ReportWire

Tag: national guard troop

  • National Guard troops under Trump’s command leave L.A before court’s deadline

    [ad_1]

    Dozens of California National Guard troops under President Trump’s command apparently slipped out of Los Angeles under cover of darkness early Sunday morning, ahead of an appellate court’s order to be gone by noon Monday.

    Administration officials would not immediately confirm whether the troops had decamped. But video taken outside the Roybal Federal Building downtown just after midnight on Sunday and reviewed by The Times shows a large tactical truck and four white passenger vans leaving the facility, which has been patrolled by armed soldiers since June.

    About 300 California troops remain under federal control, some 100 of whom were still active in Los Angeles as of last week, court records show.

    “There were more than usual, and all of them left — there was not a single one that stayed,” said protester Rosa Martinez, who has demonstrated outside the federal building for months and was there Sunday.

    Troops were spotted briefly later that day, but had not been seen again as of Monday afternoon, Martinez said.

    The development that forced the troops to leave was part of a sprawling legal fight for control of federalized soldiers nationwide that remains ongoing.

    The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued the order late Friday but softened an even more stringent edict from a lower court judge last week that would have forced the president to relinquish command of the state’s forces. Trump federalized thousands of California National Guard troops in June to quell unrest over immigration enforcement in Los Angeles.

    “For the first time in six months, there will be no military deployed on the streets of Los Angeles,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said in a statement. “While this decision is not final, it is a gratifying and hard-fought step in the right direction.”

    The ruling Friday came from the same three-judge panel that handed the president one of his most sweeping second-term victories this summer, after it found that the California deployment could go forward under an obscure and virtually untested subsection of the law.

    That precedent set a “great level of deference” as the standard of review for deployments that have since mushroomed across the country, circumscribing debate even in courts where it is not legally binding.

    But the so-called Newsom standard — California Gov. Gavin Newsom was the lead plaintiff on the lawsuit — has drawn intense scrutiny and increasingly public rebuke in recent weeks, even as the Trump administration argues it affords the administration new and greater powers.

    In October, the 7th Circuit — the appellate court that covers Illinois — found the president’s claims had “insufficient evidence,” upholding a block on a troop deployment in and around Chicago.

    “Even applying great deference to the administration’s view of the facts … there is insufficient evidence that protest activity in Illinois has significantly impeded the ability of federal officers to execute federal immigration laws,” the panel wrote.

    That ruling is now under review at the Supreme Court.

    In November, the 9th Circuit vacated its earlier decision allowing Trump’s Oregon federalization to go forward amid claims the Justice Department misrepresented important facts in its filings. That case is under review by a larger panel of the appellate division, with a decision expected early next year.

    Despite mounting pressure, Justice Department lawyers have doubled down on their claims of near-total power, arguing that federalized troops remain under the president’s command in perpetuity, and that courts have no role in reviewing their deployment.

    When Judge Mark J. Bennett asked the Department of Justice whether federalized troops could “stay called up forever” under the government’s reading of the statute at a hearing in October, the answer was an unequivocal yes.

    “There’s not a word in the statute that talks about how long they can remain in federal service,” Deputy Assistant Atty. Gen. Eric McArthur said.

    For now, the fate of 300 federalized California soldiers remains in limbo, though troops are currently barred by court orders from deployment in California and Oregon.

    Times staff writers David Zahniser and Kevin Rector contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Sonja Sharp

    Source link

  • Trump has power to command National Guard troops in Oregon, 9th Circuit rules

    [ad_1]

    The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals handed command of Oregon National Guard troops to the president Monday, further raising the stakes in the ongoing multifront judicial battle over military deployments to cities across the U.S.

    A three-judge appellate panel — including two members appointed by Trump during his first term — found that the law “does not limit the facts and circumstances that the President may consider” when deciding whether to dispatch soldiers domestically.

    The judges found that when ordering a deployment, “The President has the authority to identify and weigh the relevant facts.”

    The ruling was a stark contrast to a lower-court judge’s finding earlier this month.

    U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut of Portland previously called the president’s justification for federalizing Oregon troops “simply untethered to the facts” in her Oct. 4 temporary restraining order.

