LA anti-ICE riot arrests continue to mount, including teen charged with attempted murder: DA
'The large-scale protests may have ended for now, but our work has not,' LA County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said in a statement Tuesday. 'We are continuing to review evidence, identify suspects and file charges where the law has been broken.:
4 Los Angeles County prosecutors said more than 40 people have not been charged in last month's andi-Ice riots.
Barbara Davidson/NYPost
4 A report released last month said that the anti-immigration unrest in Los Angeles cost the city more than $30 million.
Toby Canham for NY Post
The raucous riots came in protest to nationwide raids by federal immigration agents enforcing President Trump's order to nab and deport illegal immigrants in the US.
According to a report last week, the unrest cost the City of Angels more than $32 million in damages and police overtime costs, not counting the cost of National Guard troops ordered in by Trump.
According to Hochman, the busts include a 17-year-old — who was not named due to his age — who was charged with attempted murder, assault on a peace officer and misdemeanor rioting.
Robert Amaya, 49, was charged with assault with a deadly weapon for allegedly confronting a family near the demonstration and wielding a knife at an 11-year-old girl.
4 Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said the anti-ICE riots are over, but the criminal cases are not.
CAROLINE BREHMAN/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock
4 The June riots in LA and other major cities stemmed from demonstration against immigration raids in the US.
Barbara Davidson/NYPost
Patrick Munoz, 37, was hit with resisting arrest and assault charges for allegedly slamming a cop with a flagpole outside an LA hotel where protesters wrongly believed ICE agents were holed up.
Dana Whitson, 66, and Iran Castro, 29, were charged with police attacking police horses in separate incidents, while 27-year-old twin sisters Antonia Aguilar and Lucia Aguilar Cole were hit with charges that they scuffled with cops after throwing a plastic bottle at a cop.
Dozens of others were charged with a slew of rioting, misconduct and assault charges.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
38 minutes ago
- The Hill
To defeat antisemitism, we must first define it
Rep. Barry Moore (R-Ala.) recently reintroduced the Define to Defeat Act, a much-needed federal measure that would help address the gaping loopholes in how our laws currently respond to antisemitic attacks. The bill is grounded in a simple idea: when trying to determine whether an unlawful act was motivated by antisemitism, investigators should consider the world's most well-accepted definition of antisemitism as contextual, rebuttable evidence. Valid monitoring, informed analysis and investigation, and effective policy-making all require uniform definitions; and while there can be no exhaustive definition of antisemitism, there must be some objective standard for what is and is not acceptable. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance's conduct-based, consensus-driven approach is the only internationally recognized definition of antisemitism that there is, or indeed ever has been. Over the last twenty years, it has proven to be an essential tool used to determine contemporary manifestations of anti-Jewish rhetoric and actions, including illustrative examples of problematic anti-Zionism that can cross the line into demonizing hatred of Jews. This new bill does not police speech or criminalize criticism of Israel. It does not punish opinions. What it does is help authorities evaluate whether clearly unlawful behavior — things like arson, battery, threats, stalking, vandalism, and harassment — may have been motivated by antisemitic bias, including when that bias comes cloaked in the language of 'anti-Zionism.' Unfortunately, that distinction is more important now than ever. Since the Oct, 7, 2023 Hamas terrorist attacks in Israel, antisemitic incidents in the U.S. have spiked by nearly 400 percent. And the veneer separating anti-Israel rhetoric from anti-Jewish violence has grown thinner by the day. Over the last few months, we have witnessed a series of horrific attacks across the country where the assailants insisted they were merely anti-Israel—right before they tried to kill Jews. In April, an arsonist threw a firebomb into the home of Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, one of the most visible Jewish elected officials in America. His attacker reportedly justified the act by citing the governor's support for Israel. In May, outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C., two young Israeli embassy staffers were killed while attending an event hosted by the American Jewish Committee. The gunman yelled 'Free Palestine' and later claimed 'I did this for Gaza.' Earlier this month in Boulder, Colo., an Egyptian national named Mohamed Soliman threw Molotov cocktails at a peaceful gathering of Jewish community members — including children and an 88-year-old Holocaust survivor — and used a homemade flamethrower to ignite chaos. His words? 