West Coast

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘It’s time to wake up’: Padilla recounts being handcuffed at Noem briefing in emotional speech

      by

      Alex Padilla took to the Senate floor on Tuesday to deliver a deeply personal speech, formally entering into the congressional record his account of being restrained and forcibly removed as he attempted to ask a question at a press conference held by the homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, in Los Angeles last week.In emotional remarks, Padilla described the encounter that he hoped would serve as a “wake up call” for Americans – a warning, he said, of how quickly democratic norms can slip away when dissent is silenced and power is unchecked.“If that is what the administration is willing to do to a United States senator for having the authority to simply ask a question,” Padilla said, “imagine what they’ll do to any American who dares to speak up”.In his floor speech, Padilla said he was in Los Angeles to conduct congressional oversight of the administration’s escalating immigration operations in the city. He was at the federal building that morning for a scheduled briefing with US northern command’s General Gregory Guillot about the president’s order to deploy US marines to the city as part of its response to protests against immigration raids that left Latino communities shaken and afraid.When he arrived, Padilla said that he was met at the building’s entrance by a national guardsman and an FBI agent. He was then escorted through a security screening and into the conference room where the briefing would take place.When he learned Noem was holding a press conference “literally down the hall” – and that it was the reason his own briefing was delayed – Padilla said he asked to attend. He and his colleagues had many outstanding information requests about the department’s immigration enforcement tactics, and he said he hoped he might learn something from the secretary.“I didn’t just stand up and go – I asked,” he said.According to Padilla, the guardsman and FBI agent then “escorted” him into the room where Noem was giving remarks to reporters. “They opened the door for me. They accompanied me into the press briefing room, and they stood next to me as I stood there for a while listening,” he said.When Noem declared that the federal law enforcement and military personnel would “liberate” Los Angeles from its Democratic governor and mayor – what Padilla called an “un-American mission statement” – he said he could no longer remain silent.“I was compelled, both as a senator and as an American, to speak up,” the senator said. “But before I could even get out my question, I was physically and aggressively forced out of the room, even as I repeatedly announced I was a United States senator, and I had a question for the secretary, and even as the national guardsmen and the FBI agent who served as my escorts brought me into that press briefing room, stood by silently, knowing full well who I was.”He was dragged into a hallway and forced onto the ground, Padilla recalled, his voice catching as he described being forced onto his knees and then his chest pressed into the ground. “I was handcuffed and marched down a hallway repeatedly asking, ‘Why am I being detained?’ Not once did they tell me why?” he said. “I pray you never have a moment like this.”As this was happening, Padilla said his thoughts turned to his family: “What will my wife think? What will our boys think?” And then to his constituents – those in a city already on edge, militarized against the wishes of the governor and local enforcement – how would they react when they saw the images of their US senator – the first Latino elected to the chamber from California – in handcuffs.When asked about Padilla’s removal during the press conference, Noem said she didn’t recognize the two-term senator and said he hadn’t requested a meeting. Noem and Padilla met for for 15 minutes following the incident, according to DHS.The FBI has said its agents believed Padilla was an attacker and responded appropriately. They blamed the senator for not wearing a pin identifying him as a member of Congress. The Guardian’s requests for comment from the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, the National Guard and the Secret Service were not immediately returned.In a statement on Tuesday, the White House dismissed Padilla’s floor speech as a “temper tantrum”.“Alex ‘Pay Attention to Me’ Padilla is bouncing from one desperate ploy for attention to the next,” said White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson, adding: “Whether or not Democrats like it, the American people support President Trump’s agenda to deport illegal aliens.”But Padilla, who noted he has never had a reputation as a “flame-thrower”, challenged his colleagues in both parties to consider what the episode revealed about the state of American democracy.“If you watched what unfolded last week and thought what happened is just about one politician and one press conference you’re missing the point,” he said. Democrats and some Republicans condemned the incident. But administration officials – and many Republicans – blamed Padilla, with the House speaker Mike Johnson suggesting he should be censured for his actions.Padilla accused Trump of being a “tyrant” who had ordered National Guard troops and US marines into Los Angeles to “justify his undemocratic crackdowns and his authoritarian power grabs”. He said Trump was surrounded by “yes men” and a pliant Congress who refused to reign in the president tries everything to “test the boundaries of his power”.“If Donald Trump can bypass the governor and activate the National Guard to put down protests on immigrant rights, he can do it to suppress your rights too,” he continued. “If he can deploy the Marines to Los Angeles without justification, he can deploy them to your state too. And if you can ignore due process, strip away first amendment rights and disappear people to foreign prisons without their day in court, he can do it to you too.”Padilla, the “proud” son of Mexican immigrants, warned that what is happening in his state could spread nationwide.“I refuse to let immigrants be political pawns on his path towards fascism,” he said. He described the situation in California as a “test case” for what could happen to “any American anywhere in the country”.As Padilla spoke in Washington, images emerged from New York where Brad Lander, the city’s comptroller and a candidate for mayor, had been arrested by masked federal agents as he visited an immigration court.“It’s time to wake up,” Padilla said, urging Americans to continue to peacefully protest the administration. “If this administration is this afraid of just one senator with a question … imagine what the voices of tens of billions of Americans peacefully protesting can do.”The Democrats in the chamber erupted in applause. More