    The appellate judges said they were guided by a precedent set in the 9th Circuit this summer, when California tried and failed to wrest back control of federalized soldiers in and around Los Angeles.

    Another proceeding in California’s case is scheduled before the appellate court this week and the court’s earlier decision could be reversed. At the same time, an almost identical deployment in Illinois is under review by the Supreme Court.

    For now, exactly which troops can deploy in Portland remains bitterly contested in U.S. District court, where Immergut blocked the administration from flooding Portland with Guardsmen from California.

    The issue is likely to be decided by Supreme Court later this fall.

    The judges who heard the Oregon case outlined the dueling legal theories in their opinions. The two members of the bench who backed Trump’s authority over the troops argued the law is straightforward.

    “The President’s decision in this area is absolute,” wrote Judge Ryan D. Nelson, a Trump appointee, in a concurrence arguing that the court had overstepped its bounds in taking the case at all.

    “Reasonable minds will disagree about the propriety of the President’s National Guard deployment in Portland,” Nelson wrote. “But federal courts are not the panacea to cure that disagreement—the political process is (at least under current Supreme Court precedent).”

    Susan P. Graber, a Clinton appointee, said the appellate court had veered into parody.

    “Given Portland protesters’ well-known penchant for wearing chicken suits, inflatable frog costumes, or nothing at all when expressing their disagreement with the methods employed by ICE, observers may be tempted to view the majority’s ruling, which accepts the government’s characterization of Portland as a war zone, as merely absurd,” she wrote in her stinging dissent.

    But the stakes of sending armed soldiers to American cities based on little more than “propaganda” are far higher, she wrote.

    “I urge my colleagues on this court to act swiftly to vacate the majority’s order before the illegal deployment of troops under false pretenses can occur,” Graber wrote. “Above all, I ask those who are watching this case unfold to retain faith in our judicial system for just a little longer.”

    [ad_2]

    Sonja Sharp

    Source link

  • Protesters clash with police outside Chicago as court allows National Guard troops to stay

    [ad_1]

    As a court battle continued over whether President Trump can legally deploy the National Guard in Illinois, a brawl broke out Saturday night between protesters and state police at an immigration detention facility near Chicago.

    The protest, which had largely been a peaceful gathering of a few hundred people at the facility in Broadview, quickly turned chaotic as protesters jumped a line of concrete barriers, stopping traffic and violating police orders to stay off the street.

    By 8 p.m., 15 people had been arrested, according to Matthew Waldberg, a spokesperson for the Cook County Sheriff’s Office and the unified command for the protests, which includes local and state police. Eight of the arrests occurred during the evening chaos, while seven were made earlier that day.

    The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility has been a flashpoint for weeks as protesters have expressed their anger and frustration at Trump’s immigration crackdown with chants, signs and fist shaking. In the last two weeks, law enforcement officers have responded with tear gas and rubber pellets on several occasions. Last week, officers pelted a pastor in the head with a rubber pepper ball.

    Tensions increased last week as Trump announced his intention to deploy federalized National Guard troops from Illinois and Texas to protect ICE and its facility.

    On Saturday, an appeals court paused a lower court’s ruling that halted any deployment of the National Guard within Illinois for two weeks. The new ruling says the troops — 300 from Illinois and 200 from Texas — can remain under federal control but cannot be deployed.

    White House officials cited “ongoing violent riots and lawlessness,” which they claimed local law enforcement was unable to quell, as a justification for deploying the troops. Twenty troops from California were also sent to Illinois to provide “refresher training.”

    At the ICE facility in Broadview on Saturday night, police pulled out wooden batons and pushed the crowd down the street, threatening to deploy tear gas if people didn’t disperse and go home. The protesters largely retreated, but a few threw objects at the police line, and skirmishes ensued.

    One woman was knocked to the ground by police, her head hitting the cement curb. A man wearing all black and a gas mask was tackled and pushed to the ground by police before he was handcuffed and taken away.

    The conflicts in the Chicago area come as Trump has ramped up immigration enforcement and deployed federal troops in several Democratic-run cities, beginning with Los Angeles this summer. The National Guard was patrolling alongside local police in Memphis last week, while in Portland, troop deployments are on hold after the state of Oregon challenged the move. The administration claims the city has become lawless, while Oregon officials argue Trump is manufacturing a crisis to justify calling in the National Guard.

