deployment

California Democrats plan to question Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Thursday about the immigration raids that have roiled Los Angeles, the federal commandeering of the state’s National Guard and the deployment of Marines in the region when he testifies before the House Armed Services Committee.

Several committee members said they received no advance notice about the federal immigration sweeps at workplaces and other locations that started Friday and that prompted large and at times fiery protests in downtown Los Angeles.

“That’s going to change,” said Rep. Derek Tran (D-Orange), when the committee questions Hegseth on Thursday morning.

“We need to de-escalate the situation,” Tran said in an interview. President Trump and his administration’s moves, most recently deploying hundreds of Marines in Southern California, “escalates the situation, sending in troops that shouldn’t be there, that are trained to shoot and kill.”

Though largely peaceful, protests about U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s actions have been punctuated by incidents of violence and lawlessness. As of Tuesday evening, several hundred people had been detained on suspicion of crimes or because of their immigration status.

After dissenters blocked the 101 Freeway, vandalized buildings in downtown Los Angeles and stole from businesses, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass on Tuesday imposed a curfew in the city’s civic core from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m.

Thursday’s testimony before the House Armed Services Committee will be Hegseth’s third appearance on Capitol Hill this week. He was questioned Tuesday by the House Appropriations subcommittee on defense and the Senate Appropriations Committee on Wednesday.

Both appearances were testy. On Wednesday, Hegseth insisted the deployment of Marines in Los Angeles was lawful but couldn’t name the law under which it is allowed. On Tuesday, he was buffeted with questions about the “chaos” in his tenure, his discussion of national secrets on a Signal group chat and the lack of information provided to elected leaders about Defense Department operations and budgets, including the cost of the federal deployment in Los Angeles.

“I want your plan!” Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) demanded. “What is your plan for the future? Can we get that in writing and on paper so that we know where you’re going? Because we don’t have anything today. We have zip! Nada!”

Hegseth responded that the agency has the details and would provide them to members of Congress. The Pentagon posted a video clip of the back-and-forth on X that tagged the congresswoman and was titled “WHY ARE YOU SCREAMING!”

Thursday’s hearing is especially notable because the committee oversees the Pentagon budget. None of the Republican members of the committee are from California. More than a dozen who were asked to weigh in on the hearing didn’t respond.

Republicans are expected to reflect the sentiments expressed by Trump, most recently on Wednesday when he took questions from reporters on the red carpet at the Kennedy Center shortly before attending a performance of “Les Miserables” with First Lady Melania Trump.

“We are going to have law and order in our country,” he said. “If I didn’t act quickly on that, Los Angeles would be burning to the ground right now.”

“These are radical left lunatics that you’re dealing with, and they’re tough, they’re smart, they’re probably paid, many of them, as you know, they’re professionals,” he added. “When you see them chopping up concrete because the bricks got captured, they’re chopping up concrete and they’re using that as a weapon. That’s pretty bad.”

Seven of the committee’s members are Democrats from California, and they are expected to press Hegseth on the legal underpinnings of the deployment of federal forces in the state, the lack of notification or coordination with state and local officials and the conditions and future of residents swept up in the raids.

“The president’s decision to deploy the National Guard and the U.S. Marines over the objections of California officials has escalated the situation, creating unnecessary chaos and putting public safety at risk,” said Rep. George Whitesides (D-Agua Dulce). “As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I’m deeply concerned with the precedent this sets, and the apparent lack of protocol followed, and I will be seeking answers.”

Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-Santa Barbara), a Mexican immigrant who served in the Marine Corps Reserve and is also a member of the committee, said Trump is doing what he does best.

“He likes to play arsonist and firefighter,” Carbajal said in an interview.

He argued Trump is using the raids to deflect attention from legislation that will harm the most vulnerable Americans while enriching the wealthy.

“There’s a question of whether what he’s doing is legal, regarding him and Hegseth sending in Marines. The governor and the mayor did not request the National Guard, let alone the Marines,” Carbajal said. “This is likely a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of U.S. forces in the U.S.”

Carbajal also said he expects what has unfolded in Los Angeles in recent days to be replicated in communities nationwide, a concern raised by Bass and other Democrats on Wednesday.

As a former Marine, Carbajal added that he and his fellow veterans had no role to play domestically, barring crisis.

“We’re not trained for this. There is no role for Marines on American soil unless rebellion is happening,” he said. “This is so ridiculous. It says a lot about the administration and what it’s willing to do to distract and create a more stressful, volatile environment.”

“Let’s make it clear,” he added. “We Democrats don’t support any violent protests. But as a Marine, there is no place for the U.S. military on domestic soil under the guise and reasoning he’s provided.”

Driverless Waymo vehicles, coated with graffiti and engulfed in flames. Masked protesters, dancing and cavorting around burning American flags. Anonymous figures brazenly blocking streets and shutting down major freeways, raining bottles and rocks on the police, while their compatriots waved Mexican flags.

The images flowing out of Los Angeles over nearly a week of protests against federal immigration raids have cast America’s second most populous city as a terrifying hellscape, where lawbreakers rule the streets and regular citizens should fear to leave their homes.

In the relentless fever loop of online and broadcast video, it does not matter that the vast majority of Los Angeles neighborhoods remain safe and secure. Digital images create their own reality and it’s one that President Trump and his supporters have used to condemn L.A. as a place that is “out of control” and on the brink of total collapse.

The images and their true meaning and context have become the subject of a furious debate in the media and among political partisans, centered on the true roots and victims of the protests, which erupted on Friday as the Trump administration moved aggressively to expand its arrests of undocumented immigrants.

