Pentagon to deploy about 700 Marines to Los Angeles
The command has activated the Marine infantry battalion that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth placed on prepare to deploy orders over the weekend amid ongoing protests against raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, according to a Northcom statement.
Approximately 700 Marines with 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines, 1st Marine Division, based out of Twentynine Palms in California, 'will seamlessly integrate' with the National Guard troops already deployed to Los Angeles to protect federal personnel and property, Northcom said.
The command noted that the Marines had been 'trained in de-escalation, crowd control, and standing rules for the use of force.'
Hegseth in a post on X later noted the deployment, attributing it to increased threats to federal officers and buildings.
'Due to increased threats to federal law enforcement officers and federal buildings, approximately 700 active-duty U.S. Marines from Camp Pendleton are being deployed to Los Angeles to restore order,' he wrote before taking a shot at California Gov. Gavin Newsom.
'We have an obligation to defend federal law enforcement officers – even if Gavin Newsom will not,' he concluded.
It is not clear if the Marines will actually be placed on the ground or if they will remain on standby, though Newsom's press office said it was their understanding that the service members are not being deployed as there is a difference between that and being mobilized.
In a statement posted to X, Newsom's press office also bashed the movement of Marines as 'mobilizing the best in class branch of the U.S. military against its own citizens.'
'The level of escalation is completely unwarranted, uncalled for, and unprecedented,' the office added.
The move is likely to further inflame tensions between California officials and the Trump administration, which have locked horns over how to respond to protests in Los Angeles and surrounding suburbs against federal immigration raids.
President Trump has insisted the deployment – only the second time in the past 60 years that a U.S. president has mobilized a state's National Guard troops without the consent of its governor – is necessary to stop protests against ICE.
'The people that are causing the problem are professional agitators. They're insurrectionists. They're bad people. They should be in jail,' Trump told reporters on Monday.
Trump also on Monday said he'd support the arrest of Newsom.
But Newson has accused the Pentagon of 'lying to the American people' in justifying deploying service members within the state, asserting that the situation intensified only when the U.S. military deployed troops.
Newsom has formally demanded the Trump administration pull the National Guard troops off the streets, and California has sued the Trump administration over what its officials say is an 'unlawful' deployment.
This story was updated at 6:31 p.m.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
26 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
9th Circuit keeps freeze on Southern California ICE patrols
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a stinging blow to the Trump administration's mass deportation project Friday night in a fiery opinion upholding a lower court's block on 'roving patrols' across much of Southern California. 'If, as Defendants suggest, they are not conducting stops that lack reasonable suspicion, they can hardly claim to be irreparably harmed by an injunction aimed at preventing a subset of stops not supported by reasonable suspicion,' the panel wrote. The ruling leaves in place a temporary restraining order barring masked and heavily armed agents from snatching people off the streets of Southern California without first establishing reasonable suspicion that they are in the U.S. illegally. Under the 4th Amendment, reasonable suspicion cannot be based solely on race, ethnicity, language, location or employment, either alone or in combination, U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong of Los Angeles wrote in her original order. 9th Circuit Judges Marsha S. Berzon, Jennifer Sung and Ronald M. Gould agreed. 'There is no predicate action that the individual plaintiffs would need to take, other than simply going about their lives, to potentially be subject to the challenged stops,' the opinion said. Fourth Amendment injunctions are hard to win, experts say. Plaintiffs must show not only that they were hurt, but that they are likely to be hurt again in the same way in the future. One way to meet that test in court is to show the injury is the product of a government policy. Throughout a hearing Monday, the appellate judges repeatedly probed that question, roughly doubling the administration's time to respond in an effort to get an answer. 'After the district court injunction here, the secretary of Homeland Security said, 'We are going to continue doing what we're doing' — so that's not a policy?' Berzon asked. 'The policy is to follow the 4th Amendment and to require reasonable suspicion,' said Deputy Assistant Atty. Gen. Yaakov Roth. Roth also rebuffed questions about a 3,000-arrests-per-day quota first touted by White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller in May. In a memo to the panel on Wednesday, Roth clarified that 'no such goal' had been established. The court rejected that argument Friday, writing that 'no official statement or express policy is required' to prove one exists. 'Agents have conducted many stops in the Los Angeles area within a matter of weeks ... some repeatedly in the same location,' the opinion said, making the likelihood of future stops 'considerable.' The ruling scolded the Department of Justice for 'misreading' the restraining order it sought to block, and said it 'mischaracterized' Judge Frimpong's order. And it rejected the government's central claim that its law enforcement mandate would be 'chilled' by the district court's order. 'Defendants have failed to establish that they will be 'chilled' from their enforcement efforts at all, let alone in a manner that constitutes the 'irreparable injury' required to support a stay pending appeal,' the panel wrote. The case is still in its early phases, with hearings set for a preliminary injunction in September. But the 'shock and awe' campaign of chaotic public arrests that first gripped Southern California on June 6 has all but ceased in the seven counties covered by Frimpong's order: Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo. 'The underlying 4th Amendment law is not complicated,' said Mohammad Tajsar of the ACLU of Southern California — part of a coalition of civil rights groups and individual attorneys challenging cases of three immigrants and two U.S. citizens swept up in chaotic arrests. 'Even a more conservative panel would have been concerned about what the government is doing.' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, whose city was among a number of Southern California municipalities allowed to join the lawsuit this week, celebrated the news. 'Today is a victory for the rule of law and for the city of Los Angeles,' Bass said. 'Los Angeles will stand together against this administration's efforts to break up families who contribute every single day to the life, the culture and the economy of our great city.' The Trump administration has previously signaled its intent to fight judicial limits on its deportation efforts any way it can. It was not immediately clear where an appeal would proceed.