    Across the Chicago region, more than 1,000 people have been arrested by federal immigration agents since the Trump administration ramped up its “Midway Blitz” to deport immigrants last month. On Friday, a Chicago TV news producer was pushed to the ground and arrested at an ICE raid. Two women were arrested by ICE agents in front of an elementary school. In the weeks before, an ICE-operated Blackhawk helicopter hovered over a Southside apartment building in an operation that resulted in dozens — including children and elderly people — being zip-tied and temporarily detained. Thirty-seven were arrested.

    The mayor of Broadview issued a city-wide order banning protests before 9 a.m. and after 6 p.m., which has been enforced.

    “It’s been intense and a lot,” said Dominique Dandridge, who lives across the street from the detention center and has watched as vans arrive and depart at all hours of the night.

    In between the conflicts with law enforcement, there has been plenty of down time, with social media influencers looking to make their mark. Selfie sticks have been as prevalent at the Broadview protests as gas masks, balaclavas, safety goggles and flags.

    Don Lemon, a former CNN journalist and now YouTuber, roamed through the small crowd Friday and Saturday, closely followed by a videographer, two crew members and a security guard.

    Then there was Cam Higby, a conservative social media influencer from Seattle who is on a tour of college campuses, where he invites students to debate with him. His presence has angered some protesters, who chanted “Temu Charlie Kirk,” suggesting that he was a cheap version of the conservative influencer fatally shot in September while speaking at a college campus in Utah.

    Also present was Nick Shirley, a 23-year-old conservative influencer. On Friday, he was escorted into the ICE facility by armed agents. Protesters jeered as he walked by, following him with their phone cameras as he pointed his own camera back at them.

    He told a reporter that he went into the facility for training — he was going to livestream an ICE raid that weekend.

    The Associated Press contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Susanne Rust

    Source link

  • Trump says Chicago mayor, Illinois governor should be jailed amid militarized campaign

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Chicago is emerging as the latest testing ground for President Trump’s domestic deployment of military force as hundreds of National Guard troops were expected to descend on the city.

    The president said Wednesday that Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson should be jailed for failing to support federal agents, and continued to paint a dark and violent picture of both Chicago and Portland, Ore., where Trump is trying to send federal troops but has so far been stonewalled by the courts.

    “It’s so bad,” Trump said at the White House on Wednesday. “It’s so crazy. It’s like the movies … where you have these bombed-out cities and these bombed-out people. It’s worse than that. I don’t think they can make a movie as bad.”

    Pritzker this week characterized Trump’s depiction of Chicago as “deranged” and untrue. Federal agents are making the community “less safe,” the governor said, noting that residents do not want “Donald Trump to occupy their communities” and that people of color are fearful of being profiled during immigration crackdowns.

    Trump has taken issue with Democrats in Illinois and Oregon who are fighting his efforts, and has twice said this week that he is willing to use the Insurrection Act of 1807 if local leaders and the courts try to stop him. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller also contended this week that a court ruling blocking Trump’s deployments to Portland amounted to a “legal insurrection” as well as “an insurrection against the laws and Constitution of the United States.”

    In a televised interview Monday, Miller was asked about his remarks and asked whether the administration would abide by court rulings that stop the deployment of troops to Illinois and Portland. Miller responded by saying the president has “plenary authority” before going silent midsentence — a moment that the host said may have been a technical issue.

    “Plenary authority” is a legal term that indicates someone has limitless power.

    The legality of deployments to Portland and Chicago will face scrutiny in two federal courts Thursday.

    The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will hear an appeal by the Trump administration in the Portland matter. A Trump-appointed judge, Karin Immergut, found the White House had not only violated the law in activating the Oregon National Guard, but it also had further defied the law by attempting to circumvent her order, sending the California National Guard in its place.

    That three-judge appellate panel consists of two Trump appointees and one Clinton appointee.

    Meanwhile, in Illinois, U.S. District Judge April Perry declined Monday to block the deployment of National Guard members on an emergency basis, allowing a buildup of forces to proceed. She will hear arguments Thursday on the legality of the operation.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom, one of Trump’s top political foes, has joined the fight against the president’s deployment efforts.