'I'm here to kill all Zionist people.' Just last week Jewish U.S. Rep. Max Miller (R-Ohio) was nearly run off the road by a driver waving a Palestinian flag and shouting death threats targeted at Miller and his one-year-old daughter. These weren't expressions of protected speech. These were violent crimes, targeting Jews who in most cases were not policymakers, soldiers, or diplomats — just ordinary Americans. And yet, each perpetrator has tried to justify the attack as somehow political, as if Jewish lives are fair game when there's tension in the Middle East. This is precisely why the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism is so crucial: It helps make clear that holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of Israel is, in fact, a form of antisemitism. Just as it would be racist to attack an Iranian for the crimes of the Ayatollah or to fire a Chinese employee over Xi Jinping's trade policy, it is antisemitic to target Jews for Israel's military decisions. This concept should not be controversial. It certainly isn't partisan. Both Republican and Democratic administrations have embraced the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition. A supermajority of U.S. states have already adopted it. So have dozens of countries around the world. And for good reason: It's the only definition that has a demonstrable track record of helping communities identify and push back against antisemitism — especially the kind that hides behind politics. Zion is not an idea; Zion is a hill, in Jerusalem, Israel, where the Jews are from. Zionism, the belief that Jewish people have a right to their homeland, is the quintessential national origin movement. Telling Jews they can't be Zionists and simultaneously remain full participants in society isn't social critique; it's discrimination. And criminal actions based on that hatred should be punishable as such. That is all the Define to Defeat Act is about: equipping law enforcement, prosecutors, and civil rights enforcers with the ability to name and respond to antisemitic actions- including violence- especially when that violence comes wrapped in politically convenient excuses. It extends the same common-sense framework that Rep. Mike Lawler's (R-N.Y.) Antisemitism Awareness Act applies to Title VI education cases into other federal civil rights contexts — like employment and housing — and helps close the gap between intent and enforcement. And while it is absolutely important to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism in the context of Title VI, when it comes to protecting civil rights, Moore's bill does more. Opponents of the definition have tried to manufacture a debate over whether the definition is too broad, too nuanced, or too controversial. It isn't. It explicitly states that criticism of Israel comparable to criticism of any other country is not antisemitic. It even includes safeguards that stress context. The reason the specific examples about Israel are provided is explicitly not because all criticism of Israel is antisemitic, as the definition takes pains to point out twice, but because there are those who falsely claim that no criticism of Israel can ever cross the line, and use their anti-Zionism as an excuse to target Jewish people or institutions. The act does not protect Israel; it protects Jewish people in America who are unlawfully discriminated against because of their real or perceived connection to Israel. Right now, the FBI reports that the majority of religiously motivated hate crimes in the U.S. are committed against Jews, who make up only 2 percent of the population. That's not just alarming. It's a national crisis. And we cannot defeat a problem we are too afraid to define. The Define to Defeat Act is a good-faith, narrowly tailored, bipartisan tool to help do just that, and all Members of both parties should support it. Mark Goldfeder is CEO of the National Jewish Advocacy Center and a law professor at Touro University.
