California governor challenges Trump’s unilateral National Guard deployment in Los Angeles
California National Guard troops were deployed to the streets of Los Angeles on Sunday to help quell a third day of protests over President Donald Trump‘s immigration enforcement, as the state’s Democratic governor called their deployment unlawful.
National Guard troops were stationed around federal government buildings, as police and protesters clashed in separate demonstrations over federal immigration raids in Los Angeles.
The deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles by President Trump has sparked significant controversy, primarily due to the lack of a request from the state’s governor and the context of ongoing protests related to immigration enforcement.
This situation presents a rare instance of federal overreach, raising questions about state sovereignty and the potential for escalating tensions.
READ ALSO: UN rights chief condemns U.S. sanctions on ICC judges as ‘deeply corrosive’
Trump ordered the deployment of approximately 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles, citing “incidents of violence and disorder” following immigration enforcement actions.
He invoked Title 10 of the United States Code, which allows the president to deploy the National Guard to “repel invasion, suppress rebellion or execute laws.”
This action federalizes the National Guard, placing them under the president’s command rather than the governor’s.
This is a significant departure from the norm, as it is exceedingly rare for a president to call up the National Guard in opposition to a governor’s wishes.
The last time a president acted in this manner was in 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson federalized the National Guard to protect civil rights demonstrators in Alabama.
Governor Newsom’s response and legal challenges
California Governor Gavin Newsom has strongly opposed the deployment, calling it an “unnecessary provocation” and a “serious breach of state sovereignty.”
He formally requested that the Trump administration rescind the order and return control of the Guard to the state, stating that local law enforcement resources are sufficient to maintain order.
Newsom has also initiated legal action against the Trump administration over the deployment, arguing that it is unconstitutional and illegal. Legal experts have suggested that Trump’s actions may face court challenges.
The deployment of the National Guard occurred in the context of protests against federal immigration raids in Los Angeles. These raids, conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), led to the arrest of at least 44 people and sparked demonstrations in various parts of the city.
Protesters and authorities clashed, with reports of arrests and the use of less-lethal rounds by law enforcement. The protests have been described as “overwhelmingly peaceful” by some, while the Trump administration has characterized them as “violent, insurrectionist mobs.”
Political motivations and implications
The deployment of the National Guard without the governor’s consent has raised concerns about the potential for escalating tensions and inciting conflict. Critics argue that the presence of troops could further inflame the situation and erode public trust. There are also concerns about the rules of engagement for the National Guard and the potential for mistakes that could harm civilians or other law enforcement personnel. The threat of deploying active-duty Marines to Los Angeles has further heightened these concerns.
Some observers believe that Trump’s deployment of the National Guard is politically motivated, aimed at scoring points with his base and provoking a response. The move has been seen as part of a broader pattern of the Trump administration using federal power against its perceived enemies. The situation has also highlighted the ongoing tensions between the Trump administration and California, with the president consistently targeting the state in his efforts to enact his agenda.
Local officials, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, have also criticized the deployment, stating that it is “a chaotic escalation” and “the last thing that our city needs.”
Federal officials, such as the U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, have defended the deployment, citing the need to protect federal agents and maintain order.[4] The situation has created a complex interplay of federal, state, and local authorities, each with their own perspectives and agendas.
The deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles by President Trump is a rare and controversial action that has been met with strong opposition from California’s governor and other state and local leaders. The move, occurring without the governor’s request and amidst protests against immigration enforcement, raises significant questions about state sovereignty, the potential for escalating tensions, and the political motivations behind the decision. The situation underscores the deep divisions within the country and the challenges of balancing federal authority with state and local interests.