    The Trump administration sent 14 members of California’s National Guard to Illinois to train troops from other states, according to court records filed Tuesday. Federal officials have also told California they intend to extend Trump’s federalization of 300 members of the state’s Guard through next year.

    “Trump is going on a cross-country crusade to sow chaos and division,” Newsom said Wednesday. “His actions — and those of his Cabinet — are against our deeply held American values. He needs to stop this illegal charade now.”

    By Wednesday evening, there were few signs of National Guard troops on the streets of Chicago. But troops from other states, including Texas’ National Guard, were waiting on the sidelines at an Army Reserve Center in Illinois as early as Tuesday.

    In anticipation of the deployment, Pritzker warned that if the president’s efforts went unchecked, it would put the United States on a “the path to full-blown authoritarianism.”

    The Democratic governor also said the president’s calls to jail him were “unhinged” and said Trump was a “wannabe dictator.”

    “There is one thing I really want to say to Donald Trump: If you come for my people, you come through me. So come and get me,” Pritzker said in an interview with MSNBC.

    As tensions grew in Chicago, Trump hosted an event at the White House to address how he intends to crack down on antifa, a nebulous left-wing anti-facist movement that he recently designated as a domestic terrorist organization.

    At the event, the president said many of the people involved in the movement are active in Chicago and Portland — and he once again attacked the local and state leaders in both cities and states.

    “You can say of Portland and you can say certainly of Chicago, it is not lawful what they are doing,” Trump said about the left-wing protests. “They are going to have to be very careful.”

    Johnson, the mayor of Chicago, slammed Trump for saying he should be jailed for his actions.

    “This is not the first time Trump has tried to have a Black man unjustly arrested,” Johnson posted on social media. “I’m not going anywhere.”

    Pritzker continued to attack Trump’s efforts into the evening, accusing the president of “breaching the Constitution and breaking the law.”

    “We need to stand up together and speak up,” the governor said on social media.

    Times staff writer Melody Gutierrez in Sacramento contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos, Michael Wilner

    Source link

  • Tension grows as Trump insists he wants to send U.S. troops to Chicago

    [ad_1]

    President Trump on Monday continued to flirt with the idea of mobilizing National Guard troops to combat crime in Chicago, just a day after he had to clarify that he has no intent to “go to war” with the American city.

    The push to militarize local law enforcement operations has been an ongoing fixation for the president, who on Saturday used war imagery and a reference to the movie “Apocalypse Now” to suggest that the newly rebranded Department of War could descend upon the Democrat-run city.

    Trump clarified Sunday that his post was meant to convey he wants to “clean up” the city, and on Monday once again floated the possibility of deploying federal agents to the city — a move that Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, has staunchly opposed.

    “I don’t know why Chicago isn’t calling us saying, please give us help,” Trump said during a speech at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C. “When you have over just a short period of time, 50 murders and hundreds of people shot, and then you have a governor that stands up and says how crime is just fine. It’s really really crazy, but we’re bringing back law and order to our country.”

    A few hours earlier, Trump posted on social media that he wanted “to help the people of Chicago, not hurt them” — a statement that Pritzker mocked as insincere, saying that Trump had “just threatened an American city with the Department of War.”

    “Once again, this isn’t about fighting crime. That requires support and coordination — yet we’ve experienced nothing like that over the past several weeks,” Pritzker said in a post on X. “Instead of taking steps to work with us on public safety, the Trump administration’s focused on scaring Illinoisians.”

    The White House did not respond when asked whether Trump would send National Guard troops to Chicago without the request from the governor. But the Department of Homeland Security announced in a news release Monday that it was launching an immigration enforcement operation to “target the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens in Chicago.”

    For weeks, Trump has talked about sending the military to Chicago and other cities led by Democrats — an action that governors have repeatedly opposed. Most Americans also oppose the idea, according to a recent CBS/YouGov poll, but the Republican base largely sees Trump’s push as a means to reduce crime.

    If Trump were to deploy U.S. forces to the cities, it would follow similar operations in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles — moves that a federal judge last week said was illegal and that amounted to Trump “creating a national police force with the President as its chief” but that Trump sees as victories.