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
After a reference to Trump's impeachments is removed from a history museum, complex questions echo
NEW YORK (AP) — It would seem the most straightforward of notions: A thing takes place, and it goes into the history books or is added to museum exhibits. But whether something even gets remembered and how — particularly when it comes to the history of a country and its leader — is often the furthest thing from simple. The latest example of that came Friday, when the Smithsonian Institution said it had removed a reference to the 2019 and 2021 impeachments of President Donald Trump from a panel in an exhibition about the American presidency. Trump has pressed institutions and agencies under federal oversight, often through the pressure of funding, to focus on the country's achievements and progress and away from things he terms 'divisive.' A Smithsonian spokesperson said the removal of the reference, which had been installed as part of a temporary addition in 2021, came after a review of 'legacy content recently' and the exhibit eventually 'will include all impeachments.' There was no time frame given for when; exhibition renovations can be time- and money-consuming endeavors. In a statement that did not directly address the impeachment references, White House spokesperson Davis Ingle said: 'We are fully supportive of updating displays to highlight American greatness.' But is history intended to highlight or to document — to report what happened, or to serve a desired narrative? The answer, as with most things about the past, can be intensely complex. It's part of a larger effort around American stories The Smithsonian's move comes in the wake of Trump administration actions like removing the name of a gay rights activist from a Navy ship, pushing for Republican supporters in Congress to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and getting rid of the leadership at the Kennedy Center. 'Based on what we have been seeing, this is part of a broader effort by the president to influence and shape how history is depicted at museums, national parks, and schools,' said Julian E. Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University. 'Not only is he pushing a specific narrative of the United States but, in this case, trying to influence how Americans learn about his own role in history.' It's not a new struggle, in the world generally and the political world particularly. There is power in being able to shape how things are remembered, if they are remembered at all — who was there, who took part, who was responsible, what happened to lead up to that point in history. And the human beings who run things have often extended their authority to the stories told about them. In China, for example, references to the June 1989 crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in Beijing's Tiananmen Square are forbidden and meticulously regulated by the ruling Communist Party government. In Soviet-era Russia, officials who ran afoul of leaders like Josef Stalin disappeared not only from the government itself but from photographs and history books where they once appeared. Jason Stanley, an expert on authoritarianism, said controlling what and how people learn of their past has long been used as a vital tool to maintain power. Stanley has made his views about the Trump administration clear; he recently left Yale University to join the University of Toronto, citing concerns over the U.S. political situation. 'If they don't control the historical narrative,' he said, 'then they can't create the kind of fake history that props up their politics.' It shows how the presentation of history matters In the United States, presidents and their families have always used their power to shape history and calibrate their own images. Jackie Kennedy insisted on cuts in William Manchester's book on her husband's 1963 assassination, 'The Death of a President.' Ronald Reagan and his wife got a cable TV channel to release a carefully calibrated documentary about him. Those around Franklin D. Roosevelt, including journalists of the era, took pains to mask the impact that paralysis had on his body and his mobility. Trump, though, has taken it to a more intense level — a sitting president encouraging an atmosphere where institutions can feel compelled to choose between him and the truth — whether he calls for it directly or not. 'We are constantly trying to position ourselves in history as citizens, as citizens of the country, citizens of the world,' said Robin Wagner-Pacifici, professor emerita of sociology at the New School for Social Research. 'So part of these exhibits and monuments are also about situating us in time. And without it, it's very hard for us to situate ourselves in history because it seems like we just kind of burst forth from the Earth.' Timothy Naftali, director of the Richard M. Nixon Presidential Library and Museum from 2007 to 2011, presided over its overhaul to offer a more objective presentation of Watergate — one not beholden to the president's loyalists. In an interview Friday, he said he was 'concerned and disappointed' about the Smithsonian decision. Naftali, now a senior researcher at Columbia University, said museum directors 'should have red lines' and that he considered removing the Trump panel to be one of them. While it might seem inconsequential for someone in power to care about a museum's offerings, Wagner-Pacifici says Trump's outlook on history and his role in it — earlier this year, he said the Smithsonian had 'come under the influence of a divisive, race-centered ideology' — shows how important those matters are to people in authority. 