As the president and his supporters in conservative media tell it, he is the defender of law and order and American values. They cast their opponents as dangerous foreign-born criminals and their feckless enablers in the Democratic Party and mainstream media.

The state’s political leaders and journalists offer a compelling rebuttal: that Trump touched off several days of protest and disruption with raids that went far beyond targeting criminals, as he previously promised, then escalated the conflict by taking the highly unusual step of sending the National Guard and Marines to Southern California.

Reaction to the raids by federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and the subsequent turmoil will divide Americans on what have become partisan lines that have become so predictable they are “calcified,” said Lynn Vavreck, a political science professor at UCLA.

“The parties want to build very different worlds, voters know it, and they know which world they want to live in,” said Vavreck, who has focused on the country’s extreme political polarization. “And because the parties are so evenly divided, and this issue is so personal to so many, the stakes are very high for people.”

1

2

3

4

5

1. A demonstrator waves a Mexican flag as a fire that was set on San Pedro street burns on Monday night. (Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times) 2. Protesters continue to clash with the Los Angeles Police Department in downtown on Monday. (Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times) 3. Protesters continue to clash with the Los Angeles Police Department in downtown Los Angeles on Monday. (Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times) 4. Anti-ICE protesters face off with the LAPD on Temple St. on Monday. (Carlin Stiehl/Los Angeles Times) 5. Flowers lay at the feet of federalized California National Guard members as they guard the Federal Building on Tuesday. (Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

As a curfew was imposed Tuesday, the sharpest street confrontations appeared to be fading and a national poll suggested Americans have mixed feelings about the events that have dominated the news.

The YouGov survey of 4,231 people found that 50% disapprove of the Trump administration’s handling of deportations, compared with 39% who approve. Pluralities of those sampled also disagreed with Trump’s deployment of the National Guard and U.S. Marines to Southern California.

But 45% of those surveyed by YouGov said they disapprove of the protests that began after recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement actions. Another 36% approved of the protests, with the rest unsure how they feel.

Faced with a middling public response to the ICE raids and subsequent protests, Trump continued to use extreme language to exaggerate the magnitude of the public safety threat and to take credit for the reduction in hostilities as the week progressed.

In a post on his TruthSocial site, he suggested that, without his military intervention, “Los Angeles would be burning just like it was burning a number of months ago, with all the houses that were lost. Los Angeles right now would be on fire.”

A large crowd hold their fist up with faith leaders outside the Federal building in downtown Los Angeles as demonstrators protest immigration raids in L.A. on Tuesday,.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

In reality, agitators set multiple spot fires in a few neighborhoods, including downtown Los Angeles and Paramount, but the blazes in recent days were tiny and quickly controlled, in contrast to the massive wildfires that devastated broad swaths of Southern California in January.

Trump’s hyperbole continued in a fundraising appeal to his supporters Tuesday. In it, he again praised his decision to deploy the National Guard (without the approval of California Gov. Gavin Newsom), concluding: “If we had not done so, Los Angeles would have been completely obliterated.”

The Republican had assistance in fueling the sense of unease.

His colleagues in Congress introduced a resolution to formally condemn the riots. “Congress steps in amid ‘out-of-control’ Los Angeles riots as Democrats resist federal help,” Fox News reported on the resolution, being led by Rep. Young Kim of Orange County.

A journalist based in New Delhi pronounced, based on unspecified evidence, that Los Angeles “is descending into a full-blown warzone.”

Veterans Affairs Secretary Douglas Collins suggested that the harm from the protesters was spreading; announcing in a social media post that a care center for vets in downtown L.A. had been temporarily closed.

“To the violent mobs in Los Angeles rioting in support of illegal immigrants and against the rule of law,” his post on X said, “your actions are interfering with Veterans’ health care.”

A chyron running with a Fox News commentary suggested “Democrats have lost their mind,” as proved by their attempts to downplay the anti-ICE riots.

Many Angelenos mocked the claims of a widespread public safety crisis. One person on X posted a picture of a dog out for a walk along a neatly kept sidewalk in a serene neighborhood, with the caption: “Los Angeles just an absolute warzone, as you can see.”

Federal officers and the National Guard protect the Federal building in downtown Los Angeles as demonstrators protest on Tuesday.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

In stark contrast to the photos of Waymo vehicles burning and police cars being pelted with rocks, a video on social media showed a group of protestors line dancing. “Oh my God! They must be stopped before their peaceful and joy filled dance party spreads to a city near you!” the caption read. “Please send in the Marines before they start doing the Cha Cha and the Macarena!”

And many people noted on social media that Sunday’s Pride parade in Hollywood for the LGBTQ+ community went off without incident, as reinforced by multiple videos of dancers and marchers celebrating along a sun-splashed parade route.

But other activists and Democrats signaled that they understand how Trump’s position can be strengthened if it appears they are condoning the more extreme episodes that emerged along with the protests — police being pelted with bottles, businesses being looted and buildings being defaced with graffiti.

On Tuesday, an X post by Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass reiterated her earlier admonitions: “Let me be clear: ANYONE who vandalized Downtown or looted stores does not care about our immigrant communities,” the mayor wrote. “You will be held accountable.”

The activist group Occupy Democrats posted a message online urging protesters to show their disdain for the violence and property damage.

“The moment violence of property damage begins, EVERY OTHER PROTESTER must immediately sit on the floor or the ground in silence, with signs down,” the advisory suggested. “The media needs to film this. This will reveal paid fake thugs posing as protesters becoming violent. ….The rest of us will demonstrate our non-violent innocence and retain our Constitutional right to peaceful protest.”

