Trump suffers setback in bid to act as national police chief after chaos on streets of LA
The deployment of National Guard soldiers on to the streets of LA by Donald Trump was always deeply controversial – and now it has been deemed illegal, too, by a federal judge.
In late spring in Los Angeles, I observed as peaceful protests against immigration raids turned confrontational.
I watched as Waymos – self-driving cars – were set alight and people waving flags shut down one of the city’s busiest freeways. I saw government buildings spray-painted with anti-government sentiment and expletives. Some people even threw bottles at police officers in riot gear.
In exchange, I saw law enforcement deploy “flash bang” crowd control devices and fire rubber bullets into crowds, indiscriminately, on occasion.
Mounted Los Angeles police officers disperse protesters earlier this summer. Pic: San Francisco Chronicle/AP
A person reacts to non-lethal munitions shot in Los Angeles.
Pic: Reuters
It was chaotic at times, violent, even, in a corner of the downtown area of the city. But I didn’t witness anything that suggested police were on the brink of being overcome by rioters. I didn’t see anything that I believe justified the deployment of 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 marines to the heart of America’s second-biggest city.
But Trump sent them in anyway, against the wishes of the local government. LA mayor Karen Bass condemned the deployment as an act of political theatre and said it risked stoking tensions.
The language Trump used was, arguably, inflammatory, too. He described LA as an “invaded” and “occupied city”. He spoke of “a full-blown assault on peace”, carried out by “rioters bearing foreign flags with the aim of continuing a foreign invasion of our country”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Trump: ‘We will liberate Los Angeles’
It didn’t reflect reality. The size of the protests were modest, several thousand people marching through a handful of streets in downtown LA, a city which spans 500 square miles and has a population of almost four million.
The majority of the soldiers simply stood guard outside government buildings, often looking bored. Some of them are still here, with nothing to do. Now a judge has ruled that the operation was illegal.
US District Judge Charles Breyer said the Trump administration “used armed soldiers (whose identity was often obscured by protective armour) and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles”.
Read more from Sky News:
French government on brink of collapse
Xi hails ‘great regeneration of China’ at parade
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Marines head to Los Angeles
In a scathing judgement, he effectively accused the White House of turning National Guard soldiers and marines into a “national police force.”
That breaches a law from 1878, barring the use of soldiers for civilian law enforcement activities.
It is a blow to what some view as the president’s ambition to federalise Democrat-run cities and deploy the National Guard in other states around the country. He had threatened to send troops to Chicago as part of an initiative he says is cracking down on crime, widening the use of National Guard troops, as seen on the streets of Washington DC.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
The fightback against immigration raids in LA
But since this judge ruled that the deployment of National Guard and marines to LA in June was unlawful in the way it unfolded, Trump may have to be inventive with his rationale for sending soldiers into other US cities in the future.
This legal judgement, though, is being appealed and may well be overturned. Either way, it is unlikely to stem the president’s ambition to act as national police chief.
It is much more than a battle over vaccines in the United States.
It has become a proxy war about trust, freedom, and the role of government in public health.
The debate about childhood immunisations, once a matter of bipartisan consensus, is now a defining clash between federal government, state leadership and the medical community.
At the centre of it is the federal government’s sharp policy shift under US health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr.
He has rolled back vaccine recommendations and reshaped advisory committees with sceptics.
States have responded along ideological lines – Florida planning to abolish all vaccine mandates; California, Oregon, and Washington forming a “Health Alliance” to safeguard them.
The western states felt they had to act when the head of the agency tasked with disease prevention was sacked.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr appears before the Senate Finance Committee on Thursday. Pic: AP
Senator Elizabeth Warren speaks at the hearing. Pic: AP
‘You’re putting Americans’ health at risk’
Susan Monarez had only been in the job for a month when Donald Trump told her she was no longer required.
“She didn’t bend the knee, so you fired her,” Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren told Mr Kennedy during a heated committee hearing on Capitol Hill.
“You’re putting American babies’ health at risk, American seniors’ health at risk, all Americans’ health at risk, and you should resign,” she added.
Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock described the health secretary as “a hazard to the health of the American people.”
“For the first time, we’re seeing deaths of children from measles. We haven’t seen that in two decades. We’re seeing that under your watch,” he said.
Mr Kennedy told the hearing America had done “worse than any country in the world” in terms of COVID deaths.
“…the people at CDC who oversaw the process, who put masks on our children, who closed our schools, are the people who will be leaving,” he said.
Read more US news:
Farage met his match in Washington hearing
How Trump is vulnerable over Epstein
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Is US politics fuelling a deadly measles outbreak?
