We do not want the military enforcing law on American soil
In the long American tension between federal authority and civil liberty, Los Angeles became a new contested ground in June 2025, when President Trump deployed active-duty Marines and thousands of National Guard troops to respond to protests sparked by immigration enforcement sweeps. The move — rare in modern history and undertaken over the explicit objections of California's governor and the city's mayor — raised enduring questions about where the line falls between protecting order and militarizing dissent. At stake is not merely a policy dispute, but a precedent: whether the armed forces of a democracy may be turned inward upon its own people exercising the right to protest.
- Trump mobilized 700 Marines and 4,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles, framing largely peaceful immigration protests as a violent occupation threatening to engulf the city in flames.
- Governor Newsom filed an emergency lawsuit challenging the federal takeover of the Guard as illegal, while Mayor Bass and Senator Reed warned the deployment was politically motivated and constitutionally dangerous.
- On the ground, a more complicated picture emerged — most demonstrations were peaceful, though some protesters clashed with police, looted stores, and blocked highways, resulting in over 100 arrests and the use of tear gas and rubber projectiles.
- The $134 million operation spread beyond Los Angeles, igniting solidarity protests in at least nine other American cities and transforming a local immigration dispute into a national confrontation over presidential power.
- With Marines holding positions near federal property and Homeland Security promising further enforcement raids, the situation remained volatile — unresolved legally, politically, and in the streets.
On a Tuesday in June, hundreds of active-duty Marines arrived in the Los Angeles area under presidential orders, joining thousands of National Guard troops already deployed to manage protests that had been building since the previous Friday. The demonstrations had begun in response to a wave of federal immigration enforcement operations, and while most remained peaceful, the Trump administration's response was swift and heavily militarized.
The Marines were staged in holding areas and would not hold arrest authority, but were tasked with protecting federal property and personnel. The Pentagon placed the cost of the operation at roughly $134 million. Governor Gavin Newsom had already filed a lawsuit arguing that Trump's activation of the Guard without gubernatorial consent was illegal — the first such override in decades. He accused the president of deliberately inflaming the crisis for political purposes. Mayor Karen Bass acknowledged that over a hundred people had been arrested but stressed that the overwhelming majority of protesters were nonviolent, calling the military response disproportionate.
Trump characterized the protests as a violent occupation and claimed Los Angeles would be 'in flames' without his intervention. The reality was more nuanced: some confrontations did occur — stones thrown at police, vehicles set on fire, stores looted — and police responded with tear gas, pepper spray, and less-lethal projectiles. But the dominant character of the demonstrations was protest, not insurrection.
Senator Jack Reed, the Senate Armed Services Committee's top Democrat, voiced alarm at the deployment of Marines for domestic civil unrest, invoking the founding principle that the military should not enforce law on American soil. The concern was constitutional as much as practical: Marines are trained for combat, not crowd management, and their presence in a domestic protest environment marked a significant departure from historical norms.
Outside a federal immigration detention facility in downtown Los Angeles, hundreds chanted for the release of detainees as National Guard soldiers formed barriers and police dispersed crowds with gas. By evening, clashes had spread into the Little Tokyo neighborhood. Protests echoed across the country — in New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Austin, and elsewhere — transforming what began as a local response to immigration raids into a national reckoning over the limits of federal power, the rights of protesters, and the role of the military in American civic life.
On a Tuesday in June, roughly seven hundred active-duty Marines arrived in the Los Angeles area under orders from President Donald Trump, who had also mobilized four thousand National Guard troops to manage protests that had roiled the city since the previous Friday. The demonstrations had erupted after Trump's administration launched a series of immigration enforcement operations, and while most remained peaceful, the federal response was swift and militarized—a decision that set off alarm bells among California's governor, the city's mayor, and senior lawmakers in Washington.
The Marines were staged in a holding area awaiting deployment to specific locations, according to a U.S. official. They would not have arrest authority but would protect federal property and personnel. By Tuesday, roughly twenty-one hundred National Guard soldiers were already in the greater Los Angeles area, with more en route. The Pentagon estimated the operation would cost approximately one hundred thirty-four million dollars, a figure that included transportation, lodging, and meals for the troops.