Craig Silverman, a journalist and cofounder of Indicator, a site that investigates deception on digital platforms, said that reporting on the context and true scope of the protests would have a hard time competing with the visceral images broadcast into Americans’ homes.

“It’s inevitable that the most extreme and compelling imagery will win the battle for attention on social media and on TV,” Silverman said via email. “It’s particularly challenging to deliver context and facts when social platforms incentivize the most shocking videos and claims, federal and state authorities offer contradictory messages about what’s happening.”

Dan Schnur, who teaches political science at USC and UC Berkeley, agreed. “The overwhelming majority of the protesters are peaceful,” Schnur said, “but they don’t do stories on all the planes that land safely at LAX, either.”

Protesters march in downtown Los Angeles on Tuesday.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

Though it might be too early to assess the ultimate impact of the L.A. unrest, Schnur suggested that all of the most prominent politicians in the drama might have accomplished their messaging goals: Trump motivated his base and diverted attention from his nasty feud with his former top advisor, Elon Musk, and the lack of progress on peace talks with Russia and Ukraine. Newsom “effectively unified the state and elevated his national profile” by taking on Trump. And Bass, under tough scrutiny for her handling of the city’s wildfire disaster, has also gotten a chance to use Trump as a foil.

What was not disputed was that Trump’s rapid deployment of the National Guard, without the approval of Newsom, had little precedent. And sending the Marines to L.A. was an even more extreme approach, with experts saying challenges to the deployment would test the limits of Trump’s power.

The federal Insurrection Act allows the deployment of the military for law enforcement purposes, but only under certain conditions, such as a national emergency.

California leaders say Trump acted before a true emergency developed, thereby preempting standard protocols, including the institution of curfews and the mobilization of other local police departments in a true emergency.

Even real estate developer Rick Caruso, Bass’ opponent in the last election, suggested Trump acted too hastily.

“There is no emergency, widespread threat, or out of control violence in Los Angeles,” Caruso wrote on X Sunday. “And absolutely no danger that justifies deployment of the National Guard, military, or other federal force to the streets of this or any other Southern California City.”

“We must call for calm in the streets,” Caruso added, “and deployment of the National Guard may prompt just the opposite.”

The Trump administration argued in federal court Wednesday that any judicial intervention to curtail its deployment of military troops to Los Angeles would endanger federal immigration agents and undermine the president’s authority to keep American cities safe.

Attorneys for President Trump called California’s request Tuesday for a temporary restraining order barring those deployments a “crass political stunt endangering American lives” amid violent protests over immigration raids in the city.

If granted, they wrote, a restraining order would prevent Trump “from exercising his lawful statutory and constitutional power” as commander in chief to ensure federal facilities and personnel are protected and that the nation’s immigration laws are adequately enforced.

“There is no rioters’ veto to enforcement of federal law,” they wrote. “And the President has every right under the Constitution and by statute to call forth the National Guard and Marines to quell lawless violence directed against enforcement of federal law.”

Hindering the administration’s deployment of troops, the attorneys argued, “would be constitutionally anathema. And it would be dangerous.”

The administration was responding to California’s request Tuesday that U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer issue a restraining order blocking Trump’s and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s deployments of thousands of state National Guard troops and hundreds of Marines to L.A.

The troops were deployed without the request or approval of Gov. Gavin Newsom or city leaders, who have called their presence unnecessary, politically motivated and a move to increase tensions on the streets, rather than reduce them.

Trump and other administration officials have defended the deployments as necessary, and in their filing Wednesday, the president’s attorneys argued that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other federal agents had been targeted in violent attacks and that federal facilities had been damaged and defaced.

They also said that local police had acknowledged things had spun out of control and that their response had been inadequate to restore order.

Trump’s attorneys included with their opposition a written declaration from Ernesto Santacruz Jr., field office director for ICE’s enforcement and removal operations unit in Los Angeles. He described how federal agents faced violence from protesters during a raid in the Garment District, near a Home Depot store in Paramount, and at a secure ICE processing facility downtown.

Santacruz said federal immigration officials were also having their personal information spread by protesters online, and that efforts by the Los Angeles Police Department, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department and the California Highway Patrol to restore order and address the threats on the street were inadequate.

“Even with the LAPD, LASD, and CHP all engaged in the ensuing law enforcement activities, I believe the safety of local federal facilities and safety of those conducting immigration enforcement operations in this area of responsibility requires additional manpower and resources,” Santacruz wrote.

The administration’s arguments, if adopted by the court, could have implications elsewhere. Similar demonstrations against immigration raids have erupted in San Francisco and Santa Ana and across the country, including in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, New York and Seattle. More protests were scheduled to coincide with a large military parade in Washington on Saturday.

Newsom and California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta first filed a lawsuit over the L.A. deployments Monday, arguing they are unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment — violating state sovereignty and clear federal law limiting the use of military forces for domestic policing, including the Posse Comitatus Act.

They said Tuesday that a restraining order was necessary on an emergency basis to prevent “imminent, irreparable harm” to the state, arguing that the Trump administration intended for the military troops to “accompany federal immigration enforcement officers on raids throughout Los Angeles.”

Bonta said Trump was using military personnel as “a political pawn” to “create a confrontational situation.” Newsom said the federal government was turning the military against American citizens in a way that “threatens the very core of our democracy.” Trump, he said, was “behaving like a tyrant, not a President.”

Constitutional scholars and members of Congress also have raised concerns about the executive branch deploying military assets to quell street protests, suggesting such tactics are most commonly used by authoritarian strongmen and dictators.

