Trump's unprecedented shows of force in LA and Washington are pushing norms, sparking fears
keenesentinel.com -- Sunday, August 17, 2025, 5:55:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: State Politics & Governors, Civil Lawsuits & Defamation Cases, Media Coverage & Press Relations
LOS ANGELES -- In downtown Los Angeles, Gov. Gavin Newsom was holding a news conference with Democratic leaders when the Border Patrol showed up nearby to conduct a showy immigration raid.
In Washington, D.C., hundreds of National Guard troops patrolled the streets, some in armored vehicles, as city officials battled with the White House over whether the federal government can take control of the local police department.
President Donald Trump has long demonized "blue" cities like Los Angeles, Washington and New York, frequently claiming -- often contrary to the evidence -- that their Democratic leaders have allowed crime and blight to worsen. Trump, for example, cited out-of-control crime as the reason for his Washington, D.C., guard deployment, even though data shows crime in the city is down.
But over the past few months, Trump's rhetoric has given way to searing images of federal power on urban streets that are generating both headlines and increasing alarm in some circles.
While past presidents have occasionally used the Insurrection Act to deploy the military in response to clear, acute crises, the way Trump has deployed troops in Democratic-run cities is unprecedented in American politics. Trump has claimed broader inherent powers and an authority to deploy troops to cities when and where he decides there is an emergency, said Matthew Beckmann, a political science professor at UC Irvine.
"President Trump is testing how far he can push his authority, in no small part to find out who or what can challenge him," he said.
State and local officials reacted with shock when they learned Border Patrol agents had massed outside Newsom's news conference Thursday. The governor was preparing to announce the launch of a campaign for a ballot measure, which if approved by voters, would redraw the state's congressional maps to favor Democrats before the 2026 midterms.
Border Patrol Sector Chief Gregory Bovino told a Fox 11 reporter: "We're here making Los Angeles a safer place since we won't have politicians that'll do that, we do that ourselves." When the reporter noted that Newsom was nearby, Bovino responded, "I don't know where he's at."
However, local law enforcement sources told The Times that the raid was not random and that they had received word from the federal authorities that Little Tokyo was targeted due to its proximity to the governor's event. The raid, the sources told The Times, was less about making arrests and more of a show of force intended to disrupt Democrats.
Whatever the reason, the raid generated news coverage and at least in the conservative media, overshadowed the announcement of the redistricting plan.
Trump's second term has been marked by increased use of troops in cities. He authorized the deployment of thousands of Marines and National Guard troops to L.A. in June after immigration raids sparked scattered protests. The troops saw little action, and local leaders said the deployment was unnecessary and only served to inflame tensions.
The operation reached a controversial zenith in July when scores of troops on horseback wearing tactical gear and driving armored vehicles, rolled through MacArthur Park. The incident generated much attention, but local police were surprised that the raid was brief and resulted in few arrests.
After the MacArthur Park raid, Mayor Karen Bass complained "there's no plan other than fear, chaos and politics."
Beckmann said the situation is a "particularly perilous historical moment because we have a president willing to flout constitutional limits while Congress and the court have been willing to accept pretext as principle."
UC Berkeley Political Science Professor Eric Schickler, co-director of the university's Institute of Governmental Studies, said the recent military displays are part of a larger mission to increase the power of the president and weaken other countervailing forces, such as the dismantling of federal agencies and the weakening of universities.
"It all adds up to a picture of really trying to turn the president into the one dominant force in American politics -- he is the boss of everything, he controls everything," Schickler said. "And that's just not how the American political system has worked for 240 years."
In some way, Trump's tactics are an extension of long-held rhetoric. In the 1980s, he regularly railed against crime in New York City, including the rape of a woman in Central Park that captured national headlines. The suspects, known as the Central Park Five, were exonerated after spending years in prison and have filed a defamation suit against Trump.
Trump and his backers say he is simply keeping campaign promises to reduce crime and deport people in the country illegally.
"Our law enforcement operations are about enforcing the law -- not about Gavin Newsom," said Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin.
