Additional Coverage:
National Guard Deployment to Los Angeles Clarified Amidst Controversy
The Department of Defense announced the deployment of 2,000 California National Guard troops to the Los Angeles area on Tuesday. This announcement comes amidst ongoing immigration enforcement actions by the Trump administration and related protests in downtown Los Angeles.
U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) clarified that these 2,000 troops were not a new deployment, but rather the activation of troops previously announced.
They will join approximately 2,100 National Guard soldiers and 700 Marines already in Los Angeles. These troops will support the protection of federal functions, personnel, and property.
Their training includes de-escalation techniques, crowd control, and appropriate use of force protocols.
The deployment, ordered by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, follows President Trump’s June 7th invocation of Title 10 law, authorizing the use of National Guard troops in response to the demonstrations.
California Governor Gavin Newsom’s office issued a statement criticizing the deployment, characterizing it as “political theater” and a diversion of resources from wildfire and border security efforts. The statement emphasized that the troops’ role is consistent with their legal position, rather than the immigration enforcement support they have been observed providing.
President Trump’s initial memo stated the troops were deployed to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel and federal property. Local and state officials have criticized the deployment, arguing that local law enforcement was capable of managing the protests and that the presence of federal troops has escalated tensions.
Governor Newsom has filed a lawsuit challenging the deployment, alleging that it constitutes a “power grab” and that California National Guard troops were federalized without his consent. A U.S.
District Judge briefly blocked the deployment last week, but an appeals court quickly overturned the ruling. On Tuesday, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in the case, focusing on whether President Trump overstepped his authority in invoking Title 10.