Governor Gavin Newsom had already filed a lawsuit Monday, arguing that Trump's activation of the Guard without gubernatorial consent was illegal—the first time in decades a president had done so without a sitting governor's request. Newsom accused Trump of deliberately inflaming the situation for political gain. Mayor Karen Bass told local media that more than one hundred people had been arrested Monday, but emphasized that the vast majority of protesters were not violent. She later posted on social media that anyone who vandalized downtown or looted stores would be held accountable, but her message was clear: the military response was disproportionate to the actual threat.
Trump defended the deployment by characterizing the protests as a violent occupation, a description both Newsom and Bass said was grossly exaggerated. On social media, Trump claimed Los Angeles would be "in flames" without his intervention. The reality on the ground told a different story. Since Friday, demonstrations had been largely concentrated in downtown Los Angeles and remained mostly peaceful. There had been confrontations—some protesters threw stones and objects at police, blocked an interstate highway, and set fires to vehicles. Several businesses were looted, including an Apple store and a CVS pharmacy. Police responded with less-lethal projectiles, pepper spray, flash-bang grenades, and tear gas. The LAPD reported at least forty arrests over the weekend on charges including attempted murder with Molotov cocktails and assault on an officer, with more expected after video review.
The deployment intensified a constitutional clash. Senator Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was "seriously concerned" about the use of active-duty Marines. "Since the founding of our nation, the American people have been perfectly clear: we do not want the military enforcing law on American soil," he said. The use of active military forces to respond to domestic civil unrest is extraordinarily rare in the United States. Marines are trained for conflicts worldwide—from the Middle East to Africa—and for rapid mobilization in emergencies like threats to U.S. embassies. Some units receive training in riot control and crowd management techniques, but their primary mission is combat.
The immigration enforcement operations that triggered the protests were part of Trump's broader crackdown on undocumented immigration. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem promised Monday that more operations would follow. Hundreds of protesters gathered outside a federal detention facility in downtown Los Angeles, chanting "free them all" and waving Mexican and Central American flags. National Guard soldiers formed a human barrier to keep people away from the building. Police dispersed crowds with gas and made arrests. By evening, officers clashed with protesters who had spread into the Little Tokyo neighborhood.
Protests erupted in at least nine other American cities Monday—New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Austin, and others. In Austin, police fired less-lethal ammunition and detained several people during confrontations with crowds numbering in the hundreds. The moment had become national, a flashpoint over immigration enforcement, military power, and the boundaries of presidential authority in response to domestic dissent. What remained unclear was whether the deployment would quell the unrest or deepen the sense among protesters and local officials that the federal government had overstepped its constitutional bounds.
Citações Notáveis
Since the founding of our nation, the American people have been perfectly clear: we do not want the military enforcing law on American soil.— Senator Jack Reed, top Democrat on Senate Armed Services Committee
This is not about public safety. This is about feeding the ego of a dangerous president.— Governor Gavin Newsom, on social media
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why did Trump decide to send active-duty Marines rather than rely on the National Guard alone?
The Guard was already being deployed, but Trump seemed to want to signal maximum force—to show he was taking the situation seriously, or at least to project that image. Marines are trained for combat operations, which sends a different message than domestic law enforcement.
But the source says the Marines can't actually arrest anyone. So what are they doing there?
Protecting federal property and federal personnel. In a sense, they're a show of force. They're there to secure buildings and installations, not to police the streets. But their presence changes the atmosphere.
Governor Newsom sued, saying Trump couldn't activate the Guard without his consent. Has that ever happened before?
Not in decades. It's a rare constitutional move. Newsom argued it was illegal and politically motivated—that Trump was using the military to inflame things rather than calm them.
The cost was one hundred thirty-four million dollars. For how long?
The source doesn't specify a duration, just the estimated cost of the operation as it was being deployed. That includes all the logistics—moving people, housing them, feeding them.
Were the protests actually violent, or was Trump exaggerating?
Mostly peaceful, according to local officials. There were confrontations—some stone-throwing, some property damage, some looting. But the mayor said over one hundred arrests happened, and most protesters weren't violent. Trump's characterization of an "occupation" seemed to overstate what was happening.
What did Senator Reed say about all this?
He was alarmed. He said since the nation's founding, Americans have been clear they don't want the military enforcing law on American soil. It's a constitutional principle, not just a preference.