Trump Declares War on Los Angeles Following ICE Protests
President Donald Trump's Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit Monday against Los Angeles, its mayor Karen Bass, and the Los Angeles City Council for 'illegal' sanctuary city policies that it says 'deliberately impede federal immigration officers' ability to carry out their responsibilities.'
This move comes weeks after the city erupted in protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. These protests quickly turned violent following Trump's decision to deploy thousands of California National Guard troops to Los Angeles without notifying California Gov. Gavin Newsom or Bass.
The lawsuit claimed that Los Angeles' refusal to cooperate with federal immigration authorities resulted in 'lawlessness, rioting, looting, and vandalism,' causing the situation to become 'so dire' that the California National Guard and U.S. Marines had to be deployed to the city.
'A direct confrontation with federal immigration authorities was the inevitable outcome of the Sanctuary City law,' the suit stated.
Yet a lawsuit filed over a week ago accusing Kristi Noem's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of being violent towards peaceful protestors claimed that the administration 'used the violent spectacle created by DHS as a reason to commandeer the National Guard and send the United States Marines into California, which in turn has generated more widespread protests.'
This did not stop Attorney General Pam Bondi from blaming sanctuary city policies for the violence.
'Sanctuary policies were the driving cause of the violence, chaos, and attacks on law enforcement that Americans recently witnessed in Los Angeles,' Bondi said in a DOJ press release Monday.
'Jurisdictions like Los Angeles that flout federal law by prioritizing illegal aliens over American citizens are undermining law enforcement at every level—it ends under President Trump,' she added.
In its suit, the DOJ said the City of Los Angeles was violating the supremacy clause, which says that state judges are bound to the federal law of the land.
It noted that the supremacy clause 'prohibits the City of Los Angeles and its officials from singling out the Federal Government for adverse treatment—as the challenged law and policies do—thereby discriminating against the Federal Government.'
Some examples listed of how these policies 'intentionally' discriminate against federal immigration agents were: restricting access to property and individual detainees, forbidding contractors and sub-contractors from providing information to agents, and 'disfavoring federal criminal laws that the City of Los Angeles has decided not to comply with.'
The suit said that the Los Angeles Ordinance and other policies 'intentionally obstruct the sharing of information envisioned by Congress, thereby impairing federal apprehension and detention of removable aliens, including dangerous criminals, as required by federal law.'
It also said that these 'obstructionist Sanctuary City laws' prevent Los Angeles law enforcement from helping federal immigration to take 'removable aliens' into custody.
'The preferences of the City of Los Angeles notwithstanding, Congress made an explicit policy choice that such removals can be effectuated by civil arrest warrants for immigration enforcement,' it said.
U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli for the Central District of California said that 'the United States Constitution's Supremacy Clause prohibits the City from picking and choosing which federal laws will be enforced and which will not.'
'By assisting removable aliens in evading federal law enforcement, the City's unlawful and discriminatory ordinance has contributed to a lawless and unsafe environment that this lawsuit will help end,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
S&P 500 futures and dollar dip as Trump revives tariff tension
Equity-index futures fell and the dollar dipped after President Trump said his administration may start sending out letters imposing unilateral tariffs on trading partners as early as Friday. Ahead of his July 9 deadline for trade negotiations, the U.S. President told reporters on Thursday: 'We're probably going to be sending some letters out, starting probably tomorrow, maybe 10 a day to various countries saying what they're going to pay to do business with the U.S.' Now that the megabill has passed, expect a ton of short-term debt to be sold to finance the government's deficit 'I'm single': At 70, I have $500,000 in stocks and $220,000 in savings. How do I invest my $130,000 windfall? 'Today is my 61st birthday': I have my ex-spouse's Social Security benefits. Should I retire at 65 and travel? 'I do all the yard work, cooking and cleaning': I live with my daughter and her lazy boyfriend. She wants me to buy her house. Do I say yes? My wife and I are in our late 60s. Do I sell stocks to pay our $30,000 credit-card debt — or do it gradually over 3 years? U.S. stocks closed at record highs following a holiday-shortened session on Thursday. The S&P 500 SPX has surged 26% from its April low as investors welcomed Trump's retreat from his original draconian tariff strategy announced on April 2 that pushed import levies to 131-year highs. However, the President's latest comments suggest few trade deals are likely to be struck before the April 9 deadline and now markets face increased tariff uncertainty once again. Jim Reid, strategist at Deutsche Bank, noted that Trump later also said that the imposed tariffs, which may come into effect on August 1, could range in value from 10% to maybe 60 or 70%. 