Federal agents "patrol all areas of Los Angeles every day with over 40 teams on the ground to make L.A. safe," she said.
In Washington D.C., where the federal government has began assuming law enforcement responsibilities, the business of policing the streets of the nation's capital had radically transformed by Friday. Federal agencies typically tasked with investigating drug kingpins, gunrunners and cybercriminals were conducting traffic stops and helping with other routine policing.
Twenty federal law enforcement teams fanned out across the city Thursday night with more than 1,750 people joining the operation, a White House official told the Associated Press. They made 33 arrests, including 15 people who did not have permanent legal status. Others were arrested on warrants for murder, rape and driving under the influence, the official said.
Thaddeus Johnson, a senior fellow with the Council on Criminal Justice, said the administration's actions not only threaten democracy, but they also have real consequences for local leaders and residents. Citizens often can't distinguish between federal or local officers and don't know when the two groups are or aren't working together.
"That breeds a lot of confusion and also breeds a lot of fear," Johnson said.
Thomas Abt, founding director of University of Maryland's Center for the Study and Practice of Violence Reduction, emphasized that pulling federal agents from their jobs can hurt overall public safety.
"There's a real threat to politicizing federal law enforcement, and sending them wherever elected officials think there's a photo opportunity instead of doing the hard work of federal law enforcement," Abt said.
Already, D.C. residents and public officials have pushed back on federal law enforcement's presence. When federal officers set up a vehicle checkpoint along the 14th Street Northwest corridor this week, hecklers shouted, "Go home, fascists" and "Get off our streets."
On Friday, the District of Columbia filed an emergency motion seeking to block the Trump administration's takeover of the city's police department.
"This is the gravest threat to Home Rule DC has ever faced, and we are fighting to stop it," D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb said in a statement on Friday. "The Administration's actions are brazenly unlawful. They go well beyond the bounds of the President's limited authority and instead seek a hostile takeover of MPD."
The show of force in L.A. has also left local officials outraged at what they see as deliberate efforts to sow fear and exert power. Hours before agents arrived in Little Tokyo, Bass and other officials held a news conference calling for an end to the continued immigration raids.
Bass said she believes the recent actions violated the temporary restraining order upheld this month by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals prohibiting agents from targeting people solely based on their race, vocation, language or location.
The number of arrests in Southern California declined in July after a judge issued the order. But in the past two weeks, some higher profile raids have begun to ramp up again.
In one instance, an 18-year-old Los Angeles high school senior was picked up by federal immigration officers while walking his dog in Van Nuys. On Thursday, a man apparently running from agents who showed up at a Home Depot parking lot in Monrovia was hit by a car and killed on the 210 Freeway.
Bass appeared to be seething as she spoke to reporters after Newsom's press conference on Thursday, calling the raid in Little Tokyo a "provocative act" and "unbelievably disrespectful."
"They're talking about disorder in Los Angeles, and they are the source of the disorder in Los Angeles right now," she said.
Sign Our PetitionIn recent years, the political landscape in the United States has increasingly resembled a battleground where the tools of governance are wielded not only for policy implementation but also as instruments of intimidation and control. The recent actions taken by federal authorities under the Trump administration, particularly in Democratic strongholds like Los Angeles and Washington D.C., signal a concerning trend toward the militarization of domestic affairs. These developments echo historical precedents where governmental authority has been used to suppress dissent and manipulate political outcomes, drawing from a legacy that spans several decades of civil rights struggles and political upheaval.
Historically, the use of federal forces in urban centers has often been justified under the guise of maintaining law and order, yet such measures frequently serve to amplify underlying tensions rather than resolve them. The deployment of National Guard troops in response to perceived crises—often exaggerated by political rhetoric—mirrors instances from the civil rights era, where federal intervention was met with both resistance and calls for justice. In this context, Trump's actions can be interpreted as a modern-day manifestation of this politicized use of military power, where the spectacle of federal troops patrolling the streets becomes a means to assert dominance over local governance and instill fear in communities.
