Tensions Escalate in Los Angeles as Protests Against Immigration Crackdown Continue, National Guard Deployed

For a third consecutive day, the streets of Los Angeles became a flashpoint of tension and confrontation as protests against the Trump administration's intensified immigration crackdown continued. Sunday saw federal agents and local law enforcement clash with demonstrators, leading to the deployment of hundreds of National Guard troops in a move that sparked significant political controversy. Yet, amidst the unrest concentrated in specific areas, the vast majority of the sprawling city maintained its typical weekend rhythm, a stark contrast highlighting the localized nature of the turmoil.

As dusk settled over downtown Los Angeles, the echoes of confrontation lingered. Jim McDonnell, the chief of the Los Angeles Police Department, voiced concerns about the escalating violence, attributing it not to the core group protesting immigration policies but to “people who do this all the time.” His remarks came as California leaders, including Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, urged protesters to remain peaceful, while simultaneously criticizing the federal government's actions.

Governor Newsom and Mayor Bass were particularly vocal in their opposition to President Trump's decision to deploy hundreds of National Guard troops to the city on Sunday. They argued that the administration had overstepped its authority. However, Chief McDonnell, while initially stating his department would not have requested National Guard assistance, acknowledged the severity of the day's violence, suggesting a “reassessment” might be necessary.

Despite their deployment to help manage the protests, videos and reports indicated that National Guard troops largely avoided direct engagement with demonstrators. Instead, the primary clashes involved Los Angeles police officers and federal agents, who utilized crowd-control munitions to disperse crowds.

Sunday afternoon saw relatively peaceful demonstrations near a downtown detention center. However, a group of protesters later moved onto the nearby 101 freeway, causing a brief disruption to traffic before California Highway Patrol officers intervened to clear the roadway. The situation devolved into hours of clashes under an overpass, where officers deployed gas and other munitions in response to demonstrators throwing objects like scooters, fireworks, and stones, some of which resulted in police vehicles being set ablaze and three officers sustaining injuries.

By midnight, the physical remnants of the day's turmoil were visible across downtown streets: burned vehicles, damaged barricades, scattered debris, and graffiti defacing government buildings.

The Political Firestorm: National Guard Deployment and Executive Authority

President Trump's decision to deploy several hundred California National Guard members to Los Angeles on Sunday ignited a political firestorm, particularly with California Governor Gavin Newsom. This move was made against the explicit wishes of Governor Newsom, who formally requested that President Trump rescind the order, calling it “unlawful” and a “serious breach of state sovereignty.”

The president invoked a rarely used provision within Title 10 of the U.S. Code, which allows for federal deployment of the National Guard in cases of “a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.” This action is highly unusual; the last time a president overrode a state governor to activate the National Guard for domestic unrest or law enforcement purposes was in 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson deployed troops to Alabama to protect civil rights marchers in Selma.

Governor Newsom's office, in a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, argued that local law enforcement was capable of maintaining order and that the federal intervention was unnecessary and counterproductive. “In dynamic and fluid situations such as the one in Los Angeles, state and local authorities are the most appropriate ones to evaluate the need for resources to safeguard life and property,” wrote David Sapp, the governor’s legal affairs secretary. He also contended that the president's order did not comply with the law, which typically requires deployment orders to be issued through the state's governor.

President Trump and his administration, however, framed the situation dramatically differently. They portrayed the demonstrations as an “insurrection” and an “invasion” by “violent, insurrectionist mobs.” Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff, a key architect of the administration's immigration policies, took to social media to describe the scene, stating, “Look at all the foreign flags. Los Angeles is occupied territory.” This rhetoric underscored the administration's view of the protests as an attack on federal authority and the nation itself.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt echoed this sentiment, stating, “Illegal criminal aliens and violent mobs have been committing arson, throwing rocks at vehicles, and attacking federal law enforcement for days.”

