In a controversial move, President Donald Trump deployed nearly 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles County over the weekend. This decision more than doubled the number of soldiers there, increasing the troop presence to 4,000 soldiers and met with intense criticism. This deployment coincides with the activation of a Marine infantry battalion from the U.S. military’s Northern Command, which had been placed on alert over the weekend. Once inside, the Marines have had little contact with the city. Only 300 of those are actually deployed there, while close to 2,700 continue to be stationed in federal buildings with no orders.
The decision to send these forces comes amid ongoing protests and demonstrations across the nation. California Governor Gavin Newsom responded to the deployment by filing a lawsuit against Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, claiming that the actions represent an “illegal takeover” of the National Guard. Newsom’s announcement has intensified the debate over the militarization of civilian spaces and the role of federal forces in domestic affairs.
Governor Newsom’s Opposition
Governor Newsom has been vocal about his opposition to the deployment. He claims that it does so without legal justification or any reasonable coordination with state officials. He expressed concern over the implications of deploying Marines onto American streets without proper oversight or notification to local law enforcement.
“The first 2,000? Given no food or water. Only approx. 300 are deployed — the rest are sitting, unused, in federal buildings without orders.” – Gavin Newsom
Newsom, for his part, articulated that this is not an issue of improving public safety, but instead, it is about politics. He characterized the deployment as a blatant abuse of power designed to serve Trump’s narrative rather than address real issues faced by communities.
“This isn’t about public safety. It’s about stroking a dangerous…” – Gavin Newsom
Newsom underscored the historical precedent of deploying military resources within domestic urban centers. He was reminded of sending Marines to Los Angeles during the Rodney King protests of 1992. He emphasized that those operations were done in close cooperation with state and local leaders, which is very much not the case in today’s situation.
LAPD’s Concerns and Arrests
The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) has been actively managing protests in the city and reported over the weekend that they arrested 50 individuals: 29 on Saturday and 21 on Sunday. Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell voiced concern over the lack of warning and communication related to the Marines’ deployment.
“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.” – Jim McDonnell
McDonnell stated that the LAPD had not received formal notification regarding the Marine deployment, raising questions about how federal forces would integrate into ongoing law enforcement efforts. The lack of interagency coordination would make responding to large-scale protests more difficult and undermine existing plans for protecting public safety.
Legal and Ethical Implications
The legal foundations for deploying military forces domestically involve strict criteria. The Insurrection Act grants a president the authority to deploy active-duty military forces during extraordinary circumstances. Many practitioners, scholars, and advocates argue that the reality on the ground falls far short of that ideal.
“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,” – Robert Patillo
Patillo warned that escalating to active-duty troops without state cooperation would lead to a militarization of civilian protests rather than restoring order. He went on to warn that U.S. Marines fulfill an essential role in America’s defense of democracy and must not be used as pawns for political ends.
“U.S. Marines serve a valuable purpose for this country — defending democracy. They are not political pawns.” – Gavin Newsom
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth defended the deployment, asserting that it was necessary to protect federal law enforcement officers amidst increasing unrest.
“We have an obligation to defend federal law enforcement officers – even if Gavin Newsom will not,” – Hegseth
As tensions continue to mount between state leadership and federal authorities, the impact of these military deployments remains uncertain. The interaction between local law enforcement and federal military forces raises critical questions regarding civil liberties and public safety in a highly charged environment.