The recent immigration raid conducted by the Border Patrol during a press conference led by California Governor Gavin Newsom exemplifies this troubling dynamic. The timing and location of the raid were conspicuously aimed at overshadowing Newsom’s announcement regarding a ballot measure to redraw congressional maps—a move that could significantly bolster Democratic representation in the state. This tactic not only raises questions about the legality and ethics of federal forces intervening in state matters but also highlights a strategic maneuver by the Trump administration to disrupt and undermine political opposition. By employing federal resources to target Democratic leaders, the administration is essentially weaponizing immigration enforcement as a political tool, further exacerbating the already fraught relationship between federal and state authorities.
Moreover, these actions are set against a backdrop of broader social struggles, particularly concerning immigration policy and civil rights. The narratives surrounding immigration have been historically rooted in xenophobia and racism, often used to rally political bases through fearmongering. The Border Patrol’s overt presence near a Democratic event not only showcases a blatant disregard for the principle of local governance but also feeds into the narrative that immigrants are a threat to societal safety—a notion that is contradicted by data showing that immigrants contribute positively to the communities they inhabit. The disruption caused by such federal raids perpetuates a cycle of fear and mistrust, further isolating vulnerable populations and undermining the social fabric that binds communities together.
As citizens and advocates for justice navigate this increasingly militarized political landscape, it is imperative to engage in thoughtful dialogue that challenges the normalization of such actions. The historical implications of using federal authority to exert control over local matters should fuel discussions about accountability and the need for reform in how federal agencies operate within communities. By framing these events within the context of historical struggles for civil rights and social justice, activists and citizens alike can effectively dismantle the narratives used to justify authoritarian practices and advocate for a return to the democratic principles of transparency, equity, and respect for local governance.
In conclusion, the recent deployment of federal forces in Democratic cities must be viewed as part of a larger trend characterized by the erosion of democratic norms and the politicization of federal powers. This moment calls for vigilance and action from all who value the principles of justice and equality. By drawing upon historical precedents and engaging in informed conversations, individuals can better equip themselves to confront and challenge the troubling practices that threaten to undermine the very foundations of democracy. The fight for social justice is not only a struggle against systemic oppression but also a continuous effort to reclaim the narrative and ensure that governance serves the people, not the interests of a powerful few.
The recent actions taken by the Trump administration in cities like Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., represent a troubling escalation of federal authority that challenges the very fabric of our democratic norms. The deployment of military and federal law enforcement to ostensibly "secure" areas in urban locations is not only an unprecedented use of power but also a concerted strategy to instill fear, suppress dissent, and undermine local governance. This manipulation of state power to target "blue" cities—often perceived as bastions of progressive values—reflects a broader political agenda that seeks to destabilize and delegitimize Democratic leadership while reinforcing a narrative of chaos and crisis.
Historically, the Insurrection Act has been invoked in instances of acute civil unrest or during natural disasters, aimed at restoring order when local authorities are unable to do so. However, Trump's frequent use of this authority in cities where crime rates are actually declining reveals a disingenuous strategy designed more to create dramatic optics than to respond to legitimate crises. This tactic has roots in a long history of federal overreach, particularly in contexts where marginalized communities have risen in protest against systemic injustices. The imagery of military personnel patrolling urban streets evokes memories of past civil rights struggles, where similar displays of force were employed to suppress movements advocating for equity and justice.
As Americans, we have a responsibility to recognize and counter these authoritarian tendencies. One critical step is to engage in local and state politics actively and advocate for the protection of civil liberties. This includes supporting legislation that safeguards against the militarization of local police forces and promotes accountability for federal actions that infringe upon the rights of citizens. It is also essential to build coalitions with community organizations and grassroots movements that challenge oppressive practices, thereby amplifying voices that demand justice and equity in governance.
Moreover, educating oneself and others about the implications of these actions is vital. By understanding the historical precedents of federal overreach and the socio-political contexts that enable such maneuvers, we can better articulate the risks posed by the normalization of militarized responses to domestic issues. Sharing information about how these tactics disproportionately affect vulnerable communities can elevate the conversation and encourage broader public discourse on the need for systemic change. Engaging in dialogues that highlight the connection between these federal actions and larger issues of race, class, and power is important for fostering a more inclusive understanding of democracy.