The standoff between the federal government and California's leadership highlights the deep political divisions surrounding immigration policy. Republicans defended the president's actions as necessary to protect federal officials and public safety, while Democrats accused the administration of escalating tensions for political gain and creating a crisis where local authorities had the situation under control.

Senator Alex Padilla of California criticized the administration's approach, saying they “create a crisis of their own making and come in with all the theatrics and cruelty of immigration enforcement.” He argued that the protests were a natural response in a community passionate about fundamental rights.

The deployment of the National Guard without the governor's consent is seen by many as the latest example of President Trump's willingness to push the boundaries of executive power and target political adversaries. This follows previous threats against California regarding federal funding over issues like transgender athletes in sports and high-speed rail projects.

Despite the political rhetoric, the reality on the ground was complex. While some protesters engaged in destructive behavior, many others demonstrated peacefully, motivated by personal connections to the immigrant community and a desire to show solidarity.

Voices from the Ground: Why People Protested

Amidst the chaos and political maneuvering, the human element of the protests remained central. Many demonstrators in downtown Los Angeles on Sunday were first- or second-generation immigrants, driven by a deep sense of solidarity with neighbors and family members affected by the recent immigration raids.

“This is a real threat, this is not just talk,” said Zander Calderon, 36, from northeast Los Angeles. He spoke of knowing several people who had received deportation orders, including one neighbor who chose to self-deport rather than live in fear. Calderon, wearing a poncho adorned with the Virgin Mary and the colors of the Mexican flag, embodied the blend of cultural pride and political resistance present in the crowd.

For some, like Elizabeth Torres, 36, the decision to protest was immediate and deeply personal. “This morning I couldn’t stay home anymore,” she said, carrying a Mexican flag outside the Metropolitan Detention Center. Her hope was that those detained inside could see her and know they were not alone.

Martín Hoecker-Martinez, a physics professor, traveled an hour and a half to join the demonstration, waving both American and Colombian flags. As an American citizen whose mother emigrated from Colombia, he felt compelled to act. “I’m an American citizen, and I think that one of the greatest points of pride of the United States is that we are a country of immigrants,” he stated, expressing frustration with the government's actions.

Nicole Garcia, 35, brought her teenage son to the protest, despite safety concerns, wanting him to witness “what it looks like when community comes together.” Her attire, a veil and face paint symbolizing the Mexican Day of the Dead, spoke to the cultural identity intertwined with the protest.

Brianna Vargas, 24, using a megaphone on an overpass above the 101 highway, explained she was protesting for her parents, who emigrated from Mexico and El Salvador, and for others too afraid to leave their homes. She emphasized the difference between online solidarity and being physically present: “It’s different when you’re actually here.”

These individual stories highlight the diverse motivations behind the protests, rooted in personal experiences, community ties, and a shared concern over the impact of federal immigration policies.

Incidents of Violence and Property Damage

While many protesters demonstrated peacefully, the weekend in Los Angeles was also marked by instances of violence and property damage, which law enforcement officials attributed to a separate element within the crowds.

During the clashes near the 101 freeway, demonstrators threw objects at California Highway Patrol officers, who responded with tear gas and flash bangs. Some police vehicles were set on fire, and three officers sustained minor injuries.

Late Sunday, reports emerged of looting in areas near the Civic Center downtown, prompting the LAPD to declare the assembly unlawful and order everyone to leave the area. The darkened streets of downtown later showed the aftermath, littered with debris and marked by graffiti.

A particularly notable incident involved a man who appeared to aim his van at protesters near a gas station in downtown Los Angeles. Eyewitnesses reported people scattering and throwing objects at the vehicle. The LAPD later detained the man, stating that “Multiple charges to follow.” It was unclear if he was armed.

Another striking incident involved Waymo driverless taxis. Multiple vehicles were vandalized and set on fire on Los Angeles Street. Protesters were seen painting graffiti on the vehicles and posing in front of the burning cars. Concerns were raised about the electric vehicles' batteries exploding. Following the vandalism, Waymo cut off service to the area and began removing vehicles from the streets.

