Trump has sent 2,000 more National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles as immigration protests intensify.
LOS ANGELES (WE) — President Donald Trump has escalated federal involvement in Los Angeles by authorizing the deployment of 2,000 additional National Guard troops and activating 700 Marines in response to intensifying protests over immigration enforcement. The decision, confirmed by the Pentagon on Monday, has drawn swift condemnation from California state officials and civil rights advocates.
Although the administration claimed the military personnel would support federal law enforcement in protecting buildings and infrastructure, the move quickly triggered a constitutional showdown. California Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit challenging Trump’s legal authority to unilaterally activate the state-based National Guard without gubernatorial consent.
“This is political theater rooted in fear,” Newsom declared during a press conference in Sacramento. “The president is abusing power to intimidate peaceful protesters and distract from his administration’s failures.”
Indeed, the protests that have erupted in Los Angeles—and spread across other major cities—stem from outrage over aggressive ICE raids conducted in the Los Angeles area last week. Federal agents stormed factories and food processing facilities, detaining hundreds of undocumented immigrants. Community groups say many detainees were taken without access to legal representation.
On Monday, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell explained that Marines were being “activated” to provide logistical support and perimeter security around federal assets. However, critics argue that such deployments inevitably escalate tensions, regardless of how limited their role may appear on paper.
Furthermore, the White House did not invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807, which would have allowed the president to override legal limitations on using active-duty troops for domestic law enforcement. Instead, a senior administration official speaking to Reuters said the Marines would act strictly in support of the National Guard and law enforcement agencies already on the ground.
Still, the presence of uniformed Marines patrolling the streets—or even staging nearby—struck a nerve with both activists and legal scholars. “Deploying Marines inside a U.S. city blurs the line between civilian policing and military operations,” said Geoffrey Stone, a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago. “It’s a troubling step toward federal overreach.”
Despite official claims, community leaders remained unconvinced. At a protest held outside Ambiance Apparel—a business recently raided by ICE—activist Perla Rios gave a passionate speech calling for legal rights and transparency. “Families have vanished overnight,” she said. “Our communities are being terrorized under the guise of law enforcement.”
Monday’s protest, led by labor unions and immigrant organizations, remained peaceful. Al Jazeera correspondent Rob Reynolds reported that National Guard units were visible but not involved in crowd control. Instead, they stood near federal buildings, watching silently.
“The protests were organized and calm,” Reynolds noted. “So why send combat-trained Marines into the city?”
Indeed, the California National Guard typically operates under the governor’s command. In this case, Trump bypassed that process. Newsom responded forcefully, accusing the president of violating state sovereignty.
“This action is both unconstitutional and unnecessary,” the governor’s office stated. “Our state’s law enforcement has effectively managed the situation without federal interference.”
While tensions rose in California, nationwide protests gained momentum. The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), which has been active in supporting immigrant workers, coordinated rallies in New York, Chicago, Houston, and Phoenix. The group also called for the immediate release of its California president, David Huerta, who was arrested during one of the recent ICE raids. Federal agents charged Huerta with conspiracy to obstruct immigration enforcement.
In a statement, SEIU decried the charges as politically motivated. “This is an attack on organized labor and our right to resist unjust laws,” the union wrote. “We demand Huerta’s release and an end to the militarized targeting of immigrant workers.”
Meanwhile, legal observers warned that Trump’s actions could ignite a broader constitutional battle. Mary McCord, former acting assistant attorney general for national security, explained that under Title 32 of the U.S. Code, National Guard deployment without a governor’s approval remains a legal gray area.
Read More:
- Guardians of Order or Agents of Escalation? Los Angeles Erupts Amid Tear Gas and Troops
- Kilmar Abrego Garcia Returned to U.S. to Face Federal Charges After Mistaken Deportation
- Trump-Musk Fallout Sparks GOP Anxiety as Lawmakers Urge Reconciliation Amid Policy Clash
“Trump is testing the limits of executive power,” McCord said. “If the courts uphold this move, it could redefine the federal-state relationship in ways we haven’t seen since the civil rights era.”
Historical comparisons were inevitable. The last time a president deployed federal troops over a governor’s objection was in 1965, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent forces to Alabama to protect civil rights marchers. Although that deployment had clear civil rights motivations, Trump’s use of troops appears aimed at immigration enforcement—a far more contentious issue.
Adding to the unrest, Trump unveiled a new travel ban affecting citizens from 12 additional countries, many of them in Africa and the Middle East. Immigration advocates immediately condemned the move, calling it a resurrection of the infamous Muslim Ban from his first term.
Murad Awawdeh, president of the New York Immigration Coalition, said, “This new policy doubles down on cruelty. It splits families and breeds fear among communities already under siege.”
On social media, videos circulated showing military convoys rolling through Downtown Los Angeles. Trucks bearing military insignia passed landmarks like Union Station, sparking alarm among residents. Many said they felt caught in the middle of a political battle they never asked for.
“America shouldn’t work this way,” said 29-year-old teacher Michelle Ortega. “We want justice, not intimidation.”
Even some conservatives voiced concern. Senator Mitt Romney, a longtime critic of Trump’s hardline tactics, stated that military force should never replace civil discourse. “Sending Marines into American cities sends the wrong message—to both citizens and the world.”
Nevertheless, Trump defended his decision. Speaking to reporters outside the White House, he claimed the protests were “largely under control” but warned that any violence would be met with “an iron fist.”
“We’re not going to let anarchists destroy our country,” he said. “California may want chaos, but I won’t allow it.”
Back in Los Angeles, protest organizers vowed to continue demonstrating. Carmen Velasquez, a lead organizer with the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), said marches would occur daily until the federal forces leave.
“Our movement is peaceful, but persistent,” Velasquez said. “We reject this militarization, and we reject the message it sends.”
Moreover, public schools and nonprofit organizations reported a noticeable shift. Attendance dropped in several districts, and hotlines at CHIRLA and the National Immigration Law Center saw a spike in calls from undocumented families seeking safety information.
Jorge Morales, a CHIRLA spokesperson, explained, “There’s a climate of fear. Families don’t know if they’re safe outside their homes. It’s creating emotional trauma in addition to legal uncertainty.”
Legal experts expect California’s lawsuit to advance quickly because of its significant constitutional implications. Experts believe it may reach the Supreme Court before the 2026 midterm elections.
Until then, Trump’s deployment stands as one of the most aggressive federal interventions in a U.S. city in decades. History will judge whether this action was necessary or an abuse of power.
For now, Los Angeles remains a flashpoint—a city caught between presidential ambition and constitutional resistance.
