Following raids targeting illegal immigrants in Los Angeles, large riots broke out between protesters and federal authorities. US President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles within 24 hours to suppress the riots. The decision sparked controversy, with criticisms that the move was unnecessary and provocative, while some local officials stated that there are sufficient resources to maintain order. The National Guard and federal agents faced violence, including stone-throwing and Molotov cocktails. California Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass condemned Trump’s decision, while Trump criticized local authorities and protesters. There was a warning about the possible mobilization of active Marines if the violence continues. The protests were a response to immigration raids, and the situation involved clashes between police and demonstrators. The National Guard was activated under federal control, a rare move in US history. This event recalls earlier riots in Los Angeles in 1992.
Political Perspectives:
Left: Left-leaning reports emphasize the unnecessary and provocative nature of President Trump’s order to deploy the National Guard, highlighting concerns about militarization of civilian protests and the risk to civil liberties. They focus on the criticism from local officials and civil rights organizations, portraying the move as an escalation that endangers residents and undermines democratic principles.
Center: Center-leaning reports provide a balanced view, acknowledging the violence and unrest following immigration raids and the need to restore order, while also noting the controversy and opposition from local authorities. They report on the legal and procedural aspects of deploying the National Guard and the historical context of such actions in Los Angeles.
Right: Right-leaning reports emphasize the necessity of strong federal action to maintain law and order, supporting President Trump’s decision to deploy the National Guard and warning against tolerating violence and lawlessness. They criticize local officials for being ineffective and portray the protests as driven by radical elements and paid agitators, endorsing the use of military force if needed.