LAPD Police Chief Jim McDonnell stated that 10 people were arrested on Sunday, adding to the 29 arrests made the previous day. He reiterated that the violence was being perpetrated by individuals distinct from the majority of peaceful protesters.

Crowd Control Tactics and Munitions

The response by law enforcement included the use of crowd-control munitions. One type reportedly used was a 37-millimeter foam baton round, designed as a less-lethal projectile for crowd dispersal. Its use in Los Angeles echoes tactics seen during the 2020 protests following the murder of George Floyd.

According to an independent examination of the LAPD’s 2020 response to the George Floyd protests, the 37-mm foam baton round requires less specialized training to use properly compared to other munitions. It can be fired indirectly, skipping along the ground in front of a crowd to disperse them.

However, the report also notes that other foam projectiles, like the 40-millimeter launcher, are intended for targeting specific individuals and carry a greater risk of fatal injury. Concerns about the misuse of these munitions have been raised by human rights organizations. A 2023 Amnesty International and Omega Research Foundation report found that police departments globally often misuse less-lethal munitions like the 37-mm round, leading to increased injuries and fatalities.

The presence and use of these tools in Los Angeles underscore the escalating nature of the confrontations and raise questions about appropriate crowd control measures during protests.

Protests Beyond Los Angeles and Denial of Access

The wave of protests against the immigration crackdown was not confined to Los Angeles. A solidarity protest in San Francisco on Sunday also turned violent, resulting in at least 60 arrests and injuries to two police officers. The demonstration began peacefully outside the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office but escalated when protesters marched towards police officers in riot gear. Objects were thrown, and physical altercations occurred as both sides pushed against metal barricades. Graffiti, including threatening messages, appeared on buildings, and public transit was disrupted.

In Pasadena, a city in Los Angeles County, sightings of federal immigration vehicles prompted a protest outside a local hotel. Dozens of demonstrators chanted and received support from passing drivers, creating a scene that contrasted sharply with the violence elsewhere. Pasadena city officials stated there were no immigration enforcement operations in the city that day, only federal personnel staying in hotels. Mayor Victor Gordo of Pasadena, an immigrant himself, expressed pride in his community's peaceful demonstration and the personal significance of the issue.

Adding another layer to the tensions, lawmakers in both California and New York reported being denied access to federal detention facilities over the weekend. Three Democratic members of Congress from California were reportedly turned away from the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown Los Angeles. Representative Maxine Waters stated she was denied entry while trying to check on David Huerta, a union leader and U.S. citizen arrested during the protests. Video showed a door being shut in her face. Representatives Jimmy Gomez and Norma Torres also reported being denied entry and claimed officers sprayed an irritant to deter them. They emphasized their right as members of Congress to oversee the well-being and conditions of detainees.

Similarly, in New York, Representatives Adriano Espaillat and Nydia Velázquez said they were barred from entering an immigration detention facility in Manhattan to investigate reports of overcrowding and poor conditions. They were told it was a “sensitive facility.” Both lawmakers expressed outrage, asserting their duty to supervise federal buildings and stating that the denial of access was unacceptable in the United States. A spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security stated that the lawmakers arrived unannounced and that ICE officials would have provided a tour with prior notice to avoid disrupting operations.

The nonprofit Immigrant Defenders Law Center reported receiving accounts of federal agents refusing detainees access to lawyers and denying food or water for extended periods, describing federal facilities as “islands of lawlessness.”

Ordinary Life Continues Amidst Disruption

Despite the intense clashes and political drama unfolding in specific locations, a striking aspect of the weekend in Los Angeles was the continuation of ordinary life across the vast majority of the county. The 55th Annual Los Angeles Pride Parade proceeded as planned in Hollywood, drawing crowds and celebrating community. The Hollywood Bowl hosted its opening weekend with performances by Hugh Jackman and The Roots. Beaches, parks, and local events saw typical weekend attendance. Traffic jams, a hallmark of Los Angeles, occurred under clear skies, seemingly unaffected by the distant unrest.

