Trump administration sues 'sanctuary city' Los Angeles
California Governor Gavin Newsom has said the thousands of troops were not necessary to address the mostly peaceful protests, but his legal efforts to have them removed have failed so far.
Los Angeles is one of many US "sanctuary cities" that prohibit local police from arresting people based on their immigration status and limit what information can be shared with federal authorities. That has brought it into direct confrontation with Trump, who assailed undocumented migrants on the campaign trail, likening them to "animals" and "monsters," and promised to launch the biggest deportation drive in US history.
Under Trump, the Justice Department has sued Chicago and several other Democratic-run cities with sanctuary policies.
'Lawless and unsafe'
In a statement, the department said it had filed suit against the city of Los Angeles, Mayor Karen Bass and the Los Angeles City Council over policies that "interfere with the federal government's enforcement of its immigration laws."
Attorney General Pam Bondi said sanctuary policies are "illegal under federal law" and contributed to the "recent lawlessness, rioting, looting, and vandalism" in the country's second-largest city. "Sanctuary policies were the driving cause of the violence, chaos, and attacks on law enforcement that Americans recently witnessed in Los Angeles," Bondi alleged, a claim denied by the California authorities.
US Attorney Bill Essayli said the lawsuit "holds the City of Los Angeles accountable for deliberately obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration law."
"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," Essayli added.
In the lawsuit filed in the US District Court for the Central District of California, the Justice Department said federal government efforts to address an immigration "crisis" were being "hindered by Sanctuary Cities such as the City of Los Angeles."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
an hour ago
- Euronews
Video. Hostage families call for deal as pressure grows on Israeli government
The protest comes ahead of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's meeting with US President Donald Trump next Monday, as pressure grows to reach a ceasefire and bring hostages home. 'We needed them home a long time ago,' said Ella Creme, holding a sign with her missing family member's name. 'This war needs to end. That's why I'm here.' Josef Gal, who joined in solidarity, said: '634 days, it's just hard for me to believe... I feel that I must do something.' The Hamas-led attack on 7 October 2023, which triggered the current war, killed around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and saw 251 others taken hostage. Since then, more than 56,000 Palestinians have been killed, according to Gaza's Health Ministry.
Euronews
an hour ago
- Euronews
Why Israel and Iran's uneasy truce may not last
After the 12-day conflict between Israel and Iran, significant doubts remain about the durability of the truce and the prospects for a future Iranian nuclear deal. It's been just over a week since the US pressed the two regional rivals into a ceasefire, ending an air war that started on 13 June when Israeli airstrikes wiped out the upper ranks of Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guard and targeted its arsenal of ballistic missiles. The strikes also hit Iran's nuclear sites, which Israel claimed put Tehran within reach of a nuclear weapon. Iran hit back with barrages of missiles on Israeli military sites, infrastructure and cities. A fragile peace was brokered by Washington on 24 June, a day after it bombed three of Iran's key nuclear sites. Yet the possibility of renewed US-Iran talks is up in the air. Washington and Tehran were holding discussions on Iran's nuclear programme when Israel started the war. Speaking on Tuesday, Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Abbas Araghchi dismissed the prospect of swiftly resuming talks with the US, after President Donald Trump had suggested that negotiations with Tehran could resume as early as this week. "The end of US military threats is a precondition for the resumption of talks between Tehran and Washington," Araghchi said in an interview with CBS. Iran sidelines UN nuclear watchdog Trump said last week that he would consider carrying out fresh strikes on Iran if the country was found to be enriching uranium to concerning levels. Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN nuclear watchdog, said on Sunday that the US strikes on the three nuclear sites in Iran — Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan — had hugely hampered its capacity to enrich uranium. However, he warned that Tehran could be producing enriched uranium "in a matter of months". Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian on Wednesday ordered the country to halt its cooperation with the IAEA, according to state media. The country's trust in the agency is now broken, Pezeshkian told French President Emmanuel Macron in a call on Sunday. Satellite images dated 29 June that were released by US aerospace firm Maxar Technologies show activity at the Fordow site, one of Iran's main uranium enrichment centres, which was hit by the US B-2 bombers. The images show diggers and people at work around the large vents of the underground site's ventilation systems. Before the Iran-Israel conflict, IAEA was allowed regular access to Iran's enrichment sites to monitor them. But under the law passed on Wednesday, any future inspection of Iran's nuclear sites by the IAEA needs approval by the Supreme National Security Council. "How do you think we can guarantee their (IAEA inspectors') safety when our peaceful facilities were targeted until a few days ago?" an Iranian diplomatic source told Euronews. Agreement unlikely While the conflict may have been considered brief by Israel and the US, for Tehran's leadership, the war remains essentially unresolved, despite the ceasefire. Unsurprising, perhaps, given that Tehran has put the death toll of the war on its citizens at 935 — including 38 children and 132 women. Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu has said there are 'ample regional opportunities' for stabilisation after the twelve-day conflict, but this remains to be seen. According to Raffaele Marchetti, director of the Centre for International and Strategic Studies at Luiss University in Rome, Tehran's leadership is opposed to the ultimate strategic goal of Israel and the US, which is not only that of a denuclearised Iran. While Netanyahu's has framed destroying Iran's nuclear programme as a matter of Israeli national security, Tehran's strategic objective would be a regional balance of power based on mutual nuclear deterrence, according to Marchetti. "It is not at all surprising that Iran has embarked on a process of nuclear development, but here we have to be a bit careful about that because at least formally, Iran, unlike Israel, has always adhered to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty," Marchetti said. It is therefore difficult for an agreement to be reached between the parties without one of them giving in, he told Euronews. Regime change could resolve the issue in the long run, Israeli and the US have calculated. Iran fears Israel's regional hegemony Israel, which has not officially recognised that it possesses nuclear weapons, does not adhere to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, unlike Iran, which did sign the agreement in 1970, during the rule of the Iranian Shah Mohammad Reza Pahalavi. At the time, Tehran stood as one of three key pillars — alongside Israel and Turkey — in the pro-Western, anti-Soviet balance of power in what is now referred to as the "extended Middle East", which also includes the Caucasus and Central Asia. In those years, before the Shia clerical revolution of 1979, Ankara, Tehran and Tel Aviv shared warm political and military relations, based on converging strategic interests. However, today, Iran speaks of its desire to destroy Israel. Neither Israel nor Iran have official military nuclear doctrines, because the former does not recognise that it has a nuclear arsenal, while the latter insists on pursuing a nuclear programme that is exclusively for peaceful, civilian purposes. Israel neither admits nor denies having atomic weapons; it is the so-called doctrine of deliberate strategic ambiguity: a state that keeps potential adversaries in uncertainty about its reaction in the event of any conflict. According to estimates by others countries, international organisations and members of the scientific community, Israel possesses a stockpile ranging between 90 and 400 nuclear warheads. Although there is no official doctrine regarding the use of atomic force, in reality for Israel the nuclear weapon 'is the ultimate weapon", said David Rigoulet-Roze, a Middle East scholar at Iris, the Paris-based Institute of International and Strategic Relations. "We are in total deterrence, it was not used even in 1973 (when Israel risked military collapse in the face of the Syrian and Egyptian offensive) in the Yom Kippur War", he said. Pursuit of strategic ambiguity This is why, despite the deliberate strategic ambiguity, one thing is certain, Rigoulet-Roze told Euronews. "The Jewish state does not tolerate, up to the use of force, the existence of other nuclear powers in the region," he said. In fact, in 1981, Israel attacked and destroyed Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor, which was officially intended for civil use and had been developed with the help of France under its then President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing and Prime Minister Jaques Chirac. Israeli security services justified the attack by saying that the reactor could potentially have been converted to plutonium production. In 2007, Israeli jets also struck around Der ez-Zor in Syria, where, according to Mossad, the al-Assad regime was building a nuclear reactor with the assistance of North Korea. Today, the balance of power and political-diplomatic relations have shifted in Israel's favour: Egypt and Jordan have recognised the Jewish state, Syria is no longer in a position to do any harm after the fall of al-Assad, and Lebanon certainly poses no existential threat. What's more, Saddam Hussein's Iraq is now but a vague memory. However, the presence of an Iranian strategic nuclear force would break the balance of non-proliferation in a notoriously unstable region, analysts warn. "Saudi Prince Bin Salman has said that in the case of an Iranian nuclear force, Saudi Arabia would also pursue the military atom, and then there would be a potential domino effect with Turkey and Egypt feeling compelled to equip themselves with atomic weapons," Rigoulet-Roze said. "This is what was intended to be avoided with the Iran nuclear deal signed in 2015 by the EU, the UK, Germany, France, the US, China and Russia, and denounced by President Trump in 2018," he added.
Euronews
3 hours ago
- Euronews
Trump threatens Musk with DOGE and deportation as feud reignites
US President Donald Trump has suggested that his administration would "take a look" at deporting Elon Musk after a feud between the pair reignited in spectacular fashion. As the public war of words between the former political allies escalated on Tuesday, Trump also said that the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) — which the tech billionaire formerly spearheaded — could review the massive US government subsidies awarded to Musk's businesses, which include Tesla and SpaceX. When asked by a reporter on Tuesday if he was considering deporting Musk, a South African national and a naturalized US citizen, Trump said: "I don't know, we'll have to take a look." "We might have to put DOGE on Elon. You know what DOGE is. DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon," Trump said. "If DOGE looks at Musk, we're going to save a fortune," he added later on Tuesday. Although Musk heavily backed Trump during his reelection campaign and was rewarded with the DOGE project, their alliance appeared to come to a dramatic end a month ago. Trading blows over Trump's bill The beef between the pair began in early June when Musk criticised Trump's tax cuts and spending bill, calling it a "disgusting abomination". In response, Trump threatened to target Musk's companies, with the tech mogul in turn calling for the US president to be impeached. While Musk backtracked on some of his attacks and Trump wished him well, hostilities resumed on Monday when the world's richest man once again criticised the tax cuts and spending bill, which the US president has described as "big and beautiful". Musk lashed out at Republicans for backing the bill, referring to it as "political suicide" and calling the GOP the "Porky Pig party". He also renewed threats to start a new political party, called the "America Party", if the bill passed. The legislation was passed by the US Senate on Tuesday by the narrowest of margins, and now goes back to the House for possible final approval. The US "needs an alternative to the Democrat-Republican uniparty so that the people actually have a voice," Musk wrote on Monday on X, the social media platform he owns. That came after Musk, who spent hundreds of millions of dollars on Trump's reelection campaign, said in May that he would likely spend "a lot less" on politics in the future. In response to Musk's latest criticism and threats, Trump on Tuesday suggested that Musk could lose subsidies for his businesses. "No more rocket launches, satellites, or electric car production, and our country would save a fortune," the US president wrote on Truth Social. Without subsidies, Musk "would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa," Trump added. Musk, for his part, has continued to criticise the tax cuts and spending bill on X, sharing posts that supported his view of the legislation, including memes and claims that it would drive up the national debt.