    • 225 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Will the public side with the protesters in LA? Here are some lessons from history | Musa al-Gharbi

      by

      On 6 June, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) conducted aggressive raids in Los Angeles, sweeping up gainfully employed workers with no criminal record. This led to demonstrations outside the Los Angeles federal building. During these protests, David Huerta, president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) of California, was arrested alongside more than 100 others – leading to even larger demonstrations the next day.Donald Trump responded on 7 June by sending federal troops to Los Angeles to quell the protests without consulting Gavin Newsom, and, in fact, in defiance of the California governor’s wishes. This dramatic federal response, paired with increasingly aggressive tactics by local police, led to the protests growing larger and escalating in their intensity. They’ve begun spreading to other major cities, too.Cue the culture war.On the right, the response was predictable: the federal clampdown was largely praised. Hyperbolic narratives about the protests and the protesters were uncritically amplified and affirmed. On the left, the response was no less predictable. There is a constellation of academic and media personalities who breathlessly root for all protests to escalate into violent revolution while another faction claims to support all the causes in principle but somehow never encounters an actual protest movement that they outright support.For my part, as I watched Waymo cars burning as Mexican flags fluttered behind them, I couldn’t help but be reminded of sociologist Pierre Bourdieu. In the documentary Sociology Is a Martial Art, he emphasized: “I don’t think it’s a problem that young people are burning cars. I want them to be able to burn cars for a purpose.”It is, indeed, possible for burning cars to serve a purpose. However, it matters immensely who is perceived to have lit the fuse.It’s uncomfortable to talk about, but all major successful social movements realized their goals with and through direct conflict. There’s never been a case where people just held hands and sang Kumbaya, provoking those in power to nod and declare, “I never thought of it that way,” and then voluntarily make difficult concessions without any threats or coercion needed. Attempts at persuasion are typically necessary for a movement’s success, but they’re rarely sufficient. Actual or anticipated violence, destruction and chaos also have their role to play.Civil rights leaders in the 1950s, for instance, went out of their way to provoke high-profile, violent and disproportionate responses from those who supported segregation. Leaders such as Martin Luther King Jr had an intuitive understanding of what empirical social science now affirms: what matters isn’t the presence or absence of violence but, rather, who gets blamed for any escalations that occur.The current anti-Ice protests have included clashes with police and occasional property damage. Melees, looting and destruction are perennially unpopular. Then again, so were civil rights-era bus boycotts, diner sit-ins and marches. In truth, the public rarely supports any form of social protest.Something similar holds for elite opinion-makers. In the civil rights era, as now, many who claimed to support social justice causes also described virtually any disruptive action taken in the service of those causes as counterproductive, whether it was violent or not. As I describe in my book, civil rights leaders across the board described these “supporters” as the primary stumbling block for achieving equality.The simple truth is that most stakeholders in society – elites and normies alike, and across ideological lines – would prefer to stick with a suboptimal status quo than to embrace disruption in the service of an uncertain future state. Due to this widespread impulse, most successful social movements are deeply unpopular until after their victory is apparent. Insofar as they notch successes, it is often in defiance of public opinion.For instance, protests on US campuses against Israel’s campaign of destruction in Gaza were deeply unpopular. However, for all their flaws and limitations, the demonstrations, and the broader cultural discussion around the protests, did get more people paying attention to what was happening in the Middle East. And as more people looked into Israel’s disastrous campaign in Gaza, American support plummeted. Among Democrats, independents and Republicans alike, sympathy for Israelis over Palestinians is significantly lower today than before 7 October 2023. These patterns are not just evident in the US but also across western Europe and beyond.The Palestinian author Omar el-Akkad notes that when atrocities become widely recognized, everyone belatedly claims to have always been against them – even if they actively facilitated or denied the crimes while they were being carried out. Successful social movements function the opposite way: once they succeed, everyone paints themselves as having always been for them, even if the movements in question were deeply unpopular at the time.Martin Luther King Jr, for instance, was widely vilified towards the end of his life. Today, he has a federal holiday named after him. The lesson? Contemporaneous public polls about demonstrations tell us very little about the impact they’ll ultimately have.So, how can we predict the likely impact of social movements?The best picture we have from empirical social science research is that conflict can help shift public opinion in favor of political causes, but it can also lead to blowback against those causes. The rule seems to be that whoever is perceived to have initiated violence loses: if the protesters are seen as sparking violence, citizens sour on the cause and support state crackdowns. If the government is seen as having provoked chaos through inept or overly aggressive action, the public grows more sympathetic to the protesters’ cause (even if they continue to hold negative opinions about the protesters and the protests themselves).The 1992 Rodney King riots in Los Angeles are an instructive example. They arose after King was unjustly beaten by law enforcement and the state failed to hold the perpetrators to account. In public opinion, the government was held liable for these legitimate grievances and outrage. As a result, the subsequent unrest seemed to generate further sympathy for police reform (even though most Americans frowned on the unrest itself).skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionStonewall was a literal riot. However, it was also widely understood that the conflict was, itself, a response to law enforcement raids on gay bars. Gay and trans people were being aggressively surveilled and harassed by the state, and began pushing back more forcefully for respect, privacy and autonomy. The government was the perceived aggressor, and this worked to the benefit of the cause. Hence, today, the Stonewall uprising is celebrated as a pivotal moment in civil rights history despite being characterized in a uniformly negative fashion at the time.This is not the way social movements always play out. If the protests come to be seen as being motivated primarily by animus, resentment or revenge (rather than positive or noble ideals), the public tends to grow more supportive of a crackdown against the movement. Likewise, if demonstrators seem pre-committed to violence, destruction and chaos, people who might otherwise be sympathetic to the cause tend to rapidly disassociate with the protesters and their stated objectives.The 6 January 2021 raid on the Capitol building, for instance, led to lower levels of affiliation with the GOP. Politicians who subsequently justified the insurrection performed especially poorly in the 2022 midterms (with negative spillover effects to Republican peers).The protests that followed George Floyd’s murder were a mixed bag: in areas where demonstrations did not spiral into chaos or violence, the protests increased support for many police reforms and, incidentally, the Democratic party. In contexts where violence, looting, crime increases and extremist claims were more prevalent – where protesters seemed more focused on condemning, punishing or razing society rather than fixing it – trends moved in the opposite direction.Yet, although the Floyd-era protests themselves had an ambivalent effect on public support for criminal justice reform, the outcome of Trump’s clampdown on the demonstrations was unambiguous: it led to a rapid erosion in GOP support among white Americans – likely costing Trump the 2020 election. Why? Because the president came off as an aggressor.Trump did not push for a crackdown reluctantly, after all other options were exhausted. He appeared to be hungry for conflict and eager to see the situation escalate. He seemed to relish norm violations and inflicting harm on his opponents. These perceptions were politically disastrous for him in 2020. They appear to be just as disastrous today.Right now, the public is split on whether the ongoing demonstrations in support of immigrants’ rights are peaceful. Yet, broadly, Americans disapprove of these protests, just as they disapprove of most others. Critically, however, most also disapprove of Trump’s decisions to deploy the national guard and the marines to Los Angeles. The federal agency at the heart of these protests, Ice, is not popular either. Americans broadly reject the agency’s tactics of conducting arrests in plain clothes, stuffing people in unmarked vehicles and wearing masks to shield their identities. The public also disagrees with deporting undocumented immigrants who were brought over as children, alongside policies that separate families, or actions that deny due process.Employers, meanwhile, have lobbied the White House to revise its policies, which seem to primarily target longstanding and gainfully employed workers rather than criminals or people free-riding on government benefits – to the detriment of core US industries.Even before the protests began, there were signs that Americans were souring on Trump’s draconian approach to immigration, and public support has declined rapidly since the protests started on 6 June.Whether the demonstrations ultimately lead to still more erosion of public support for Trump or continued declines in public support for immigration will likely depend less on whether the demonstrations continue to escalate than on whom the public ultimately blames for any escalation that occurs.At present, it’s not looking good for the White House.