Ultimately, we must challenge the narrative propagated by those in power that seeks to paint urban centers as lawless and in need of federal intervention. By advocating for policies that promote community safety through social investment rather than militarization—such as affordable housing, mental health services, and education—we can offer a compelling alternative vision for governance. This approach not only counters the fear-mongering often employed by right-wing rhetoric but also aligns with the core values of justice and equity that are essential for a truly democratic society. Engaging in these conversations and actions can empower citizens to reclaim their agency and resist the encroachment of authoritarian tactics in their communities.
Analyzing the article, we can identify several actionable steps concerned citizens can take to respond to the current political climate and the unsettling shows of federal force in urban areas. Here’s a detailed list of ideas and actions we can personally take to address the situation:
### 1. **Mobilize Community Awareness** - **Action:** Organize community meetings or forums to discuss the implications of federal troop deployments and immigration raids on local governance and safety. - **Example:** Partner with local activist groups to host a town hall. Use tools like Meetup or Eventbrite to create an event page.
### 2. **Petition for Change** - **Action:** Create or support petitions that call for local and state governments to take a stand against federal overreach and to ensure community safety. - **Example:** Use platforms like Change.org to start a petition demanding local representatives oppose federal troop deployments in urban areas. - **What to Say:** "We, the undersigned, call upon [Local Government Official’s Name] to protect our community's autonomy and stand against the militarization of our neighborhoods."
### 3. **Contact Local Representatives** - **Action:** Write to local and state officials expressing concerns about federal actions and urging them to take a stand. - **Who to Write To:** - **California Governor Gavin Newsom** - Email: governor@governor.ca.gov - Mailing Address: Office of Governor Gavin Newsom, 1021 O Street, Suite 900, Sacramento, CA 95814 - **Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass** - Email: mayor.bass@lacity.org - Mailing Address: City Hall, 200 N Spring St, Room 303, Los Angeles, CA 90012
- **What to Say:** "Dear [Official's Name], I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the recent federal actions in our city. The deployment of troops and immigration raids are not only unnecessary but also create an atmosphere of fear and instability. I urge you to stand up for our community's rights and ensure local control over our law enforcement."
### 4. **Support Local Advocacy Groups** - **Action:** Contribute time or resources to local organizations that advocate for immigrant rights, police reform, and community safety. - **Example:** Volunteer with or donate to groups like the ACLU of Southern California or the Immigrant Justice Project. - **Contact Information:** - **ACLU of Southern California** - Website: [www.aclusocal.org](http://www.aclusocal.org) - Email: info@aclusocal.org - **Immigrant Justice Project** - Website: [www.immigrantjustice.org](http://www.immigrantjustice.org) - Email: info@immigrantjustice.org
### 5. **Engage in Social Media Advocacy** - **Action:** Use social media platforms to raise awareness about the issue, share information, and mobilize others. - **Example:** Create informative posts about the implications of federal raids and troop deployments, using hashtags to reach a broader audience (e.g., #LocalControl #StopFederalRaids). - **What to Say:** "The recent show of federal force in our cities undermines our local governance and creates fear in our communities. Let's unite to demand change!"
### 6. **Attend Public Meetings** - **Action:** Participate in city council meetings or public forums to voice concerns and demand transparency regarding local law enforcement and federal involvement. - **Example:** Check your city’s website for upcoming meetings and prepare a statement to present your views. - **What to Say:** "As a concerned resident, I urge the council to prioritize community safety over federal intervention and to work towards policies that protect our rights."
### 7. **Educate Yourself and Others** - **Action:** Host or attend workshops on civil rights, police accountability, and the implications of militarization in urban settings. - **Example:** Partner with local universities or community colleges to provide educational resources and speakers on these topics. - **What to Say:** "Awareness is the first step towards action. Join us to learn more about how we can protect our communities from federal overreach."
By taking these steps, we can collectively push back against federal actions that threaten local governance and community safety. Each action contributes to creating a more informed and active citizenry ready to advocate for justice and equality.