    In his Monday remarks, Trump claimed that he “saved Los Angeles” and that crime is down to “virtually nothing” in Washington because he decided to send military forces to patrol the cities. Trump downplayed instances of domestic violence, saying those are “much lesser things” that should not be taken into account when trying to discern whether his crime-fighting efforts have worked in the nation’s capital.

    “Things that take place in the home, they call crime. They’ll do anything they can to find something,” Trump lamented. “If a man has a little fight with the wife, they say this was a crime. Now, I can’t claim 100%, but we are a safe city.”

    Trump said “we can do the same thing” in other cities, like Chicago and New York City.

    “We are waiting for a call from Chicago,” Trump said. “We’ll fix Chicago.”

    As of Monday afternoon, Pritzker’s office had yet to receive any “formal communication or information from the Trump administration” about potential plans to have troops deployed into the city, said Matt Hill, a spokesperson for the Illinois governor.

    “Like the public and press, we are learning of their operations through social media as they attempt to produce a reality television show,” Hill said in an email. “If he cared about delivering real solutions for Illinois, then we would have heard from him.”

    Pritzker, in remarks posted on social media Sunday, said the Trump administration was trampling on citizens’ constitutional rights “in the fake guise of fighting crime.”

    “Once Donald Trump gets the citizens of this nation comfortable with the current atrocities committed under the color of law — what comes next?” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Ana Ceballos

    Source link

  • Trump deployment of military troops to Los Angeles was illegal, judge rules in blistering opinion

    [ad_1]

    A federal judge ruled Tuesday that the Trump administration’s deployment of U.S. military troops to Los Angeles during immigration raids earlier this year was illegal.

    U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer found the deployment violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which limited the use of the military for law enforcement purposes. He stayed his ruling to give the administration a chance to appeal.

    “President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have stated their intention to call National Guard troops into service in other cities across the country … thus creating a national police force with the President as its chief,” Breyer wrote.

    The ruling could have implications beyond Los Angeles.

    Trump, who sent roughly 5,000 Marines and National Guard troops to L.A. in June in a move that was opposed by California Gov. Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass, issued an executive order declaring a public safety emergency in D.C. The order invoked Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act that places the Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control.

    In June, Breyer ruled that Trump broke the law when he mobilized thousands of California National Guard members against the state’s wishes.

    In a 36-page decision, Breyer wrote that Trump’s actions “were illegal — both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

    But the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals paused that court order, allowing the troops to remain in Los Angeles while the case plays out in federal court. The appellate court found the president had broad, though not “unreviewable,” authority to deploy the military in American cities.

    In his Tuesday ruling Breyer added: “The evidence at trial established that Defendants systematically used armed soldiers (whose identity was often obscured by protective armor) and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles. In short, Defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act.”

    [ad_2]

    Jenny Jarvie

    Source link

  • Trump orders could target ‘cashless bail’ cities from D.C. to L.A.

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — President Trump took executive action Monday threatening to cut federal aid to cities and counties that offer cashless bail to criminal defendants, a move that could place Democratic jurisdictions throughout the country under further financial strain.

    Trump’s first executive order specifically targeted the practice of cashless bail in the District of Columbia, where the president has sent National Guard troops to patrol the streets. His second action directed the Justice Department to draw up a list of jurisdictions that have “substantially eliminated cash bail as a potential condition for crimes that pose a clear threat to public safety and order” — a list that would then be subject to federal funding cuts, the White House said.

    “That was when the big crime in this country started,” Trump said. “That was when it happened. Somebody kills somebody, they go and don’t worry about it — no cash, come back in a couple of months, we’ll give you a trial. You never see the person again.”

    “They thought it was discriminatory to make people put up money because they just killed three people lying in the street,” he added. “We’re ending it.”

    Trump does not have the power to unilaterally change D.C. law. But administration officials hope the threat of significant financial pressures on the city will force local lawmakers to change it themselves.

    Similarly, his second order could ultimately result in cuts to federal grants and contracts with Los Angeles County, where courts use cash bail only in the most serious criminal cases.

    Studies have not shown a correlation between cashless bail policies and an increase in crime.

    As of October 2023, nearly everyone accused of misdemeanors or nonviolent felonies in Los Angeles County is either cited and released or freed on certain conditions after their case is reviewed by a judge. The judge can offer other conditions for release, including electronic monitoring or home supervision by probation officials.