      Musa al-Gharbi is a sociologist in the School of Communication and Journalism at Stony Brook University. His book, We Have Never Been Woke: The Cultural Contradictions of a New Elite, is out now with Princeton University Press. He is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 238 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘This moment was thrust upon him’: Gavin Newsom steps up to parry Trump’s ‘wrecking ball’ attacks on American democracy

      by

      When Donald Trump landed in Los Angeles to tour the ruins left by January’s devastating wildfires, just days after being sworn in for a second term, California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, was waiting on the tarmac to greet him. The surprisingly warm exchange between two longtime political rivals seemed to reflect a new reality: with a vengeful Trump back in the White House, fire-ravaged California – and its Democratic governor – had a great deal at stake.In the weeks that followed, Newsom met with Trump at the White House to lobby for federal disaster relief, then approved funding to strengthen the state’s legal defenses against challenges from the Trump administration. He invited Maga-world fixtures on to his podcast, including Steve Bannon, and infuriated progressives, and even some allies, when he said that it was “deeply unfair” for transgender athletes to compete in girls’ sports – a wedge issue central to Trump’s conservative agenda. All the while, his state was suing the Trump administration – over executive actions on immigration, federal funding and tariffs – at a rate of more than one lawsuit a week.Their fragile detente, already showing cracks, shattered spectacularly last week, when the president mobilized thousands of national guard troops and 700 marines – over the governor’s objections – to quell protests in Los Angeles sparked by immigration raids across the region.Newsom accused Trump of deliberately injecting chaos into a situation that local authorities had under control. Trump’s actions, he declared, were “madness” and marked an “unmistakable step toward authoritarianism”. Trump, in turn, called Newsom, whom he refers to as “Newscum”, grossly incompetent and suggested the governor should be arrested. “Gavin likes the publicity,” the president mused, though he later played down the threat.With guards troops deployed in the streets of Los Angeles, the 57-year-old governor of the country’s most populous state delivered a formal, state-of-the-union-style address warning that the president was taking a “wrecking ball” to American democracy.“Look, this isn’t just about protests in LA,” Newsom said on Tuesday. “This is about all of us. This is about you.”“California may be first – but it clearly won’t end here. Other states are next,” he said. “Democracy is next.”For months, Democrats, anti-Trump Republicans and a growing number of alarmed Americans had been clamoring for leaders who grasp what they say is the urgency of Trump’s assault on democratic norms and American institutions. When Trump activated California’s national guard troops, Newsom stepped into the ring – and hasn’t stopped swinging since.“This moment was thrust upon him,” said Mike Madrid, a sharp critic of Trump and former political director of the California Republican party, “and whether it was a battlefield conversion or a genuine moment, Gavin Newsom realized that the only way out of this was to fight.”View image in fullscreenIn the week since the national guard’s deployment to Los Angeles, Newsom has mounted an all-out offensive – battling Trump in the courts and in the court of public opinion. He has made himself ubiquitous: sitting for interviews with podcasters and YouTubers, national media and local media. On social media, he and his team are running a rapid response blitz – a stream of taunts, Star Wars memes and factchecks.Newsom sued to block the guard’s deployment without his consent. California later filed an emergency order asking a judge to bar the guard from assisting with immigration enforcement. On Thursday, a federal judge sided with the state, finding that Trump’s deployment of the guard was unlawful – though the victory was short-lived. Two hours later, the ninth US circuit court of appeals temporarily blocked the order.“He is not a king and he should stop acting like one,” Newsom said on Thursday, at a press conference before the ruling was paused.The White House has responded in kind, with Trump hurling insults back at Newsom. When asked what crime Newsom might be charged with, Trump sniped: “His primary crime is running for governor, because he’s done such a bad job.”Trump, thanking the appeals court on Friday, said: “If I didn’t send the military into Los Angeles, that city would be burning to the ground right now” – a claim Newsom, city officials and local law enforcement strongly dispute.Tensions escalated further on Thursday, when a senator from California, Alex Padilla, was forcibly removed and handcuffed after trying to ask a question at a press conference held by the homeland security secretary, Kristi Noem, amid the ongoing protests in Los Angeles. Newsom called the episode “outrageous, dictatorial, and shameful”.“This is a moment that tests the mettle of leaders,” said Brian Brokaw, a longtime political adviser to Newsom. He noted that Newsom’s tenure was defined by crisis from the very start.The day after he was elected in 2018, a gunman killed 12 people at a country music bar in Thousand Oaks and as the Camp fire – the deadliest wildfire in state history – raged toward the town of Paradise. Since then, Newsom has faced a near-constant onslaught: more fires, more mass shootings, floods, mudslides, drought, a global pandemic, mass protests after the murder of George Floyd, and the wildfires that swept Los Angeles earlier this year.“Newsom has pretty good instincts,” Brokaw said. “He knows what a moment like this requires – and that’s what you’re seeing from him now.”The rapidly intensifying standoff between Trump and Newsom has rallied Democrats. Twenty-two Democratic governors signed a joint statement in support of California, calling Trump’s troop deployment “ineffective and dangerous”. The signatories spanned the ideological spectrum of the party and included several governors who are potential 2028 presidential contenders, such as JB Pritzker of Illinois, Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Andy Beshear of Kentucky.“He has shown he’s not going to be intimidated, and we’re all for that,” Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, said earlier this week.Even some of his critics have been impressed. Ezra Levin, the co-founder of Indivisible, one of the groups behind Saturday’s “day of defiance” protests against Trump, said Newsom’s pugilistic response to the president’s “bullying” has been “spot on”.