A coalition of 18 other state attorneys general issued a statement Wednesday backing Bonta and California’s lawsuit, saying Trump’s decision to deploy troops without the consent of California’s leaders was “unlawful, unconstitutional, and undemocratic.”

“The federal administration should be working with local leaders to keep everyone safe, not mobilizing the military against the American people,” said the statement, which was joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon and Vermont.

In their response to California’s restraining order request Wednesday, the president’s attorneys said the military forces in L.A. would not be directly engaged in policing, and that state officials had offered zero evidence to suggest otherwise.

“Neither the National Guard nor the Marines are engaged in law enforcement. Rather, they are protecting law enforcement, consistent with longstanding practice and the inherent protective power to provide for the safety of federal property and personnel,” Trump’s attorneys wrote.

A hearing on the state’s request for a restraining order is scheduled for 1:30 p.m. Thursday. The outcome could potentially affect how federal resources are deployed at future demonstrations in L.A. and beyond, including in coming days.

The administration has said immigration raids will continue in L.A. and nationwide. Trump has warned that any protesters who show up at the military parade in Washington will be “met with heavy force.”

The parade is for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, according to the administration, but critics have derided it as an authoritarian show of strongman power by Trump — whose birthday is also Saturday.

California’s two U.S. Senators pushed top military officials Tuesday for more information about how hundreds of U.S. Marines were deployed to Los Angeles over the objections of local leaders and what the active-duty military will do on the ground.

In a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla asked the Pentagon to explain the legal basis for deploying 700 active-duty Marines amid ongoing protests and unrest over immigration raids across Southern California.

“A decision to deploy active-duty military personnel within the United States should only be undertaken during the most extreme circumstances, and these are not them,” Schiff and Padilla wrote in the letter. “That this deployment was made over the objections of state authorities is all the more unjustifiable.”

California is challenging the legality of the militarization, arguing in a lawsuit filed Monday that the deployment of both the National Guard and the Marines violated the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which spells out the limits of federal power.

Schiff and Padilla asked Hegseth to clarify the mission the Marines will be following during their deployment, as well as what training the troops have received for crowd control, use of force and de-escalation.

The senators also asked whether the Defense Department received any requests from the White House or the Department of Homeland Security about “the scope of the Marines’ mission and duties.”

Hegseth mobilized the Marines Monday from a base in Twentynine Palms. Convoys were seen heading east on the 10 Freeway toward Los Angeles on Monday evening.

Schiff and Padilla said that Congress received a notification from the U.S. Northern Command on Monday about the mobilization that said the Marines had been deployed to “restore order” and support the roughly 4,000 members of the state National Guard who had been called into service Saturday and Monday.

The notification, the senators said, “did not provide critical information to understand the legal authority, mission, or rules of engagement for Marines involved in this domestic deployment.”

The California National Guard was first mobilized Saturday night over Newsom’s objection.

The last time a president sent the National Guard into a state without a request from the governor was six decades ago, when President Lyndon B. Johnson mobilized troops in Alabama to defend civil rights demonstrators and enforce a federal court order in 1965.

Trump and the White House have said the military mobilization is legal under Section 12406 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code on Armed Forces. The statute gives the president the authority to federalize the National Guard if there is “a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States,” but also states that the Guard must be called up through an order from the state’s governor.

Trump has said that without the mobilization of the military, “Los Angeles would have been completely obliterated.”

Days of protests have included some violent clashes with police and some vandalism and burglaries.

“It was heading in the wrong direction,” Trump said Monday. “It’s now heading in the right direction. And we hope to have the support of Gavin, because Gavin is the big beneficiary as we straighten out his problems. I mean, his state is a mess.”

On Tuesday morning, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass said city officials had not been told what the military would do, given that the National Guard is already in place outside of federal buildings.

“This is just absolutely unnecessary,” Bass said. “People have asked me, ‘What are the Marines going to do when they get here?’ That’s a good question. I have no idea.”

On Tuesday, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta sought a restraining order to block the deployment.

California on Tuesday asked a federal court for a temporary restraining order blocking the Trump administration’s deployment of both state National Guard forces and U.S. Marines to Los Angeles amid mass protests over sweeping federal immigration enforcement efforts.

The request was filed in the same federal lawsuit the state and California Gov. Gavin Newsom filed Monday, in which they alleged Trump had exceeded his authority and violated the U.S. Constitution by sending military forces into an American city without the request or approval of the state governor or local officials.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta, whose office is handling the litigation on behalf of both Newsom and the state, said the restraining order was necessary to bring an immediate stop to the deployments, which local officials have contended are not needed and only adding to tensions sparked by sweeping immigration detentions and arrests in communities with large immigrant communities.

“The President is looking for any pretense to place military forces on American streets to intimidate and quiet those who disagree with him,” Bonta said in a statement Tuesday. “It’s not just immoral — it’s illegal and dangerous.”

Newsom, in his own statement, echoed Bonta, saying the federal government “is now turning the military against American citizens.”

“Sending trained warfighters onto the streets is unprecedented and threatens the very core of our democracy,” Newsom said. “Donald Trump is behaving like a tyrant, not a President.”

The state’s request Tuesday asked for the restraining order to be granted by 1 p.m. Tuesday “to prevent immediate and irreparable harm” to the state.

Absent such relief, the Trump administration’s “use of the military and the federalized National Guard to patrol communities or otherwise engage in general law enforcement activities creates imminent harm to State Sovereignty, deprives the State of vital resources, escalates tensions and promotes (rather than quells) civil unrest,” the state contended.