'So definitely one to keep an eye on, as the difference in that range would have significant economic implications for the various countries,' said Reid. U.S. equity and bond markets are closed for the Independence Day break, but stock-index futures are active, and the E-mini S&P 500 contract ES00 was 0.6% lower in early Friday action, with traders shrugging off news that the Republican's big tax-cutting bill had been passed. The U.S. dollar fell, down 0.4% versus the Japanese yen USDJPY, and losing 0.2% against the euro EURUSD. Global stock markets were mostly on the back foot, despite Wall Street's overnight record, with those countries arguably more vulnerable to a higher unilateral Trump tariff under most pressure. South Korea's KOSPI Composite Index KR:180721 fell 2%, while Germany's DAX DX:DAX was down 0.7% and the CAC 40 FR:PX1 in France lost 0.9% by mid afternoon in Europe. '[R]isk sentiment is draining from markets,' said Kathleen Brooks, research director at XTB. 'President Trump seems to have called time on trade negotiations before next Wednesday's deadline…This suggests that at this late stage he is willing to play hardball rather than negotiate,' she added. Concerns that higher tariffs across a broad range of countries would stymie trade and weaken the global economy saw copper futures HG00 fall 1.6% and oil futures CL.1 drop 1.3%. 'Optimism is evaporating at the end of the week, as the U.S. tariff deadline looms and the signs are that many countries will face higher duties than expected,' said Susannah Streeter, head of money and markets at Hargreaves Lansdown. The mildly risk-off tone caused bitcoin BTCUSD to slip 0.8% but saw gold GC00 give up early gains to trade little changed at around $3,342 an ounce. My wife and I have $7,000 a month in pensions and Social Security, plus $140,000 cash. Can we afford to retire? 'Finance makes me break out in hives': I inherited $240K from my parents. Do I pay off my $258K mortgage and give up my job? The Dow and Russell 2000 are joining the stock market's party. Is it a game changer for the bulls? My job is offering me a payout. Should I take a $61,000 lump sum — or $355 a month for life? We're living in 'end times' when you can't retire on $1 million Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Chicago Tribune
30 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
President Donald Trump branded, browbeat and prevailed. But his big bill may come at a political cost
WASHINGTON — Barack Obama had the Affordable Care Act. Joe Biden had the Inflation Reduction Act. President Donald Trump will have the tax cuts. All were hailed in the moment and became ripe political targets in campaigns that followed. In Trump's case, the tax cuts may almost become lost in the debates over other parts of the multitrillion-dollar bill that Democrats say will force poor Americans off their health care and overturn a decade or more of energy policy. Through persuasion and browbeating, Trump forced nearly all congressional Republicans to line up behind his marquee legislation despite some of its unpalatable pieces. He followed the playbook that had marked his life in business before politics. He focused on branding — labeling the legislation the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' — then relentlessly pushed to strong-arm it through Congress, solely on the votes of Republicans. But Trump's victory will soon be tested during the 2026 midterm elections where Democrats plan to run on a durable theme: that the Republican president favors the rich on tax cuts over poorer people who will lose their health care. Trump and Republicans argue that those who deserve coverage will retain it. Nonpartisan analysts, however, project significant increases to the number of uninsured. Meanwhile, the GOP's promise that the bill will turbocharge the economy will be tested at a time of uncertainty and trade turmoil. Trump has tried to counter the notion of favoring the rich with provisions that would reduce the taxes for people paid in tips and receiving overtime pay, two kinds of earners who represent a small share of the workforce. Extending the tax cuts from Trump's first term that were set to expire if Congress failed to act meant he could also argue that millions of people would avoid a tax increase. To enact that and other expensive priorities, Republicans made steep cuts to Medicaid that ultimately belied Trump's promise that those on government entitlement programs 'won't be affected.' 'The biggest thing is, he's answering the call of the forgotten people. That's why his No. 1 request was the no tax on tips, the no tax on overtime, tax relief for seniors,' said Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee. 'I think that's going to be the big impact.' Presidents have seen their signature legislative accomplishments unraveled by their successors or become a significant political liability for their party in subsequent elections. A central case for Biden's reelection was that the public would reward the Democrat for his legislative accomplishments. That never bore fruit as he struggled to improve his poll numbers driven down by concerns about his age and stubborn inflation. Since taking office in January, Trump has acted to gut tax breaks meant to boost clean energy initiatives that were part of Biden's landmark health care-and-climate bill. Obama's health overhaul, which the Democrat signed into law in March 2010, led to a political bloodbath in the midterms that fall. Its popularity only became potent when Republicans tried to repeal it in 2017. Whatever political boost Trump may have gotten from his first-term tax cuts in 2017 did not help him in the 2018 midterms, when Democrats regained control of the House, or in 2020 when he lost to Biden. 'I don't think there's much if any evidence from recent or even not-so-recent history of the president's party passing a big one-party bill and getting rewarded for it,' said Kyle Kondik, an elections analyst with the nonpartisan University of Virginia's Center for Politics. Democrats hope they can translate their policy losses into political gains. During an Oval Office appearance in January, Trump pledged he would 'love and cherish Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.' 