a halt to the fighting, while Russia would have been allowed to bypass some of Ukraine's stiffest defences for free. There was some talk of Russian forces being made to withdraw from the northern region of Sumy and neighbouring Kharkiv. This strategy, according to Jaroslava Barbieri, a research fellow at Chatham House's Ukraine Forum, was designed by Putin to position Zelensky as the main blockage to peace in Trump's eyes. 'I'd say in demanding swathes of Ukrainian territory as part of a peace deal, Putin is aware the condition is unacceptable for most Ukrainians,' Barbieri said. Rejecting the offer could 'portray Ukraine's position as uncooperative and ungrateful to Trump's peace-brokering efforts,' she added. Barbieri said: 'It could drive a wedge between Trump and European allies, who have reiterated the importance of preserving Ukraine's sovereignty. 'And ... potentially destabilise Ukrainian society by mobilising grievances among the minority who are willing to accept concessions to end the war.' Polling by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology released in June found that just 38 per cent of Ukrainians were willing to accept territorial losses 'in order to achieve peace as soon as possible and preserve independence'. In comparison, 52 per cent said they were firmly against ceding land 'even if this makes the war last longer'. But Zelensky has accepted that some form of cession of territory will be necessary to end the war. Without it, he'd be likely to lose US support, and eventually European allies would start to fade away. Trump declared on Monday that there will be 'some swapping, some changes to land'. Sources have told Britain's Daily Telegraph that Zelensky could be ready to stop fighting, freeze the front line and hand over de facto control of territories occupied by Russian forces to Moscow as part of any settlement. These include swathes of Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and Crimea. Loading Trump added: 'We're going to try to get some of that territory back for Ukraine.' The key to Zelensky managing the process and selling it back to his public will be in the language. De jure recognition of Russia's control would require a referendum and would be likely to stoke tensions in the population, enough to hurt Zelensky at the ballot box in any future election. Agreeing to de facto control, which is not legally recognised, in acceptance of the temporary reality of the situation on the ground is more likely. One possibility for this being discussed among war-watchers would be to replicate the Sino-British Joint Declaration signed between China and the United Kingdom to decide on Hong Kong's future. That deal saw London return sovereignty to Beijing in 1997, but under the condition that it would maintain Hong Kong's special status for 50 years. Loading Could Ukraine and Russia agree to recognise that the Donbas regions are legally Ukrainian but managed as if they belonged to Moscow for a set period of time? That would be likely to settle Zelensky's referendum problem by kicking any real decision into the long grass. The bloodshed would stop and the line in the sand would be drawn – for now. However, Moscow would use the time to sow anti-Ukrainian sentiment in the region, with the intention of making its eventual return almost impossible and unpalatable for Ukrainians, who have all lost a father, brother or friend in the war. Whatever the proposal, it would appear that Putin has covertly edged closer to one of his war aims by leaving Zelensky with a decision that will shape his future as president. And he has put the spotlight back on Ukraine's leader.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store