The request specifically notes that the use of military forces such as Marines to conduct domestic policing tasks is unlawful, and that Trump administration officials have stated that is how the Marines being deployed to Los Angeles may be used.

“The Marine Corps’ deployment for law enforcement purposes is likewise unlawful. For more than a century, the Posse Comitatus Act has expressly prohibited the use of the active duty armed forces and federalized national guard for civilian law enforcement,” the state’s request states. “And the President and Secretary Hegseth have made clear — publicly and privately — that the Marines are not in Los Angeles to stand outside a federal building.”

At Trump’s direction, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth mobilized nearly 2,000 members of the state’s National Guard on Saturday after Trump said L.A. was descending into chaos and federal agents were in danger, then mobilized another 2,000 members on Monday. The Pentagon approved the deployment of 700 U.S. Marines from the base in Twentynine Palms to the city Monday, with the stated mission of protecting federal buildings and agents.

Hegseth said the deployments would last 60 days, and the acting Pentagon budget chief said the cost would be at least $134 million. He told members of the House appropriations defense subcommittee that the length of the deployments was intended to “ensure that those rioters, looters and thugs on the other side assaulting our police officers know that we’re not going anywhere.”

Local officials have decried acts of violence, property damage and burglaries that have occurred in tandem with the protests, but have also said that Trump administration officials have blown the problems out of proportion and that there is no need for federal forces in the city.

Constitutional scholars and some members of Congress have also questioned the domestic deployment of military forces, especially without the buy-in of local and state officials — calling it a tactic of dictators and authoritarian regimes.

L.A. Mayor Karen Bass questioned what Marines would do on the ground, while Police Chief Jim McDonnell said the arrival of military forces in the city without “clear coordination” with local law enforcement “presents a significant logistical and operational challenge for those of us tasked with safeguarding this city.”

Bonta had said Monday that the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution limits federal power around such deployments, that the deployment of National Guard forces to quell protests without Newsom’s consent was “unlawful” and “unprecedented,” and that the deployment of Marines would be “similarly unlawful.”

On Tuesday, he said the state was asking the court to “immediately block the Trump Administration from ordering the military or federalized national guard from patrolling our communities or otherwise engaging in general law enforcement activities beyond federal property.”

United States President Donald Trump has ordered the deployment of Marines in Los Angeles to quell protests that have erupted against the arrests of 44 people on Friday for violating immigration laws.

Trump on Monday also doubled the strength of National Guard forces that his administration has deployed in the country’s second largest city to 4,000 soldiers.

His administration has justified the deployments by arguing, in part, that local authorities were failing to ensure the safety of law enforcement officials and federal property.

But the deployment of the Marines – coming on the back of the move to send the National Guard to Los Angeles – has sparked criticism, not just from Trump’s political opponents like California Governor Gavin Newsom but also from the Los Angeles police.

The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) has said the deployment of Marines will make its job harder. Here’s what the dispute is about, and why the LAPD argues that the deployment of military forces could complicate its work:

What are the US Marines?

The Marines are a branch of the US armed forces and are a component of the Navy. The Marine Corps was first established in 1775.

Its soldiers are trained for land and sea operations and have a particular focus on amphibious warfare, which refers to attacks launched from ships onto shore.

US citizens or legal residents who have a high school diploma and are aged 17 to 28 are eligible to enlist for the Marines. They have to undergo an initial strength test to be recruited. Recruits undergo about 13 weeks of initial training to become a part of the Marine Corps. Once a year, each Marine undergoes a battle-readiness test with a focus on physical readiness and stamina.

There are 172,577 active duty Marine personnel in the US as well as 33,036 reserve personnel as of 2023, the latest data released by the US Department of Defense.

What is the Marine deployment?

The US military’s Northern Command released a statement on Monday saying it had activated a Marine infantry battalion in Los Angeles that was on alert over the weekend. About 700 Marines with the 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines and 1st Marine Division will “seamlessly integrate” with National Guard troops deployed in the city, it said.

Initially, the LAPD was involved in quelling civil unrest due to the protests, starting on Friday. On Saturday, Trump deployed about 2,000 National Guard soldiers to Los Angeles County, defying objections by Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass.

After the Marine deployment announcement, Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said an “additional” 2,000 National Guard soldiers would also be mobilised in addition to the 2,000 who had been sent to the city over the weekend.

What did the LAPD say about the Marine deployment?

On Monday, Police Chief Jim McDonnell released a statement saying the LAPD had not received a formal notification that the Marines would be coming to LA.

“The possible arrival of federal military forces in Los Angeles absent clear coordination presents a significant logistical and operational challenge for those of us charged with safeguarding this city,” he said.

McDonnell added that the LAPD and its partners “have decades of experience managing large-scale public demonstrations, and we remain confident in our ability to do so professionally and effectively”.

The LAPD boss urged open and continuous communication between all law enforcement agencies involved to avoid confusion and escalation.

What does the LAPD mean by this?

History indicates that a lack of communication, coupled with differences in approach based on different agencies’ training, can inflame already tense situations that law enforcement officials confront.

While the US routinely sends its Marines on overseas missions, it is rare for the US president to deploy Marines to quell a domestic crisis.

The last time this happened was in 1992 in Los Angeles during protests against the acquittal of four policemen who had been filmed beating Rodney King, a Black man. Six days of riots broke out, and 2,000 National Guard soldiers and 1,500 Marines were deployed in the city. The riots in 1992 resulted in the deaths of 63 people and widespread looting, assaults and arson, unlike the ongoing protests, which have been largely peaceful.