“I think he’s been one of the leading members of the ‘roll over and play dead’ faction, one of these dead-dog Democrats,” Levin said. “But maybe – maybe – he is shifting sides, and I think it is very important that we welcome people and leaders when they do that.”The White House believes its maximalist response to unrest in California plays to its political advantage. Trump, who campaigned on a promise of mass deportations, has framed California’s resistance as an obstruction to what he says is a popular mandate. Images of protesters waving Mexican flags near burning robotaxis feed the rightwing narrative of disorder in Democratic-run cities such as Los Angeles.“To be very cynical about this, you can argue that this benefits both principals,” said Bill Whalen, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution thinktank at Stanford University. “Donald Trump gets to swing at his favorite piñata, California, but Gavin Newsom doesn’t mind taking the whacks because it plays pretty well with the Democratic base.”According to a YouGov flash poll, 45% of Americans disapprove of the Los Angeles protests, while 36% approve. Similar shares disapprove of Trump’s deployment of the marines – 47% to 34% – and the national guard – 45% to 38%.View image in fullscreenSince Trump’s 2024 victory, many Democrats have taken pains to show support for law enforcement and border security.Some say Newsom’s approach offers a clear path forward. He has been unequivocal in condemning sporadic violence, vowing “zero tolerance” for bad actors. At the same time, he has offered a full-throated defense of the city’s immigrant communities, accusing Trump of tearing apart families and “disappearing” neighbors.“What’s happening right now is very different than anything we’ve seen before,” Newsom said in his Tuesday address, accusing federal agents of indiscriminately targeting Latino neighborhoods. “Trump is pulling a military dragnet across LA, well beyond his stated intent to just go after violent and serious criminals.”Conservatives say Newsom’s posture is precisely what helped Trump make inroads in some of the bluest corners of the country last year. Steve Hilton, a former top adviser to former UK prime minister David Cameron now running for governor of California, accused Newsom of trying to “gaslight us”.“Do your job,” he said on Fox News, “instead of pretending this is fine.”Newsom rose to prominence as the mayor of San Francisco, defying state law to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. He served as the state’s lieutenant governor for eight years before being elected governor in the middle of Trump’s first term, riding a wave of progressive anger. He survived a 2021 recall attempt, fueled in part by backlash to his handling of the pandemic, and was easily re-elected in 2022. He campaigned aggressively for Biden in 2024, even as some in the party hoped he’d run himself. When Biden dropped out, Newsom quickly endorsed his fellow Californian, “fearless” Kamala Harris.Democrats’ staggering losses in November left the party leaderless and without power in Washington. As Democrats grasped for answers – how to oppose an emboldened president whom voters chose over them – Newsom launched a podcast. Some speculated Newsom’s moves – interviewing far-right figures on his podcast, cracking down on homeless encampments and moving to scale back health coverage for immigrants without legal status – were part of a calculated pivot toward the political center, in preparation for a 2028 presidential run.Asked recently at a press conference if he was trying to shed his liberal persona, Newsom said he had always been a “hard-headed pragmatist”. “I’m not an ideologue,” he added.California – the biggest blue state in the country – has long served as Trump’s favorite foil. From homelessness and crime to immigration and climate policy, Trump has painted the state as a cautionary tale – a failed experiment in liberal governance now a “symbol of our nation’s decline”.This week, amid his clash with Newsom, Trump signed into law a measure blocking California’s vehicle emissions rules and his administration announced plans to abolish two of the state’s newest national monuments.“If it’s a day ending in Y, it’s another day of Trump’s war on California,” the governor’s office tweeted.Steve Maviglio, a Democratic political consultant, said Newsom’s “guerrilla warfare” tactics may raise the governor’s national profile – but at a cost.“We know that the president doesn’t respond well to being attacked,” Maviglio said, adding: “It’s likely going to result in a lot less federal dollars coming our way – which is about the last thing we need right now with a multibillion-dollar budget deficit.”Yet Newsom’s attempt at conciliation yielded little protection. Earlier this month, the Trump administration warned it may pull billions in funding from California’s long-delayed high-speed rail project. Trump has threatened to “maybe permanently” strip federal funding if the state continues to allow transgender athletes to compete in girls’ and women’s sports. And California is still waiting for the disaster aid Newsom sought after the fires.Newsom has argued in recent interviews that Trump can’t be placated. The governor suggested the state had leverage: it could withhold the billions in taxes its residents pay the federal government. (He has since tempered the idea, but said he urged his team to get “creative” on how the state might push back on Trump’s threats.)Newsom also suggested that growing public opposition to the immigration crackdown was working, after Trump conceded that his immigration tactics were hurting agriculture and hospitality. “Turns out, chasing hardworking people through ranches and snatching women and children off the streets is not good policy,” Newsom shot back.Though protests have calmed, the situation remains volatile. With the appeals court decision, Trump remains in command of the national guard through at least next week. On Friday, US marines temporarily detained a man outside the Wilshire Federal Building in Los Angeles – the first known detention of a civilian by active-duty troops deployed there by Trump.Speaking in Los Angeles, Noem pledged to “liberate” Los Angeles and vowed that the Trump administration would continue its immigration operations across the region.Ahead of planned protests on Saturday, Newsom ordered the state to “pre-deploy” additional resources to support law enforcement throughout the state. Organized as a show of defiance against Trump’s military parade staged in the streets of Washington DC on Saturday to celebrate the US army’s 250th anniversary and the president’s 79th birthday, the events have multiplied since Trump deployed guard troops to Los Angeles.For Newsom, the stakes are bigger than California. He has framed this moment as a test of democratic resilience in the face of creeping authoritarianism. And for those who have long sounded the alarm, the governor is meeting it.“He’s become what Democrats nationally have been waiting for since the election,” Madrid said. “He’s the tip of the spear – the more strenuously he fights, the more aggressive he is, the more he uses Trump’s tactics against him, the more he’s going to be rewarded.”David Smith in Washington and Rachel Leingang contributed reporting More

