The mayor of Los Angeles has announced that a curfew will be in force overnight, as officials attempt to “stop the vandalism and stop the looting”.
Karen Bass says the restrictions will be in force in downtown areas of the city from 8pm to 6am local time (4am to 2pm UK time) – and will likely be repeated in the coming days.
She confirmed that a local emergency had been declared as “we reached a tipping point”, with 23 businesses looted on Monday night.
Ms Bass said “graffiti is everywhere”, with “significant damage” to properties as a result of the protests.
Image: Workers try to remove graffiti after a protest over immigration raids. ICE Pic: AP/Damian Dovarganes
Image: Members of law enforcement stand guard in downtown LA. Pic: Reuters/Leah Millis
Image: A protester marches past businesses being boarded up. Pic: Reuters/Leah Millis
Jim McDonnell, the chief of the Los Angeles Police Department, described the curfew as a “necessary measure to protect lives” after “unlawful and dangerous behaviour” had been escalating in the last few days.
On Tuesday alone, 197 arrests were made by the force, and he warned anyone violating the curfew without a valid reason would be detained.
Residents, people who are homeless, those travelling to and from work, credited media as well as public safety and emergency personnel, will be exempt from the curfew, according to Mr McDonnell.
More on Los Angeles
Related Topics:
The curfew covers a one square mile (2.59 square kilometre) section of downtown LA that includes the area where protests have happened since Friday. The city of Los Angeles encompasses roughly 500 square miles (2,295 square kilometres).
Image: Workers board up a store in Santa Ana. Pic: AP/Jae C. Hong
Image: California National Guard soldiers stand at a federal agency building. Pic: AP
Image: Protesters are detained by law enforcement near the federal building in downtown LA. Pic: AP/Eric Thayer
The protests are in response to raids carried out by the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE).
US President Donald Trump has activated 4,000 National Guard troops – the federal reserve force – to protect ICE officers carrying out raids as well as federal buildings in LA, despite objections by California Governor Gavin Newsom, who called the deployments unnecessary, illegal and politically motivated.
Mr Trump also sent 700 Marines, who are expected to start operating in the LA area on Wednesday, according to the US Northern Command.
Image: The Ronald Reagan Federal Building and Courthouse in Santa are boarded up. Pic: Mindy Schauer/The Orange County Register via AP
Image: National Guard troops are lined up to protect a federal building in downtown LA. Pic: AP/Eric Thayer
State officials said Mr Trump’s response was an extreme overreaction to mostly peaceful demonstrations, with California senators Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla saying the domestic mobilisation of active-duty military personnel should only happen “during the most extreme circumstances, and these are not them”.
Mr Trump defended his decision in a speech to soldiers at the Army base in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on Tuesday, saying his administration would “liberate Los Angeles”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:49
Trump: ‘We will liberate Los Angeles’
“Generations of Army heroes did not shed their blood on distant shores only to watch our country be destroyed by invasion and third-world lawlessness,” Mr Trump said.
“What you’re witnessing in California is a full-blown assault on peace, on public order and on national sovereignty, carried out by rioters bearing foreign flags.”
Image: A protester is arrested by law enforcement officers in downtown LA. Pic: AP/Eric Thayer
Image: California Highway Patrol officers clash with protesters in LA. Pic: AP/Eric Thayer
Gavin Newsom launched a blistering response in an address on Tuesday evening, saying the deployment of the National Guard without consulting Californian officials was a “brazen abuse of power by a sitting president”.
He said it “enflamed a combustible situation, putting our people, our officers and even our National Guard at risk”.
“That’s when the downward spiral began. He doubled down on his dangerous National Guard deployment by fanning the flames even harder – and the president, he did it on purpose,” Mr Newsom said.
Newsom takes the fight to Trump
California Governor Gavin Newsom’s televised address to the nation felt presidential as he took the fight to the man in the Oval Office, with a series of scorching put downs.
He made a compelling case that Donald Trump’s extraordinary decision to send troops to LA against his wishes had put the country on the brink of authoritarianism.
He spoke the day after the Pentagon announced 700 Marines were being deployed to join 4,000 National Guard troops ordered to the streets of LA by Trump.
But there has been no evidence so far that local law enforcement is being overwhelmed by the size or might of this resistance movement.
The head-to-head between Trump and Newsom is a compelling one.
The governor is known to harbour presidential ambitions for 2028 and is something of a MAGA bogeyman.
Newsom presides over a blue state, the biggest in the country, and is growing his brand with a podcast and – now – Trump has effectively put him in the national spotlight by bringing this political battle to his door.
The governor accused Mr Trump of choosing escalation and “theatrics over public safety”, as the situation was “winding down” before the president deployed the federal reserve force.
Mr Newsom added: “When Donald Trump sought blanket authority to commandeer the National Guard, he made that order apply to every state in this nation.