    “A person’s ability to pay a large sum of money should not be the determining factor in deciding whether that person, who is presumed innocent, stays in jail before trial or is released,” then-Presiding Judge Samantha Jessner said at the time.

    The county reached out to the court on how Trump’s executive order may affect the county’s bail policies and had not heard back.

    The county policy has proved controversial with some cities saying they believed the lack of cash bail would make their communities less safe. Twelve cities within the county sued unsuccessfully to block the cashless bail reform, arguing it would lead to higher crime rates and violated the court’s responsibilities to uphold public safety. Sheriff Robert Luna told the supervisors in 2023 that some communities were alarmed at the “lack of consequences for those who commit crimes.”

    The sheriff’s office and the public defender’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The county had initially begun a zero-bail system during the pandemic to prevent crowding in jails. A report to the Board of Supervisors found instances of re-arrest or failure to appear in court remained relatively stable despite the change.

    In the fall of 2022, six people sued the county and city, arguing they spent five days in custody solely because they could not afford bail, leaving them in “dismal” conditions. Demanding cash bail created a “wealth-based detention system,” the plaintiffs alleged. The suit led to a preliminary injunction barring the city and county from enforcing cash bail requirements for some people who had yet to be arraigned.

    Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill in 2018 to end cash bail across California. Voters nixed it after the bail bond industry spearheaded a campaign to send the measure to voters. The referendum was defeated in 2020 with 56% voting “no.”

    Trump also signed an executive action directing the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute individuals for burning the American flag, calling it an act of incitement, despite standing Supreme Court precedent that doing so is an expression of free speech.

    They were the latest steps in a spree of executive actions from Trump ostensibly targeting crime in the United States, following Trump’s deployment of Marines and the National Guard to Los Angeles in June and his federalization of the National Guard in D.C. earlier this month.

    He has threatened to launch similar operations with federal forces to New York and Chicago, despite local officials telling the Trump administration that the deployments are not necessary.

    “They probably do want it,” Trump said. “If we didn’t go to Los Angeles, you would literally have had to call off the Olympics. It was so bad.”

    Ahead of the 2028 Olympics, to be held in Los Angeles, American cities should be “spotless,” Trump added.

    Wilner reported from Washington, Ellis from Los Angeles.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Wilner, Rebecca Ellis

    Source link

  • From the L.A. Olympics to Oakland, California braces for Trump National Guard deployments

    [ad_1]

    President Trump’s decision to deploy hundreds of National Guard troops to Washington has California officials on high alert, with some worrying that he intends to activate federal forces in the Bay Area and Southern California, especially during the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics.

    Trump said that his use of the National Guard to fight crime could expand to other cities, and suggested that local police have been unable to do the job.

    Legal experts say it is highly unusual and troubling for forces to be deployed without a major crisis, such as civil unrest or a natural disaster. The Washington deployment is another example of Trump seeking to use the military for domestic endeavors, similar to his decision to send the National Guard to Los Angeles in June, amid an immigration crackdown that sparked protests, experts said.

    Washington has long struggled with crime but has seen major reductions in recent years.

    Officials in Oakland and Los Angeles — two cities the president mentioned by name — slammed Trump’s comments about crime in their cities. Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee said in a statement that the president’s characterization wasn’t rooted in fact, but “based in fear-mongering in an attempt to score cheap political points.” Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called it “performative” and a “stunt.”

    Trump has said he would consider deploying the military to Los Angeles once again to protect the 2028 Olympic Games. This month, he signed an executive order that named him chair of a White House task force on the Los Angeles Games.

    The White House has not said specifically what role Trump would play in security arrangements.

    Los Angeles City Councilmember Imelda Padilla, who sits on the city panel overseeing the Games, acknowledged last week that the city is a “little nervous” about the federal government’s plans for securing the event.

    Congress recently approved $1 billion for security and planning for the Games. A representative for the Department of Homeland Security declined to explain to The Times how the funds will be used.

    Padilla said her concern was based on the unpredictable nature of the administration, as well as recent immigration raids that have used masked, heavily armed agents to round up people at Home Depot parking lots and car washes.