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
ICE's $175 billion windfall: Trump's mass deportation force set to receive military-level funding
President Donald Trump's budget, which passed the Senate Tuesday, allocated some $175 billion towards his mass deportation campaign, more money than almost any country spends on its military, and many times the estimated yearly cost it would take to end world hunger. On Wednesday, Senate Republicans green lit a budget that would cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans while slashing services like Medicaid and SNAP for everyone else. For the White House, however, the most important part of the bill seems to be the funding for Trump's campaign to purge immigrants and, potentially, American citizens from the country. Vice President JD Vance spoke to this in a post on X, writing: 'Everything else—the CBO score, the proper baseline, the minutiae of the Medicaid policy—is immaterial compared to the ICE money and immigration enforcement provisions.' When put in context, it's easy to see why this is Vance's position. The $175 billion deportation budget is larger than the military budget for any country other than the United States and China, surpassing the Russian military budget by nearly $30 billion. Sily Shah, executive director of the human rights organization Detention Watch Network, told Salon that the budget would pave the way for an unprecedented increase in detention and deportation capacity. '45 years ago, we just didn't detain people in this way. For the most part, people were released from detention after a day or two, and they got to go through proceedings on their own while they were home with their families or working,' Shah said. 'Since then, the scale has gone up. But this is, this is the highest it's ever been. And they don't even have this money.' According to estimates from the World Food Programme, the funds going towards deportation would also be enough to fully fund the program to end world hunger for four years. Broken down, the $175 billion topline number includes nearly $30 billion ICE's enforcement budget; $45 billion for building new immigration detention centers; $47 billion for the construction of a border wall; $12 billion for state-level immigration measures; and roughly $10 billion to reimburse the Department of Homeland Security for 'safeguard[ing] the borders of the United States,' among other provisions. Americans have already had a preview of some of what's to come with the increased deportation budget, like on Wednesday, when Trump traveled to Florida to tour a new camp being built there to house immigrants. The facility, dubbed 'Alligator Auschwitz' by critics, is a 3,000-bed tent city and prison in the Everglades. The facility is expected to cost around $450 million a year, just a fraction of the $45 billion that Republicans have allocated towards building new detention facilities. This particular facility, however, is funded by FEMA funds, reminiscent of the 'FEMA concentration camp' conspiracy theory popular among Republicans, only this time it's real. And the Florida GOP is already selling 'Alligator Alcatraz' trucker hats, among other merch. Trump also suggested that the new camp could be the first of many, foreshadowing a new incarceration system in the United States. 'Well, I think would like to see them in many states. Really, many states,' Trump said. 'And, you know, at some point, they might morph into a system.' In terms of total capacity, the American Immigration Council estimates that the new funding will be enough to balloon ICE's detention capacity to at least 116,000 beds, which is comparable to the total number of Japanese Americans interned during the whole of WWII. Currently, ICE has around 56,000 people in detention facilities around the country, with many of the largest facilities located in southern states like Louisiana and Texas. The current population in detention facilities also represents the highest number of detainees since August of 2019. In practical terms, Shah said that she expects this to mean more camps like the one in Florida. Detention capacity, Shah explained, is a bottleneck in the deportation process, with more beds meaning that the Trump administration will be able to scale up their deportation campaign dramatically.'I think the work we need [is] to … make sure that doesn't get normalized,' Shah said. 'The conditions are terrible, and it makes it so much harder for people to fight their cases.' The budget for ICE's enforcement will likely be allocated in large part to hiring new ICE agents, the often-masked agents who abduct people from American streets and courthouses. The new $30 billion ICE budget, more than three times the previous budget, would provide for the hiring of some 10,000 ICE agents, who would receive a $10,000 bonus, per the White House. For comparison, the FBI's budget in fiscal year 2025 was just $11 billion. Shah underscored, however, that the ICE agents themselves likely won't be the primary drivers when it comes to detaining people. Rather, it will be local police departments and their coordination with ICE that will serve as a funnel to push more people into detention and ultimately into deportation. As for those who may be hoping to avoid ending up at one of Trump's new camps through resources like the popular ICEBlock app, Tom Homan, Trump's border czar, said he's planning a crackdown. Homan told far-right podcaster Charlie Kirk that the administration will be investigating the app, claiming it puts the ICE agents at risk. 'It puts ICE officers at a great risk,' Homan said. 'They're not Nazis! They're not racists! They're mothers and fathers, too. They're enforcing the laws enacted by Congress.' The post ICE's $175 billion windfall: Trump's mass deportation force set to receive military-level funding appeared first on