“This is about all of us, this is about you. California may be first, but it clearly won’t end here; other states are next. Democracy is next. Democracy is under assault before our eyes.”
Image: A man holds a Mexican flag, which has become synonymous with solidarity for migrants targeted in the raids. Pic: AP/Damian Dovarganes
Image: A protester holds up a placard while marching through downtown LA. Pic: Reuters/Leah Millis
Image: People protest against the ongoing immigration raids in Washington, D.C. Pic: AP/Julia Demaree Nikhinson
Homeland Security said on Monday that ICE had arrested 2,000 immigration offenders per day recently, which significantly exceeds the 311 daily average in the fiscal year 2024 under former president Joe Biden.
The protests over the immigration raids have started to spread across the US, with demonstrations in cities like Seattle, Austin, Chicago and Washington, D.C.
There are developments in the quest for peace in Ukraine.
It’s been one of those days when different snippets of news have come together to create a picture of sorts. The jigsaw remains complicated, but the suggestion is neither the Ukrainiansnor the Europeans have been privy to the developments.
The most intriguing development came at lunchtime on Thursday.
“He must have got this from K…” wrote Donald Trump‘s special envoy Steve Witkoff on X. He clearly thought he was sending a private message.
He was replying to a scoop of a story by Axios’s Barak Ravid.
Image: Steve Witkoff, Trump’s envoy for the Middle East and trusted Ukraine peace plan man. Pic: Reuters
The story revealed a “secret” plan to end the Ukrainewar. The report suggested the Americans had been talking secretly to the Russians about a renewed effort to bring the war to an end, which involved Ukraine ceding land it still controls to Russia.
Who is “K” in Witkoff’s message? It’s probably Kirill Dmitriev, who has become Putin’s unofficial and unlikely envoy to Washington. Kyiv-born and Stanford-educated Dmitriev is, essentially, Witkoff’s Russian opposite number.
In a sense, they are the yin and yang of this geopolitical puzzle. Witkoff is a real estate mogul. Dmitriev is an economist. They are opposing forces with backgrounds that are, on the face of it, equally unsuited to geopolitical conflict resolution. Yet their two leaders are trusting them with this huge task.
Image: Kirill Dmitriev was in Alaska for the Trump-Putin summit earlier this year. Pic: Reuters
‘Territorial concessions’ in 28-point plan
So, back to the developments to have emerged over the last 24 hours.
First, we know senior US Department of War officials, including Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, have arrived in the Ukrainian capital to meet their counterparts there.
Their visit was scheduled but the focus shifted. The plan to discuss drone technology and the winter offensive morphed into a discussion about a Russian-presented peace plan Witkoff and Dmitriev had been discussing.
Image: Rescue workers clear rubble after a Russian strike on Ternopil, Ukraine. Pic: AP
This is the second development. The Axios report – which Witkoff seems inadvertently to have suggested came from Dmitriev – claims the two envoys met recently in Florida (Witkoff’s base) to discuss a 28-point plan for peace.
A defence official told our partners at NBC News that Driscoll has been briefed on the 28-point plan. Driscoll and his military staff are thought to have been presenting an initial brief to the Ukrainian side of this Russian-sponsored plan.
Ukrainian sources have suggested to me in clear terms they are not happy with this Witkoff-Dmitriev plan. Sources tell me it includes “territorial concessions” and “reductions in military strength”. The Ukrainian position is the plan represents the latest attempt to “play the American government”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:50
Death toll rises after Russian strikes
What’s happening with security guarantees?
Ukraine wants security guarantees from the US. Trump signalled during Zelenskyy’s last visit to Washington that he was willing to provide those. This was framed by the Europeans as a huge positive development, even though the White House did not spell out the crucial detail – what would these guarantees actually entail?
The latest reporting, from Axios, suggests the security guarantees (still undefined, publicly at least) are dependent on Ukraine giving up the whole of the Donbas region – this would include about 15% of territory Russia does not currently hold.
Crucially, the areas of the Donbas from which Ukraine would withdraw (the 15%) would be considered a demilitarised zone. The plan is very similar to one floated by Vice President JD Vance in the months before Trump won last year’s election, which was roundly rejected as a non-starter at the time.
Another source, from a third country close to the negotiations, has told me the Qataris are playing a role in the talks and were present at the weekend when Steve Witkoff met Ukraine’s national security advisor Rustem Umerov last weekend.
Qatari and Turkish mediation, along with the multipoint peace plan for Gaza, is being projected as a model transferable to Ukraine despite the conflict, challenges, and root causes being wholly different.
Other European sources told me this morning they were not aware of this Russian-American plan. It’s worth remembering it’s in the interests of the Russians to be seen to be engaged in peace proposals in order to avoid secondary sanctions from the US.
Zelenskyy has been in Turkey over the past 24 hours, where he singled out Trump’s efforts to find peace.