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      What the foreign flags at the LA protests really mean

      by

      At the White House on Wednesday, the press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, told reporters Donald Trump’s decision to dispatch the military to Los Angeles had been triggered by something he’d seen: “images of foreign flags being waved” during protests over federal immigration raids.Leavitt did not specify which images the president had been so disturbed by, but the fact that some protesters denouncing his immigration crackdown have waved Mexican, Guatemalan and Salvadorian flags, or hybrid flags that combine those banners with the American flag, has been taken as an affront by supporters of his mass deportation campaign.The architect of that policy, Stephen Miller, has complained bitterly about flag-waving protesters on the streets of his Los Angeles hometown, and shared video of demonstrators on social media with the comment: “Look at all the foreign flags. Los Angeles is occupied territory.”Trump himself even claimed, during his deeply partisan speech to soldiers at Fort Bragg on Tuesday, that his deployment of active-duty marines to the city was justified because of the protesters he called “rioters bearing foreign flags with the aim of continuing a foreign invasion”.But observers with a more nuanced understanding of the Los Angeles communities being targeted in these raids, and of the nation’s history as a refuge for immigrants, suggest that the flags are not intended to signal allegiance to any foreign government but rather to signal solidarity with immigrants from those places and, for Americans with roots in those countries, to express pride in their heritage.Lalo Alcaraz, a Mexican American satirist and editorial cartoonist, who coined the term “self-deportation” in the 1990s as part of an elaborate prank in response to the anti-immigrant policies of then California governor Pete Wilson, said that the protesters carrying those flags in LA are not immigrants themselves, but “the younger generation that are American citizens and that have pride in their immigrant parents”. Their parents, he said, “are hard-working good people who come from other countries – Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador. This is why they proudly wave those flags.”“Of course they’re proud of their roots, and honestly, what has the American flag done for them but persecute their families?” Alcaraz added. “They are promised that there is a right way to immigrate, that there will be a pathway to citizenship, but this promise has been ignored because corporations make profits off the low wages and hard work of these immigrants, and want to keep them in limbo because it’s easier to control them.”That sentiment was echoed by a protester named Jesus, who told NPR during a protest this week that he waved the Mexican flag because “I’m proud of my Mexican heritage, you know? Even though it was several generations ago, my family members were immigrants.”As NPR’s Adrian Florido pointed out, the large number of flags from other parts of the Americas at these protests contrasted sharply with what was seen in the same place two decades ago.View image in fullscreenIn 2006, when huge marches brought hundreds of thousands of people to the streets of LA to protest against Republicans in Congress introducing a restrictive immigration bill that would close off paths to citizenship and build fences along the border, organizers urged the demonstrators to wave American flags.“Apparently taking stock of complaints about the number of Mexican flags in previous demonstrations, organizers made sure that the vast majority of marchers Monday carried American flags,” the Los Angeles Times reported in 2006 on the massive May Day march that year. Images from that rally showed that Mexican flags were vastly outnumbered in a sea of American flags.Others have pointed out that, for Americans with European roots, waving the flags of their ancestors, from Ireland or Italy, for example, is considered uncontroversial.“The reason Mexicans and Mexican Americans wave the Mexican flag is the same reason the Irish wave the Irish flag,” David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, wrote on Friday. “Not because they want to go back there, but because they are proud of their Heritage and want to stand up for people with their ancestry.”“When you persecute a minority, it makes them more aware of their identity and differences from the majority, slowing assimilation,” he added. “In other words, the Trump agenda is bad for the very thing Trumpists claim to want.”In that light, it is worth recalling that charges of dual loyalty were once hurled at Irish and Italian immigrants, too. Less than a century ago, in fact, American citizens from Irish and Italian families were viewed with hatred and suspicion by native-born, white Protestants.To take one example, when 1,000 robed members of the Ku Klux Klan rioted at the 1927 Memorial Day parade in Queens, and seven men were arrested, one of their chief targets was New York’s Irish American-led police force, which tried to prevent them from marching. One of those men was the current president’s father, Fred Trump. (A report from the time in a Brooklyn newspaper said that “a charge of refusing to disperse from a parade when ordered to do so” against Trump was quickly dismissed.)The deep vein of hatred Italian immigrants faced was even a motivating factor in the the first Columbus Day proclamation, issued by Benjamin Harrison in 1892. The then US president hoped to gain support from new Italian American voters, but he was also trying to absolve the country of the stain from a deadly anti-Italian riot the year before in New Orleans, in which 11 Italian immigrants had been falsely accused of murder and were lynched by a mob.One of Trump’s first acts on returning to office this year was to issue a proclamation that Columbus Day would be celebrated during his administration without any acknowledgement of the Indigenous people who suffered so much in the centuries after his voyage to this hemisphere. More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Has Trump turned the US into a police state? – podcast