On one occasion in 1992, LAPD officers and Marines were called to respond to a domestic disturbance at a local home.

When they arrived, a shotgun was fired out the front door. A police officer yelled, “Cover me,” which to the police means to prepare to shoot if necessary but to hold one’s fire. For Marines trained for combat, “cover me” means to use firepower. The Marines shot more than 200 bullets instantly as a response to the officer. Three children were inside the home at the time. While no one was killed, federal soldiers were withdrawn from Los Angeles shortly after this.

While the deployment of US Marines to Los Angeles in 1992 was carried out in coordination with state and local authorities, they are now being sent against the wishes of the state government, Bass and the LAPD.

That compounds the risks that could follow, experts said.

“If the administration escalates to active duty troops, especially without coordination with state leaders, it would amount to a militarization of civilian protest, not a restoration of order,” attorney Robert Patillo said in a written statement to Al Jazeera. “That move could violate the First Amendment rights of peaceful protesters and would likely inflame tensions on the ground, not resolve them.” 

The First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the freedom of speech and assembly.

Is the Marine deployment necessary?

Reports from LA suggest that the National Guard troops who have been activated are barely being used in the city, raising questions about whether the deployment of Marines or additional National Guard soldiers is really necessary.

Al Jazeera’s Rob Reynolds, reporting from LA, said Monday’s protests organised by unions in the city centre were peaceful.

“[The National Guard] didn’t engage with the protesters. They didn’t do much of anything other than stand there in their military uniforms,” Reynolds said.

On his personal X account, Newsom posted that the initial 2,000 National Guard soldiers were not given food or water. Of them, only 300 were deployed while the rest were sitting in federal buildings without orders, he said. Al Jazeera could not independently verify this.

I was just informed Trump is deploying another 2,000 Guard troops to L.A.

The first 2,000? Given no food or water. Only approx. 300 are deployed — the rest are sitting, unused, in federal buildings without orders.

This isn’t about public safety. It’s about stroking a dangerous…

— Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 9, 2025

In another post, Newsom wrote that “the Secretary of Defense is illegally deploying [the Marines] onto American streets.”

U.S. Marines serve a valuable purpose for this country — defending democracy. They are not political pawns.

The Secretary of Defense is illegally deploying them onto American streets so Trump can have a talking point at his parade this weekend.

It’s a blatant abuse of power.…

— Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 10, 2025

On Monday, Newsom announced that he had filed a lawsuit against Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth “to end the illegal takeover” of the National Guard. Trump’s federalisation of the National Guard on Saturday marked the first time in 60 years that a US president has activated the guard in defiance of a state governor’s wishes.

“For Trump to deploy regular armed forces, such as the marines, would require him to clear another legal hurdle. He would have to invoke the Insurrection Act, which is very rare and would escalate the situation to a constitutional crisis,” Gregory Magarian, professor of law at Washington University’s School of Law in St Louis, Missouri, told Al Jazeera in an emailed statement.

So far, it is unclear whether Trump invoked the Insurrection Act to deploy the Marines. To activate the National Guard, he did not invoke the Insurrection Act but a similar federal law, Title 10 of the United States Code.

“While the Insurrection Act technically gives the president the authority to deploy active-duty military forces under extreme conditions, we are nowhere near the legal threshold that would justify sending in the marines,” Patillo said.

What is the Trump administration saying?

Hegseth wrote in an X post that Marines had been deployed “due to increased threats to federal law enforcement officers and federal buildings”.

“We have an obligation to defend federal law enforcement officers – even if Gavin Newsom will not,” Hegseth wrote.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in an X post on Monday that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, who have been leading the immigration arrests, will “continue to enforce the law” despite the protests.

What is the latest update on the LA immigration protests?

Over the weekend, the LAPD arrested 50 protesters: 29 on Saturday and 21 on Sunday.

Local news outlets have reported protests against the arrests have also begun in at least nine other US cities, including New York, Philadelphia and San Francisco.

California officials on Monday filed a federal lawsuit over the mobilization of the state’s National Guard during the weekend’s immigration protests in Los Angeles, accusing President Trump of overstepping his federal authority and violating the U.S. Constitution.

As thousands of people gathered in the streets to protest raids and arrests by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Trump mobilized nearly 2,000 members of the National Guard over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said that state officials could handle the situation and that Trump was sowing chaos in the streets for political purposes.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said the decision by Trump and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth violated the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which spells out the limits of federal power. Bonta said the state will seek a restraining order for the “unlawful, unprecedented” deployment of the National Guard, and argues in the 22-page lawsuit that an impending deployment of U.S. Marines was “similarly unlawful.”

“Trump and Hegseth ignored law enforcement’s expertise and guidance and trampled over our state’s, California’s, sovereignty,” Bonta said at a news conference.

Experts and state officials say Trump’s actions and the subsequent lawsuit have thrust the U.S. into uncharted legal territory. Bonta said there have not been many court rulings on the questions at play because the statute Trump cited “has been rarely used, for good reason.”

“It is very unusual and unnecessary, and out of keeping with our constitutional tradition, that they are there without the consent of the governor, in a situation where the governor says that state authorities have the situation under control,” said Laura A. Dickinson, a professor at the George Washington University Law School.

Whether Trump’s action was illegal, Dickinson said, “is really untested.”

Trump and the White House say the military mobilization is legal under Section 12406 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code on Armed Forces. The statute gives the president the authority to federalize the National Guard if there is “a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States,” but says the Guard must be called up through an order from the state’s governor.