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Cities' Immigration Approach Is a Model of Multiracial Democracy
Federal immigration enforcement aimed at cities that are home to large immigrant populations rests on a fundamental misunderstanding of how city-led immigrant inclusion policies are making America safer and more prosperous. Claims that big cities harbor and protect illegal immigrants is political misinformation. To be clear: There isn't a city or town in America that can legally prohibit ICE agents from carrying out their work. So-called sanctuary cities instead direct their local law enforcement to not independently do ICE's job for them, going on immigration raids, sweeping worksites for immigration papers, or otherwise diverting resources away from keeping the peace locally. The American flag is pictured. The American flag is pictured. Robbie Jay Barratt - AMA/Getty Images Data shows that cities that don't participate in ICE raids report lower poverty, crime, and unemployment rates than those that preemptively enforce immigration regulations. It isn't just about not cooperating with ICE, however. Cities across the country—run by Democrats and Republicans alike—are prioritizing holistic policies that build trust with immigrant communities. These efforts aim to ensure that residents do not fear local police, enabling them to report crimes and engage with civic life without fear of deportation. Programs under the Welcoming Cities Initiative—adopted in Fargo, Gainesville, Huntsville, Akron, and others—focus on integrating immigrants through local action plans that often include improving relationships with law enforcement. On the other hand, evidence shows that police forces that work with ICE to hunt down undocumented immigrants, even if they haven't committed a local crime, drive down a whole community's rates of reporting crimes when they do occur. Other cities, including Boise and Chattanooga, have joined the Strong Cities Network, working to counter violence against groups like immigrants and promote social cohesion across their city—a key vision of inclusive and pluralist democracy. These community-based initiatives stand in stark contrast to the top-down directives from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Cities like New York, Trenton, Washington, D.C., and Dayton have implemented municipal ID programs, useful for connecting utilities and establishing identity with law enforcement or doctors regardless of immigration status, all without conferring federal voting rights or privileges. From Gainesville, Fla., to the border town of San Diego, local police have served as an important part of the cities' "Immigrant Inclusion Blueprints," creating plans to boost the cultural competence of police, educate immigrants on their constitutional rights, and make victim rights information available in several languages. Such policies reflect cities' practical, nonpartisan approach to complex national issues that tend to become overly polarized in Washington, D.C. Immigrants, regardless of immigration status, are not the moochers and dangerous "vermin" that some would paint them as. Local economies in inclusive and welcoming cities are thriving. Fargo's immigrant population contributed $542.8 million to the metro GDP while paying $13.8 million in state and local taxes and $28.3 million in federal taxes. Dayton's immigrant population contributed $74 million to Social Security and more than $19 million to Medicare in 2019. The Gainesville, Fla., action plan on inclusive public safety shows results too. As the immigrant population continues to rise, the city has seen a historic drop in the crime rate. Increasing representation, honoring various perspectives, and promoting deliberative engagement produce outcomes that make communities stronger. Cities do not—and should not—provide sanctuary for criminals against federal enforcement. Instead, they are creating a sanctuary where everyone, regardless of country of origin, race, or ethnicity can flourish. These policies show that treating all people with human dignity both improves everyone's bottom line and keeps communities safe. Pluralist, multiracial democracy means that regardless of background or blood, residents can coexist and flourish because it is America's civic institutions that bind "We the People" together. Our democratic identity is forged as we work together to make our communities safer, more prosperous, and welcoming. In these policies and programs toward immigrants, America's cities are fundamentally fulfilling the founding pledge to form "a more perfect union." Joel Day, Ph.D., is the managing director of the University of Notre Dame's Democracy Initiative and a former administrator for the city of San Diego, where he led local immigration initiatives and oversaw several public safety programs. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