      by

      Archive: CBS News, AP, ABC 7 Chicago, ABC News, FOX 9 Minneapolis-St. Paul, FOX 11 LA, NBC News, PBS Newshour
      Listen to Football Weekly
      Subscribe to the Guardian’s new narrative series Missing in the Amazon
      Send your questions and feedback to politicsweeklyamerica@theguardian.com
      Help support the Guardian. Go to theguardian.com/politcspodus More

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump keeps national guards in LA for now as appeals court puts brakes on ban

      by

      An appeals court has temporarily returned control of California’s national guard to Donald Trump, just hours after a federal judge ruled the president’s use of the guards to suppress protests in Los Angeles was illegal and banned it.The 9th US Circuit court of appeals order means Trump retains command of the guards for now and can continue to use them to respond to protests against his immigration crackdown. The court could later decide against his control.It’s a temporary victory for Trump in back-and-forth court decisions on who should control the security force, an issue that has pitted California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, against the president and angered Democrats, who see the deployment as an abuse of power.The three-judge panel that paused the ruling included two judges appointed by Trump in his first term. The other is a judge appointed by Joe Biden. The panel said it would hold a hearing on Tuesday to consider the merits of the order from District Judge Charles Breyer from earlier in the day.Breyer ruled the Guard deployment was illegal and both violated the 10th amendment and exceeded Trump’s statutory authority. The order applied only to the National Guard troops and not Marines who were also deployed to the LA protests. The judge said he would not rule on the Marines because they were not out on the streets yet.In issuing a temporary restraining order against Trump, Breyer found the president had failed to show there was a “rebellion” in Los Angeles that required him to federalize the guard and failed to comply with the procedural steps to notify the governor.“His actions were illegal – both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States constitution. He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor,” Breyer wrote.The request for the injunction is part of a lawsuit filed by the state of California challenging Trump’s move to call up more than 4,000 national guard troops and about 700 active-duty marines based in Twentynine Palms, California, over Newsom’s objections.Beryer’s decision came after a hearing in federal district court in San Francisco where the justice department argued Trump had the sole and unreviewable power to decide whether there was a “rebellion” that needed federal intervention.Breyer rejected both arguments in his sweeping 36-page opinion, effectively rebuking the justice department for trying to suggest the conditions to take control of the guard had been met as long as Trump had decided himself that was the case.“The president’s discretion in what to do next does not mean that the president can unilaterally and without judicial review declare that a vacancy exists in order to fill it. That is classic ipse dixit,” Breyer wrote, adding that the definition of rebellion had clearly not been met.The temporary restraining order did not touch on Trump and his defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, moving to deploy the marines, in large part because the justice department told the judge they were only being used to protect federal buildings and personnel.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionUsing the military for protective purposes, Breyer suggested at the hearing, would not be a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, a 19th-century law prohibiting the use of troops to engage in law enforcement activities on domestic soil.Trump has been suggesting the idea of deploying troops against Americans since his first term, when some Black Lives Matter protests in the summer of 2020 turned violent. He opted against doing so at the time, but has since expressed regret to advisers that he did not punish them more aggressively.Notably, during a campaign rally in 2023, Trump vowed to respond more forcefully if elected to a second term. “You’re supposed to not be involved in that, you just have to be asked by the governor or the mayor to come in,” he said of the president’s usual role in deciding whether to send in the military. “The next time, I’m not waiting.”The Associated Press contributed reporting. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Senator Alex Padilla forcibly removed from Kristi Noem’s LA press conference