Because founders distrusted military rule, the Constitution allows the president to deploy the military for civil law enforcement only in “dire, narrow circumstances,” Bonta’s complaint argues. But, the lawsuit says, the Trump administration appears to be using the statute “as a mechanism to evade these time-honored constitutional limits.”

Trump has said that the mobilization was necessary to “deal with the violent, instigated riots,” and that without the National Guard, “Los Angeles would have been completely obliterated.”

Days of protests after the ICE raids included some violent clashes involving protesters, local police and federal officials and some vandalism and burglaries. Local officials have decried those actions but have defended the right of Angelenos to peacefully demonstrate.

“It was heading in the wrong direction,” Trump said at the White House. “It’s now heading in the right direction. And we hope to have the support of Gavin, because Gavin is the big beneficiary as we straighten out his problems. I mean, his state is a mess.”

The part of the law that “the Trump administration is going to have difficulty explaining away” requires that orders to call up the National Guard “be issued through the governors, which is obviously not happening here,” said Elizabeth Goitein, the senior director of the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program.

Less black and white, she said, is what happens “if the president tries to exercise the authority provided by that law to federalize the National Guard and the governor refuses to issue the orders.”

As the governor, Newsom is the commander in chief of the California National Guard. On Saturday night, Hegseth sent a memo to the head of the California Guard to mobilize nearly 2,000 members. The leader of the state National Guard then sent the memo to Newsom’s office, the complaint says. Neither Newsom nor his office consented to the mobilization, the lawsuit says.

Newsom wrote to Hegseth on Sunday, asking him to rescind the troop deployment. The letter said the mobilization was “a serious breach of state sovereignty that seems intentionally designed to inflame the situation, while simultaneously depriving the state from deploying these personnel and resources where they are truly required.”

Hegseth issued another memo Monday night deploying another 2,000 members of the National Guard, the lawsuit says.

Newsom has warned that the executive order that Trump signed applies to other states as well as to California, which will “allow him to go into any state and do the same thing.”

Legal experts said the statute that the White House used to justify the National Guard mobilization is usually invoked in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807, a wide-reaching law that gives presidents the emergency power to call up the military in the United States if they believe the situation warrants it.

Goitein said presidents generally invoke the Insurrection Act, then use the statute that Trump cited as the “call-up authority” to actually mobilize the military. How the law stands on its own, she said, “is one of the legal questions that have not come up before in the courts.”

The Insurrection Act has been invoked 30 times in the history of the country, and Trump has not invoked it in Los Angeles. It was last invoked in 1992, when then-Gov. Pete Wilson asked President George H.W. Bush to federalize the National Guard in the wake of the Rodney King verdict.

The last time a president sent the National Guard into a state without a request from the governor was six decades ago, when President Lyndon B. Johnson mobilized troops in Alabama to defend civil rights demonstrators and enforce a federal court order in 1965.

Bonta’s office said the specific statute that Trump is using has been invoked only once before, when President Nixon mobilized the National Guard to deliver the mail during a U.S. Postal Service strike in 1970.

The argument that Trump has violated the 10th Amendment is a clever subversion of a line of thinking that has traditionally been backed by conservative judges, said Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law.

The 10th Amendment says that the federal government has only the powers specifically assigned by the Constitution, and other powers are controlled by the states.

“Deploying over 4,000 federalized military forces to quell a protest or prevent future protests despite the lack of evidence that local law enforcement was incapable of asserting control and ensuring public safety during such protests represents the exact type of intrusion on state power that is at the heart of the 10th Amendment,” state lawyers argue in the lawsuit.

“The state has a strong argument that … by nationalizing the state guard, that Trump is commandeering the state,” Chemerinsky said.

He said the Supreme Court has ruled on the 10th Amendment only a handful of times in recent decades, including saying that Congress couldn’t require states to accept federal mandates related to sports betting, background checks for guns and radioactive waste disposal.

Times staff writer Seema Mehta contributed to this report.

California National Guard troops arrived in Los Angeles on Sunday in a show of force following scattered clashes between immigration agents and protesters and amid a widening political divide between California and the Trump administration.

The move by President Trump to activate nearly 2,000 guardsmen marked the first time since 1965 that a president has deployed a state’s National Guard without a request from that state’s governor. The decision was met with stern rebukes from state and local officials, including Gov. Gavin Newsom who said the deployment was “not to meet an unmet need, but to manufacture a crisis.”

Newsom’s office on Sunday afternoon sent a formal letter to the Trump administration asking them to rescind their deployment of troops.

“There is currently no need for the National Guard to be deployed in Los Angeles, and to do so in this unlawful manner and for such a lengthy period is a serious breach of state sovereignty that seems intentionally designed to inflame the situation, while simultaneously depriving the state from deploying these personnel and resources where they are truly required,” the letter reads.

On Sunday afternoon, there were tense moments outside a federal detention center in downtown L.A., with officers firing tear gas and nonlethal rounds at protesters.

But other areas that had seen unrest over the last few days, including the Garment District, Paramount and Compton, seemed calm.

It was unclear exactly how many troops were deployed to Los Angeles as of Sunday afternoon. The National Guard’s 79th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, based in San Diego, said Sunday that 300 personnel were on the ground to protect federal property and personnel.

Trump administration officials have seized on the isolated incidents of violence to suggest wide parts of L.A. are out of control. On Sunday, Trump took to social media to claim “violent, insurrectionist mobs are swarming and attacking” federal law enforcement.

“A once great American City, Los Angeles, has been invaded and occupied by Illegal Aliens and Criminals,” he wrote, blaming Democratic politicians for not cracking down earlier.

While officials have not said how long the immigration enforcement actions will continue, Trump told reporters Sunday, “we’re going to have troops everywhere. We’re not going to let this happen to our country.”