'We're not going to do anything with that, other than if we can find some abuse or waste, we'll do something,' Trump said. 'But the people won't be affected. It will only be more effective and better.' That promise is far removed from what Trump and the Republican Party ultimately chose to do, paring back not only Medicaid but also food assistance for the poor to make the math work on their sweeping bill. It would force 11.8 million more people to become uninsured by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office, whose estimates the GOP has dismissed. 'In Trump's first term, Democrats in Congress prevented bad outcomes. They didn't repeal the (Affordable Care Act), and we did COVID relief together. This time is different,' said Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii. 'Hospitals will close, people will die, the cost of electricity will go up, and people will go without food.' Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., repeatedly argued the legislation would lead to drastic coverage losses in his home state and others, leaving them vulnerable to political attacks similar to what Democrats faced after they enacted 'Obamacare.' With his warnings unheeded, Tillis announced he would not run for reelection, after he opposed advancing the bill and enduring Trump's criticism. 'If there is a political dimension to this, it is the extraordinary impact that you're going to have in states like California, blue states with red districts,' Tillis said. 'The narrative is going to be overwhelmingly negative in states like California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey.' Even Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who eventually became the decisive vote in the Senate that ensured the bill's passage, said the legislation needed more work and she urged the House to revise it. Lawmakers there did not. Early polling suggests that Trump's bill is deeply unpopular, including among independents and a healthy share of Republicans. White House officials said their own research does not reflect that. So far, it's only Republicans celebrating the victory. That seems OK with the president. In a speech in Iowa after the bill passed, he said Democrats only opposed it because they 'hated Trump.' That didn't bother him, he said, 'because I hate them, too.'
New York Post
30 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump says US will begin talks with China on possible TikTok deal as early as Monday
President Trump said he will begin talks with China in coming days on the sale of TikTok. 'We pretty much have a deal,' Trump told reporters late Friday. 'I think we're gonna start Monday or Tuesday . . . talking to China, perhaps President Xi [Jinping] or one of his representatives, but we pretty much have a deal.' The White House will likely need China to approve such a deal regarding the video-sharing, social-media platform, added the president. 4 President Donald Trump said he will begin talks with China in the coming days about a possible deal on the sale of TikTok. REUTERS Advertisement Trump made the announcement after The Post's Charles Gasparino earlier Friday reported the commander-in-chief had found a buyer for the controversial Chinese-owned short-video app but his real problem is with the seller. TikTok is being used as a pawn in the US-Chinese trade negotiations by Beijing, which knows Trump wants the app to remain operating in the United States, sources said. There will be no sale of TikTok to American investors — a move needed to conform to a US law — until the Chinese president is confident he has extracted as much as he can in terms of a favorable trade deal with the White House, added the sources. Advertisement 4 Chinese President Xi Jinping has been using TikTok as a pawn in the US-Chinese trade negotiations, according to sources. KAZAKHSTAN'S PRESIDENTIAL PRESS SERVICE/AFP via Getty Images Trump last month signed an executive order to extend the deadline to Sept. 17 for TikTok's China-based parent company ByteDance to divest TikTok's assets in the United States. It was the third such extension since Trump returned to the White House in January. In April, a group of wealthy investors and tech honchos were poised to place a bid with China to buy the app's US-based operations until Trump launched a trade war against Beijing, hitting China with 145% tariffs on imported goods. Advertisement That number has since been lowered as both sides negotiate other trade issues as part of a broader deal. 4 President Trump said he has a 'great relationship' with Chinese President Xi Jinping. AP When asked how confident he is that China will agree to a deal, the president said, 'I'm not confident, but I think so. President Xi and I have a great relationship, and I think it's good for them. I think the deal is good for China, and it's good for us.' 4 Trump last month signed an executive order to extend the deadline to Sept. 17 for TikTok's China-based parent company ByteDance to divest TikTok's assets in the United States. AFP via Getty Images Advertisement Congress voted overwhelmingly last year to ban TikTok if ByteDance wouldn't divest — via a 79-18 Senate vote and a 360-58 House landslide. Then-President Joe Biden signed the act. Trump halted the implementation of the ban on his first day in office — issuing an initial 75-day extension. Trump was skeptical of TikTok as a Chinese data-collection front during his first term, but came out against the ban after most major US-owned social media and content platforms, including Facebook, Twitter and Google-owned YouTube, banned him following the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