      by

      Alex Padilla, a Democratic California senator and vocal critic of the Trump administration’s immigration polices, was forcibly removed and handcuffed as he attempted to ask a question at a press conference held by Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, in Los Angeles on Thursday.In video taken of the incident that has since gone viral on social media, Padilla is seen being restrained and removed from the room by Secret Service agents.“I’m Senator Alex Padilla. I have questions for the secretary,” Padilla shouts, as he struggles to move past against the men pushing him back toward the exit.“Hands off!” Padilla says at least three times. Outside the room, he is pinned to the floor and placed in handcuffs.Emerging afterward, Padilla, the ranking member of the judiciary subcommittee on immigration, citizenship and border safety, said he and his colleagues had repeatedly asked DHS for more information on its “increasingly extreme immigration enforcement actions” but had not received a response to his inquiries.“If this is how this administration responds to a senator with a question, if this is how the DHS responds to a senator with a question, you can only imagine what they’re doing to farm workers, to cooks, to day laborers, throughout the LA community and throughout California and throughout the country,” Padilla, the son of immigrants from Mexico, told reporters. “We will hold this administration accountable.”The extraordinary scene stunned his Democratic colleagues from Capitol Hill to California, though his actions drew criticism from Republicans, including the House speaker, Mike Johnson, who called for Padilla’s censure. It comes amid escalating tensions between California and the federal government, after Donald Trump deployed national guard troops and US Marines to LA to quell protests prompted by immigration raids, over the objections of the state’s governor and the city’s mayor.“I am shocked by how far we have descended in the first 140 days of this administration,” Adam Schiff, the junior senator from California said in a speech from the Senate floor shortly after viewing the video of the incident. “What is becoming of our democracy? Are there no limits to what this administration will do? Is there no line they will not cross?”In a statement, the DHS said the senator “chose disrespectful political theatre” and disrupted a live news conference. They falsely claimed that Padilla had failed to identify himself and believed he was an attacker when he “lunged toward” Noem as she delivered remarks.“Mr Padilla was told repeatedly to back away and did not comply with officers’ repeated commands,” the department said in a statement posted on X, adding that officers responded and “acted appropriately”.The deputy FBI director Dan Bongino accused Padilla of “not wearing a security pin” and said he “physically resisted law enforcement when confronted”.“Our FBI personnel acted completely appropriately while assisting Secret Service and we are grateful for their professionalism and service,” Bongino added.Noem was in Los Angeles to accompany federal agents on immigration operations in the area.Noem said Padilla’s approach “wasn’t appropriate” and that she wished he had reached out to her office before interrupting the event. Following the incident, she and the senator met for 15 minutes, according to DHS. Noem told reporters that they had a “great” and “productive” conversation and exchanged phone numbers.Democratic officials said they were stunned by what the House minority leader, Hakeem Jeffries, described as the “manhandling” of a sitting US senator.The California governor, Gavin Newsom, called Padilla “one of the most decent people I know”, before adding: “This is outrageous, dictatorial, and shameful. Trump and his shock troops are out of control. This must end now.”Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader, wrote on X that “watching this video sickened my stomach, the manhandling of a United States Senator, Senator Padilla. We need immediate answers to what the hell went on.”Jimmy Gomez, a California representative, wrote on X : “This isn’t just shocking, it’s a threat to the rule of law and democratic accountability. Sen Padilla is conducting oversight over the lawlessness of the Trump and the violations of the #RuleOfLaw. If this can happen to immigrant communities, it can happen to anyone.”Tina Smith, a Minnesota senator, said: “This is disgusting. If this is how they treat Alex Padilla, a United States Senator, how do you think they’ll treat you?”Norma Torres, a California representative, lambasted the treatment of Padilla in an impassioned video, writing: “Let’s call it what it is: a disgraceful abuse of power. Senator Alex Padilla was dragged and handcuffed out for daring to question Secretary Noem. This wasn’t a threat – it was dissent. They’re not keeping us safe – they’re silencing us.”The clash with Padilla comes just days after the Democratic representative LaMonica McIver of New Jersey was indicted on federal charges alleging she assaulted and interfered with immigration officers after a clash with law enforcement at a May protest outside a detention facility in Newark. Democrats have cast the charges as a politically motivated attempt by the Trump administration to intimidate the opposition.As he exited the floor of the House of Representatives, Johnson said the senator had been at fault, accusing him of “charging a cabinet secretary at a press conference” and calling his actions “wildly inappropriate”.“A sitting member of Congress should not act like that,” he said. “It is beneath a member of the Congress, it is beneath a US senator.”Johnson said he believes Padilla’s behavior “merits immediate attention” by Congress and “at a minimum, it rises to the level of a censure”. More