“It’s a beautiful, sunny day,” a parking attendant at Hollywood Burbank Airport noted, highlighting the disconnect between the localized conflict and the broader metropolitan experience. Los Angeles County, spanning 4,000 square miles, possesses a unique capacity to absorb and isolate disruptions, whether natural disasters or civil unrest.

Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School, observed that the current situation did not resemble the widespread chaos of the 1992 riots. From her vantage point overlooking the city, she saw quiet streets and normal activity, noting that in areas like the West Side, it was “largely business as usual.” This geographical and social diffusion meant that while downtown and a few other specific locations experienced intense confrontations, life for millions of Angelenos remained largely undisturbed.

Mayor Karen Bass acknowledged this duality, expressing sorrow that the city, still recovering from recent wildfires, faced this new turmoil. She described the federal deployment as “tragic” and “the last thing Los Angeles needs.” However, she also urged protesters to avoid violence that could be exploited by the administration, stating that those who contributed to unrest would face consequences.

The contrast between the intense, localized clashes and the widespread calm across Los Angeles underscores the complex dynamics at play. It highlights how large, diverse metropolitan areas can compartmentalize disruptions, allowing daily life to continue for many even as significant conflicts unfold in specific neighborhoods.

The Role and History of the National Guard

The deployment of the California National Guard in Los Angeles brought renewed attention to the role and nature of this state-based military force. The National Guard is composed of hundreds of thousands of trained soldiers who typically serve part-time while holding civilian jobs or attending college. They are activated for state-level emergencies like natural disasters or civil unrest, and can also be deployed overseas to support federal military operations.

The tradition of state militias predates the United States, with the National Guard tracing its history back to 1636. They played a crucial role in the Revolutionary War and have since served alongside the regular army. Guard troops participate in regular drills and annual training.

Both state governors and the president have the authority to activate the National Guard. Presidential activation often occurs at the request of state officials, as seen during the 1992 Los Angeles riots when President George H.W. Bush deployed troops at the request of California's governor. However, President Trump's action this weekend, bypassing Governor Newsom's authority, was a rare instance of a president unilaterally activating a state's Guard for domestic unrest since 1965.

In recent history, the Guard has been extensively used for disaster response, such as securing evacuation zones during California wildfires, responding to Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and assisting during the devastating fire in Lahaina, Hawaii, in 2023. They also play a significant role in federal military operations abroad, including deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan and training support for the Ukrainian military.

The presence of the National Guard in Los Angeles, particularly under the controversial circumstances of their deployment, added a layer of complexity to an already tense situation. While they reportedly avoided direct confrontation with protesters, their presence symbolized the federal government's forceful intervention in a local matter, further fueling the political debate surrounding the immigration crackdown and the appropriate response to civil unrest.

Conclusion: An Unfolding Situation

The third day of protests in Los Angeles underscored the deep divisions and heightened tensions surrounding immigration policy and federal enforcement. The clashes between protesters and law enforcement, coupled with the controversial deployment of the National Guard, created a volatile environment in specific areas of the city. While the Trump administration framed the events as an “insurrection” requiring forceful federal intervention, California leaders criticized the move as an overreach that exacerbated the situation.

The voices of protesters, many of whom were immigrants or had personal connections to those affected by the raids, highlighted the human impact of the policies driving the unrest. Incidents of violence and property damage, though attributed to a subset of the crowd, added a layer of complexity and danger to the demonstrations.

As the situation unfolded, the denial of access to detention facilities for lawmakers in both California and New York raised concerns about transparency and oversight of federal immigration operations. Meanwhile, the continuation of ordinary life across most of Los Angeles served as a reminder of the city's vastness and its capacity to absorb localized disruptions.

The events of the weekend in Los Angeles represent a significant moment in the ongoing national debate over immigration, federal authority, and the right to protest. The standoff between state and federal leadership, the varied experiences of protesters, and the incidents of violence all contribute to a complex and still unfolding narrative with profound implications for the communities involved and the country as a whole.