    “Everything that we’re seeing with the raids was a real curveball to our city,” Padilla said during a Los Angeles Current Affairs Forum event. It dealt “a real curveball to [efforts] to focus on the things that folks care about, like homelessness, like transportation … economic development,” she said.

    Bass, appearing on CNN this week, said that using the National Guard during the Olympics is “completely appropriate.” She said that the city expects a “federal response when we have over 200 countries here, meaning heads of state of over 200 countries. Of course you have the military involved. That is routine.”

    But Bass made a distinction between L.A. Olympics security and the “political stunt” she said Trump pulled by bringing in the National Guard and the U.S. Marines after protests over the federal government’s immigration crackdown. That deployment faces ongoing legal challenges, with an appeals court ruling that Trump had the legal authority to send the National Guard.

    “I believed then, and I believe now that Los Angeles was a test case, and I think D.C. is a test case as well,” Bass said. “To say, well, we can take over your city whenever we want, and I’m the commander in chief, and I can use the troops whenever we want.”

    On Monday, Trump tied his action to what has been a familiar theme to him: perceived urban decay.

    “You look at Chicago, how bad it is, you look at Los Angeles, how bad it is. We have other cities that are very bad. New York has a problem. And then you have, of course, Baltimore and Oakland. We don’t even mention that anymore —they’re so far gone,” he said. “We’re not going to let it happen. We’re not going to lose our cities over this.”

    White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said officers and agents deployed across the District of Columbia have so far made 23 arrests for offenses including homicide, possession with intent to distribute narcotics, lewd acts, reckless driving, fare evasion and not having permits. Six illegal handguns were seized, she said.

    Citing crime as a reason to deploy National Guard troops without the support of a state governor is highly unprecedented, experts said. The National Guard has been deployed to Southern California before, notably during the 1992 L.A. riots and the civil unrest after George Floyd’s murder in Minneapolis in 2020.

    “It would be awful because he would be clearly violating his legal authorities and he’d be sued again by the governor and undoubtedly, by the mayors of L.A. and Oakland,” said William Banks, a law professor at Syracuse University. “The citizens in those cities would be up in arms. They would be aghast that there are soldiers patrolling their streets.”

    The District of Columbia does not have control over its National Guard, which gives the president wide latitude to deploy those troops. In California and other states, the head of the National Guard is the governor and there are legal limits on how federal troops can be used.

    The Posse Comitatus Act, passed in 1878 after the end of Reconstruction, largely bars federal troops from being used in civilian law enforcement. The law reflects a tradition dating to the Revolutionary War era that sees military interference in American life as a threat to liberty and democracy.

    “We have such a strong tradition that we don’t use the military for domestic law enforcement, and it’s a characteristic of authoritarian countries to see the military be used in that way,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley Law School and a constitutional law expert. “That’s never been so in the United States, and many are concerned about the way in which President Trump is acting the way authoritarian rulers do.”

    Whether the troops deployed to Los Angeles in June amid the federal immigration raids were used for domestic law enforcement in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act is central in the trial underway this week in federal court in San Francisco.

    If Trump were to send troops to California, Banks said, the only legal lever he could pull would be to declare an insurrection and invoke the Insurrection Act.

    Unlike in D.C., Trump wouldn’t be able to federalize police departments in other parts of the country. There are circumstances where the federal government has put departments under consent decrees — a reform tool for agencies that have engaged in unlawful practices — but in those cases the government alleged specific civil rights violations, said Ed Obayashi, a Northern California sheriff’s deputy and legal counsel on policing.

    “You are not going to be able to come in and take over because you say crime is rising in a particular place,” he said.

    Oakland Councilman Ken Houston, a third-generation resident who was elected in 2024, said his city doesn’t need the federal government’s help with public safety.

    Oakland has struggled with crime for years, but Houston cited progress. Violent crimes, including homicide, aggravated assault, rape and robbery are down 29% so far this year from the same period in 2024. Property crimes including burglary, motor vehicle theft and larceny also are trending down, according to city data.

    “He’s going by old numbers and he’s making a point,” Houston said of Trump. “Oakland does not need the National Guard.”

    Times staff writer Noah Goldberg contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Hannah Fry, Dakota Smith, Richard Winton, Andrea Castillo

    Source link