    • 163 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Why did Angelenos swiftly resist Ice raids? Look to LA’s deep immigrant roots

      by

      Nerves are frayed in Los Angeles, as the second largest city in the US is flooded with more than 2,000 federal troops tasked with protecting immigration enforcement officials after thousands of people hit the streets to protest against deportation raids.That this weekend’s immigration enforcement actions sparked a fierce response in LA will not come as a surprise to many Californians. LA’s immigrant roots, and its deep ties to neighboring Mexico, are central to the region’s identity.Long before it was part of the US, LA was Indigenous Tongva and Chumash land. It later came under Spanish and then Mexican rule. The name “California” itself comes from a Spanish novel, Las sergas de Esplandián (The Adventures of Esplandián), and appeared on maps as early as 1541. But it wasn’t until 2 August 1769, that the Spaniard Juan Crespi, a Franciscan priest accompanying the first European land expedition through California, described in his journal a “beautiful river from the north-west”. He named the river, which would later become the LA River, Nuestra Señora de los Angeles de la Porciúncula (Our Lady of the Angels of the Porciuncula). Twelve years later, in 1781, the settlement would emerge with the shortened and anglicized name of Los Angeles.After Mexico’s independence from Spain in 1821, Los Angeles – indeed the whole region– remained Mexican territory until it was ceded to the US in 1848 after the Mexican-American war. California became the 31st state in 1850, entering the Union as a free state.Today, one in three people of LA county’s more than 10 million residents are immigrants, and 1.6 million children in the region have at least one immigrant parent. They come from countries around the world. It’s common for Angelenos to have been born in Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, the Philippines, China and Hong Kong – but also Russia, France, the UK and elsewhere.Their experiences are diverse, shaped by race, class, legal status, education, languages spoken and more. And they fill vital roles in the region’s economy. Immigrant workers make up 40% of the LA metro area’s workforce.View image in fullscreen“In Los Angeles – more than anywhere – the relationship between immigrant and non-immigrant is interdependent,” says LA city councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez, the son of Mexican immigrants and street vendors.Soto-Martínez represents council district 13, which includes some of LA’s most diverse neighborhoods: Echo Park, Silver Lake, Koreatown, Thai Town, Historic Filipinotown and Little Armenia.“Angelenos know that it doesn’t matter where you are – if you’re eating at a restaurant, chances are your food is cooked by an immigrant,” Soto-Martínez said. “If you’re having work done on your house, it’s often an immigrant. Many nannies are immigrants. And if you go to the hospital, chances are you’re being treated by an immigrant.”View image in fullscreenLA has long celebrated its immigrant culture, and in recent years city leaders have worked to protect its immigrant population from the Trump administration’s deportation agenda. In 2023, ahead of a possible second Donald Trump term, LA declared itself a sanctuary city, barring local personnel and resources from being used in federal immigration enforcement. California, too, has passed a string of laws to protect immigrant workers – regardless of legal status – from retaliation, wage theft and other forms of exploitation.“We are a city of immigrants, and we have always embraced that,” Karen Bass, the mayor of LA, said in a press conference on Monday.With immigrants such a strong part of its culture, Friday’s arrest of 118 immigrants, and claims from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that many of them were criminals, has galled the community. The DHS’s website featured photos of 11 people arrested in the raids, with a headline that read: “ICE Captures Worst of the Worst Illegal Alien Criminals in Los Angeles Including Murderers, Sex Offenders, and Other Violent Criminals.”Jorge-Mario Cabrera, a spokesperson for the non-profit Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (Chirla), says his organization has been in direct contact with many of the families of those arrested and has deployed legal counsel in multiple cases. So far, he says: “We’ve found no credible evidence to back homeland security’s claims. These were not targeted arrests. They weren’t based on judicial warrants. And the lie won’t survive for long.”The raids at workplaces – pushed by Tom Homan, Trump’s border czar, and Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff – come amid a broader push by the administration to hasten arrests and increase deportations. Homan warned LA is likely to see more enforcement this month. And he’s also admitted that the agency has arrested people with no criminal records.Cabrera says given the situation, Angelenos are reacting with justified anger, hurt and civic determination. People in LA with power will stand up for their immigrant friends and family members, he argued.“Angelenos are good about ensuring their voices are heard,” he says. Still, he urges peaceful protest only. “If we give the government reasons to repress us, they will use their maximum power to do so.”Advocates and city leaders also warn that people everywhere should be chilled by what’s happening in the City of Angels.“I think we’re an experiment,” said Mayor Bass. “Because if you can do this to the nation’s second largest city, maybe the administration is hoping this will be a signal to everyone everywhere to fear them. Your federal government … can come in and take over.” More