Many California officials, who have long been at odds with Trump, say the president was trying to exploit the situation for his political advantage and sow unneeded disorder and confusion.

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called the deployment of federalized troops a “chaotic escalation” and issued a reminder that “Los Angeles will always stand with everyone who calls our city home.”

While most demonstrators have gathered peacefully, some have hurled objects at law enforcement personnel, set garbage and vehicles on fire and defaced federal property with graffiti.

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation in Los Angeles over the past week has resulted in the arrest of 118 people, including some who have been convicted of drug trafficking, assault, child cruelty, domestic violence and robbery, according to the agency.

Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin and Republican politicians who support Trump’s immigration actions have characterized the protests as riots intended to “keep rapists, murderers and other violent criminals loose on Los Angeles streets.”

Representative Maxine Waters speak to the media at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles on Sunday.

(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)

On Sunday morning, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) addressed roughly two dozen National Guard soldiers posted outside the Metropolitan Detention Center on Alameda Street. She had arrived at the center to inquire about Service Employees International Union California President David Huerta, who was injured and detained while documenting an immigration enforcement raid in downtown Los Angeles on Friday.

“Who are you going to shoot?” Waters asked the solders. “If you’re going to shoot me, you better shoot straight.”

Remnants of tear gas used by law enforcement during protests Saturday lingered in the air around the building, at times forcing Waters to cough. Waters, an outspoken critic of the president, called the deployment of National Guard troops an unnecessary escalation of tensions and accused Trump of “trying to make an example” out of Los Angeles, a longstanding sanctuary city.

Leonard Tunstad, a 69-year-old Los Angeles resident, rode his bike up to the edge of the loading dock where troops were stationed and asked them if they really wanted to be loyal to a president that “had 34 felony convictions.” He said he felt compelled to shout facts about Trump at the guardsmen because he feared the young men have been “indoctrinated against their own citizens.”

Tunstad said he believed the deployment was a gross overreaction by the Trump administration, noting the city has been home to far more raucous protests that were handled by local police.

“This is just a show. This is just a spectacle,” he said.

A Department of Homeland Security officer approached one of the louder demonstrators saying that he “didn’t want a repeat of last night” and didn’t want to “get political.” He told protesters as long as they stick to the sidewalk and don’t block vehicle access to the loading dock there wouldn’t be any problems.

Later, DHS and California National Guard troops shoved dozens of protesters into Alameda Street, hitting people with riot shields, firing pellets into the ground and deploying tear gas to clear a path for a caravan of DHS, Border Patrol and military vehicles to enter the detention center.

Jose Longoria struggled to breathe as clouds of tear gas filled Alameda Street. He pointed to a white scuff mark on his shoe, saying that a tear gas canister had hit him in the foot, causing him to limp slightly.

“We’re not armed. We’re just peacefully protesting. They’re acting out,” Longoria said of the officers.

Julie Solis, 50, walked back and forth along Alameda Street holding a Mexican flag and urging the crowd to make their voices heard, but to keep the scene peaceful. She said she believes the National Guard was deployed solely to provoke a response and make Los Angeles look unruly to justify further aggression from federal law enforcement.

People march toward the Metropolitan Detention Center during an immigration march in downtown Los Angeles on Sunday.

(Luke Johnson/Los Angeles Times)

“They want arrests. They want to see us fail. We need to be peaceful. We need to be eloquent,” she said.

National Guard troops were last summoned to Los Angeles and other Southern California cities in 2020, during the George Floyd protests. Those deployments were authorized by Newsom.

However, the last time the National Guard was called on by a president without a request from a state governor was 60 years ago, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators.

Antonio Villaraigosa, former speaker of the California Assembly and a former L.A. mayor, said Trump’s move was “meant to incite more fear and chaos in our community.”

“Trump’s military-style mass deportation ICE raids in California have gone too far, tearing families apart and threatening public safety,” he said in a statement. “The raids at stores and workplaces are wrong, just as it’s wrong to separate families with raids at schools, graduations, and churches.”

In Paramount, a group of camouflaged National Guard troops were stationed in a business park with armored vehicles where a Department of Homeland Security office is located.

Jessica Juarez walked along Alondra Boulevard with a trash bag full of spent tear gas canisters on Sunday morning. Her voice grew hoarse as she helped a group of volunteers clean up after clashes between protesters and law enforcement the day before.

United States Attorney Bill Essayli told NBC in an interview that an officer suffered a broken wrist and others were injured by rocks and cement block pieces that were thrown at them during Saturday’s protest. He said it was “an extremely violent crowd,” but officials are “undeterred.”

An acrid odor still hung in the air from the gas and flash bang grenades law enforcement fired on protesters Saturday, while scorched asphalt marked the intersection outside a Home Depot where federal authorities had staged.

“I’m proud of our community, of the strength we showed,” said Juarez, 40. “It’s like they put so much fear into Paramount and for what? These guys didn’t even clean up after themselves.”

The images of Paramount shrouded in smoke and flanked by police in riot gear are unusual for this community of about 50,000 residents. In many ways, the city became the starting point for the escalating federal response.

“What else do you call it but an attack on Paramount and the people who live here?” said resident and union organizer Alejandro Maldonado. “People in the community were standing up to unjust immigration policies.”

For some, the fight between Los Angeles residents and the federal government is akin to David and Goliath. “It really does seem like they wanted to pick a fight with the little guy,” union organizer Ardelia Aldridge said.

Staff writer Seema Mehta and Brittny Mejia contributed to this report