Image: Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Recep Tayyip Erdogan at a press conference in Ankara. Pic: AP
“Since the beginning of this year, we in Ukraine have supported every decisive step and the leadership of @POTUS, every strong and fair proposal aimed at ending this war.” Zelenskyy wrote. “And only President Trump and the United States have sufficient power to make this war come to an end.”
The letter sent by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform said members wanted to talk to him because of the widely reported allegations that have been made against him, which he denies, and because of his relationship with Epstein and what he may have seen.
The committee is looking into Epstein’s crimes and his wider sex trafficking network. Andrew was given until today, 20 November, to respond.
Legally he isn’t obliged to talk to them, and to be honest it’s hard to imagine why he would.
The only time he has spoken at length about the allegations against him and his relationship with Epstein was that Newsnight interview in 2019, and we all know how much of a disaster that was.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:35
Releasing the Epstein files: How we got here
Yes, this could be an opportunity for him to publicly apologise for keeping up his links with Epstein, which he has never done before, or show some sympathy towards Epstein’s victims, even as he vehemently denies the allegations against him.
But while there is the moral argument that he should tell the committee everything he knows, it could also raise more uncomfortable questions for him, and that could feel like too much of a risk for Andrew and the wider Royal Family.
However, even saying no won’t draw all this to a close. There are other outstanding loose ends.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
13:31
The new Epstein files: The key takeaways
There could also still be a debate in parliament about the Andrew problem.
The Liberal Democrats have said they want to use their opposition debating time to bring the issue to the floor of the House of Commons, while other MPs on the Public Accounts Committee have signalled their intention to look into Andrew’s finances and housing arrangements.
And then there are the wider Epstein files over in America, and what information they may hold.
From developments this week, it seems we are edging ever closer to seeing those released.
All of this may mean Andrew in other ways is forced to say more than he wants to, even without opening up to the Congress committee.
Donald Trump has signed a bill approving the release of files relating to Jeffrey Epstein by the US Justice Department.
“I HAVE JUST SIGNED THE BILL TO RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES!” he said in a Truth Social post, following a lengthy preamble aimed at discrediting the Democrats.
“Democrats have used the ‘Epstein’ issue, which affects them far more than the Republican Party, in order to try and distract from our AMAZING Victories,” he continued.
Image: Donald Trump speaking in Washington earlier on Wednesday. Pic: Reuters
The Justice Department now has 30 days to release the documents it holds on the paedophile financier.
WHAT DOES THE BILL SAY MUST BE RELEASED?
All files relating to Epstein, including investigations, prosecutions, or custodial matters;
All files relating to Ghislaine Maxwell;
Flight logs or travel records for any aircraft, vessel, or vehicle owned, operated, or used by Epstein or any related entity;
Individuals named or referenced in connection with Epstein’s criminal activities, civil settlements, immunity or plea agreements, or investigations;
Entities with known or alleged ties to Epstein’s trafficking or financial networks;
Any immunity deals, non-prosecution agreements, plea bargains, or sealed settlements involving Epstein or his associates;
Internal DOJ communications concerning decisions to charge, not charge, investigate, or decline to investigate Epstein or his associates;
All communications concerning the destruction, deletion, alteration, misplacement, or concealment of files related to Epstein;
Documentation of Epstein’s detention or death, including witness interviews and autopsy reports.
How did we get here?
Mr Trump promised during last year’s election campaign to release the Epstein files in full, but has since spent months decrying them as a Democratic “hoax”.
His links to the Epstein have long been subject to scrutiny. Mr Trump has always denied any wrongdoing.
“Because of this request, the votes were almost unanimous in favor [sic] of passage,” Mr Trump wrote in his late-night post announcing the signing of the bill.
The House of Representatives was indeed near unanimous in voting for the material to be released, with 427 in favour and one against.
Hot on the heels of that vote, which was met with cheers in the chamber, the Senate said it too would pass the bill.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:35
House passes bill to release all Epstein files
Trump tries to tie Democrats to Epstein
Mr Trump’s post repeatedly labels Epstein as a Democrat, citing his past associations with the likes of Bill Clinton.
Emails, photos and other documents released by Congress in recent weeks have included references to Mr Trump, the UK’s since sacked US ambassador Lord Mandelson, and former British prince Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, who has faced calls from members of the committee to give evidence.
Like Mr Trump, both Britons have denied any wrongdoing and expressed regret about their relationship with Epstein.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:23
What’s at stake for Andrew at US Congress committee?
Unrest in MAGA world
The issue has proved to be a major source of division within Mr Trump’s Make America Great Again movement.
Marjorie Taylor Greene, a long-time Trump backer who publicly fell out with the president just days ago, stood with Epstein survivors on the steps of the Capitol ahead of Tuesday’s Congress votes.
She said: “These women have fought the most horrific fight that no woman should have to fight. And they did it by banding together and never giving up.”