Jab mandates compared to ‘slavery’
Several senior figures at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have resigned since Susan Monarez was removed.
The turmoil in public health has led to a fragmented system where Americans’ access to vaccines and the rules governing them, largely depend on where they live.
Likening vaccine mandates to “slavery”, Florida’s surgeon general Joseph Ladapo said the government had no right to dictate them.
“Your body is a gift from God. What you put into your body is because of your relationship with your body and your God,” he said.
It is a tug of war between collective responsibility or individual choice and one that will redefine public health in this nation.
Donald Trump is to rebrand the US Department of Defense as the “Department of War”, according to the White House.
The president will today sign an executive order allowing it to be used as a secondary title for the US government’s biggest organisation.
It also means defence secretary Pete Hegseth will be able to refer to himself as the “secretary of war” in official communications and ceremonies.
Mr Hegseth could refer to himself as ‘secretary of war’ under the change. Pic: Reuters
Mr Hegseth posted the words “DEPARTMENT OF WAR” on X on Thursday night.
Permanently renaming the department would need congressional approval, but the White House said the executive order will instruct Mr Hegseth to begin the process.
The Department of Defense – often referred to colloquially as the Pentagon due to the shape of its Washington HQ – was called the War Department until 1949.
Historians say the name was changed to show the US was focussed on preventing conflict following the Second World War and the dawning of the nuclear age.
Mr Trump raised the possibility of a change in June, when he suggested it was originally renamed to be “politically correct”.
The department is often just referred to as the Pentagon. Pic: Reuters
His reversion to the more combative title could cost tens of millions, with letterheads and building signs in the US and at military bases around the world potentially needing a refresh.
Joe Biden’s effort to rename nine army bases honouring the Confederacy and Confederate leaders, set to cost $39m (£29m), was reversed by Mr Hegseth earlier this year.
Read more from Sky News:
The proxy war that will redefine US public health
Judge says Trump’s National Guard deployment was illegal
Opponents have already criticised Mr Trump’s move.
“Why not put this money toward supporting military families or toward employing diplomats that help prevent conflicts from starting in the first place?” said Democratic senator Tammy Duckworth, a member of the armed services committee.
Mr Trump’s other federal renaming orders include controversially labelling the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf Of America” and reverting North America’s tallest mountain, Denali in Alaska, to its former name of Mount McKinley.
The Mexican government and Alaska’s Republican senators both rejected the changes.
For so long, the Epstein story has cast them in a cameo role.
Everyday coverage of the scandal churns through the politics and process of it all, reducing their suffering to a passing reference.
Not anymore.
Not on a morning when they gathered on Capitol Hill, survivors of Epstein‘s abuse, strengthened by shared experience and a resolve to address it.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Epstein survivors call for release of all files
In a news conference that lasted over an hour, they brought an authenticity that only they could.
There was vivid recollection of the abuse they endured and a certainty in the justice they seek.
They had the safety of each other – adults now, with the horrors of youth at a distance, though never far away.
It was an emotional gathering on Capitol Hill, attended by survivors, politicians and several hundred members of the public who turned up in support.
Banners read “Release the files”, “Listen to the victims” and “Even your MAGA base demands Epstein files”.
Haley Robson was one of several Epstein survivors who spoke. Pic: AP
A startling spectacle
That last statement isn’t lost on Donald Trump. As if for emphasis, one of the speakers was the ultra-loyal House representative Marjorie Taylor Greene – they don’t make them more MAGA.
In a spectacle, startling to politics-watchers in this town, she stood side by side with Democrat congressmen to demand the Epstein files be released.
It reflects a discontent spread through Donald Trump’s support base.
He is the man who once counted Jeffrey Epstein as a friend and who has said he’d release the files, only to reverse course.
Read more:
Partial release of Epstein files feeds cover-up claims
Explainer: Trump, Epstein and the MAGA controversy
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘It’s a Democrat hoax’ – Trump on Epstein files
Trump’s vulnerability
The Epstein files is the slow-burner that won’t go out, a story that exposes Trump’s vulnerability.
Just how vulnerable can be measured on Congress, where politicians need only a couple of Republicans to back legislation demanding full publication.
It bears the shape of a loyalty test to the president and the dynamics of that have changed with the survivors stepping forward.
One by one, they presented a thunderous reminder of the people and the moral imperative at the heart of the Jeffrey Epstein saga.
It’s political, sure, but it’s about much more – that, we saw on Capitol Hill.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment11 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024