'You might say about that person, whoever that person is, their power is so immense and their legitimacy is so stable and so sort of monumental that why would they bother with things like this ... why would they bother to waste their energy and effort on that?' Wagner-Pacifici said. Her conclusion: 'The legitimacy of those in power has to be reconstituted constantly. They can never rest on their laurels.' ___
an hour ago
A Tunisian musician was detained in LA after living in US for a decade. His doctor wife speaks out
LOS ANGELES -- Dr. Wafaa Alrashid noticed fewer of her patients were showing up for their appointments at the Los Angeles area hospital where she works as immigration raids spread fear among the Latino population she serves. The Utah-born chief medical officer at Huntington Hospital understood their fear on a personal level. Her husband Rami Othmane, a Tunisian singer and classical musician, began carrying a receipt of his pending green card application around with him. Over the past few months, immigration agents have arrested hundreds of people in Southern California, prompting protests against the federal raids and the subsequent deployment of the National Guard and Marines. Despite living in the U.S. for a decade as one of thousands of residents married to U.S. citizens, he was swept up in the crackdown. On July 13, Othmane was stopped while driving to a grocery store in Pasadena. He quickly pulled out his paperwork to show federal immigration agents. 'They didn't care, they said, 'Please step out of the car,'' Alrashid recalled hearing the officers say as she watched her husband's arrest in horror over FaceTime. Alrashid immediately jumped in her car and followed her phone to his location. She arrived just in time to see the outline of his head in the back of a vehicle driving away. 'That was probably the worst day of my life," she said. The Trump administration's crackdown on illegal immigration has ensnared not only immigrants without legal status but legal permanent residents like Othmane who has green cards. Some U.S. citizens have even been arrested. Meanwhile, many asylum-seekers who have regular check-in appointments are being arrested in the hallways outside courtrooms as the White House works toward its promise of mass deportations. Alrashid said her husband has been in the U.S. since 2015 and overstayed his visa, but his deportation order was dismissed in 2020. They wed in March 2025 and immediately filed for a green card. After his arrest, he was taken to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in downtown Los Angeles where he was held in a freezing cold room with 'no beds, no pillows, no blankets, no soap, no toothbrushes and toothpaste, and when you're in a room with people, the bathroom's open,' she said. The Department of Homeland Security in an emailed statement noted the expiration of his tourist visa but did not address the dismissal of the deportation order in 2020 nor his pending green card application. The agency denied any allegations of mistreatment, and said "ensuring the safety, security, and well-being of individuals in our custody is a top priority at ICE.' Alrashid said for years her husband has performed classical Arabic music across Southern California. They first met when he was singing at a restaurant. 'He's the kindest person,' Alrashid said, adding that he gave a sweater she brought him to a fellow detainee and to give others privacy, he built a makeshift barrier around the open toilet using trash bags. 'He's brought a lot to the community, a lot of people love his music," she said. More than a week after his arrest, fellow musicians, immigration advocates and activists joined Alrashid in a rally outside the facility. A few of his colleagues performed classical Arabic music, drumming loud enough that they hoped the detainees inside could hear them. Los Jornaleros del Norte musicians, who often play Spanish-language music at rallies, also were there. 'In Latin American culture, the serenade — to bring music to people — is an act of love and kindness. But in this moment, bringing music to people who are in captivity is also an act of resistance," said Pablo Alvarado, co-executive director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network. Leading up to the rally, Alrashid was worried because she hadn't received her daily call from her husband and was told she couldn't visit him that day at the detention facility. She finally heard from him that evening. Othmane told her over the phone he was now at an immigration detention facility in Arizona, and that his left leg was swollen. 'They should ultrasound your leg, don't take a risk,' she said. Alrashid hopes to get her husband out on bail while his case is being processed. They had a procedural hearing on Thursday where the judge verified his immigration status, and have a bail bond hearing scheduled for Tuesday.
