Governor Newsom criticizes federal deployment of 2,000 troops after ICE raids spark demonstrations across Los Angeles
Gavin Newsom condemns National Guard deployment (Courtesy Wikipedia)Sacramento, California (Times Media Service) – Gavin Newsom condemns National Guard deployment amid ICE raids in Los Angeles, calling the federal intervention “purposefully inflammatory” and warning it will only escalate tensions as hundreds of demonstrators clash with authorities following the detention of roughly 150 undocumented immigrants.
ICE Raids Ignite Protests in Los Angeles
On June 6 and 7, U.S.U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) conducted coordinated raids across Los Angeles County, detaining an estimated 150 undocumented immigrants in early-morning operations. Local community groups and immigrant-rights organizations immediately mobilized, calling for solidarity actions and civil disobedience at federal buildings downtown. What began as peaceful vigils quickly turned confrontational when a subset of protesters blocked entrances to the Metropolitan Detention Center and scuffled with ICE officers. Police reported several injuries on both sides and made over a dozen arrests for obstructing federal agents.
Demonstrators chanted “No justice, no peace!” as they formed human barricades, while federal law enforcement declared the assemblies unlawful and threatened to use crowd-control measures. Videos circulated on social media showing officers in riot gear deploying non-lethal munitions, which further inflamed public outrage. By Saturday evening, organizers estimated that upwards of 2,000 people had joined marches from multiple neighborhoods to downtown protest sites, demanding an end to what they described as “cruel and unnecessary” immigration enforcement.
Community leaders stressed the human cost of the raids, with families mourning sudden separations and local shelters straining to accommodate those released on bond. “These sweeps are tearing our communities apart,” said Lucia Moreno, director of a South L.A. advocacy group. “People are living in fear of disappearing at their front door.” As the protests escalated, Mayor Karen Bass and Los Angeles County officials requested additional state law enforcement support, asserting that local police and sheriff’s deputies could manage the unrest.
CA National Guard Deployment Under Unusual Federal Authority
Late Saturday night, President Trump invoked Section 12406 of Title 10 U.S. Code to federalize and deploy 2,000 members of the California National Guard to Los Angeles—marking the first time since 1965 that a president has mobilized a state Guard without the governor’s consent. The administration cited “incidents of violence and disorder” obstructing ICE’s operations and labeled the protests a threat to federal property and personnel. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth further hinted at the possible deployment of active-duty Marines to reinforce the Guard, though no formal order has been issued.
Federal officials framed the move as a necessary step to restore order and protect officers from hostile “paid agitators,” but critics say the law was never intended for domestic protest suppression. Legal experts warn of a potential constitutional clash over the balance of power between the White House and state governors. Under this rarely used statute, troops report directly to the president, bypassing state command—an escalation that many see as a dangerous precedent for quelling civil dissent.
Despite the White House assertion that local authorities had requested assistance, neither Governor Newsom nor Mayor Bass formally asked for National Guard support. The sudden federal takeover has incited questions about accountability and appropriate use of military forces on American soil, especially against largely peaceful demonstrators exercising First Amendment rights.
Newsom Condemns National Guard Deployment
Governor Gavin Newsom released a statement condemning the intervention as “purposefully inflammatory” and “completely unnecessary,” noting that California law enforcement was fully capable of protecting public safety. “There is currently no unmet need,” he asserted, urging the president to withdraw the troops and restore local control. In a video message posted to social media, Newsom accused the federal government of “sowing chaos” to justify more aggressive crackdowns and warned that the deployment would only deepen the divide between Washington and California.
Newsom also floated the possibility of retaliatory financial measures, highlighting that California contributes significantly more in federal taxes than it receives in return. “It’s unconscionable to use our own Guard against our citizens,” he said. He closed by calling on Californians to remain peaceful: “Exercise your rights, but do not give them the spectacle they crave. Violence only undermines our cause.”
Reactions from Washington and Beyond
Across the political spectrum, reactions have been swift. Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders blasted the deployment as “a move toward authoritarianism,” while Democratic Congresswoman Nanette Barragán accused the White House of “trampling on states’ rights.” The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced plans to sue the administration, calling the action “akin to a declaration of war on all Californians” and warning of lasting legal challenges.
On the other side, Vice President J.D. Vance defended the president’s authority to act unilaterally when state leaders fail to maintain order. Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin praised the move as “a clear message that violence against federal officers will not be tolerated.” Meanwhile, civil-rights organizations and faith leaders held interfaith vigils, decrying the use of military force against marginalized communities and urging a return to dialogue.
Legal and Political Implications Ahead
Legal scholars predict a protracted court battle over the constitutionality of deploying the National Guard without gubernatorial approval. Similar cases in the 1960s were settled by the Supreme Court, but the modern stakes involve contentious debates over immigration policy, states’ rights, and executive power. California’s attorney general has hinted at seeking an injunction to block the deployment, setting the stage for a landmark federal showdown.
Politically, the clash underscores widening fissures between California’s Democratic leadership and the federal executive—an antagonism likely to shape the 2026 congressional elections. With hundreds of National Guard troops now stationed at federal buildings, local businesses and residents brace for continued protests and possible confrontations. As the legal process unfolds, both sides warn that the situation in Los Angeles could become a bellwether for future disputes over military force in domestic affairs.
Stephanie Ramirez / California Contributor (Times Media Service)
Native Californian, she sees California’s importance & aims to enhance its quality and enjoyment for all.
sramirez@timesmediaservice.com
