Tuesday briefing: What Trump’s response to the LA protests could mean for US democracy

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Trump's Military Response to LA Protests Raises Concerns Over Democratic Principles"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 7.1
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

Last week, Los Angeles experienced a wave of federal immigration raids conducted by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, which led to widespread protests across the city. Activists expressed outrage over the treatment of detainees, with reports suggesting that many were held without judicial warrants. The protests escalated quickly, drawing thousands of participants who initially demonstrated peacefully but later engaged in confrontations with law enforcement, resulting in incidents of violence, including the vandalism of police vehicles and obstruction of highways. In response to the unrest, President Donald Trump announced the deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles, promising to take a firm stance against the demonstrators. He characterized the protesters as 'paid insurrectionists' and ordered an additional 700 marines to assist local law enforcement, marking a significant escalation in federal involvement in what was primarily a local issue.

California Governor Gavin Newsom condemned Trump's actions as a dangerous step toward authoritarianism, arguing that they threaten the balance of power between state and federal authorities. The mayor of Los Angeles, Karen Bass, echoed these sentiments, expressing concern that the federal government was undermining local governance. Legal experts, including human rights lawyer Philippe Sands, have warned that such military deployments, especially without state approval, could signal a troubling trend towards the normalization of military intervention in civilian affairs. Sands noted that while the judiciary in the United States has remained intact and capable of providing checks against executive overreach, the current climate poses significant challenges to democratic norms. The deployment of troops to quell protests raises critical questions about the resilience of constitutional safeguards and the potential for authoritarian practices to take root in American governance, as similar tactics have been observed in other authoritarian regimes historically. The situation in Los Angeles may serve as a litmus test for the limits of public tolerance regarding federal power and the ongoing struggle to maintain democratic principles in the face of escalating tensions around immigration policy and civil dissent.

TruthLens AI Analysis

Recent events in Los Angeles surrounding immigration raids and subsequent protests have drawn significant attention to President Trump's response and its implications for US democracy. The article highlights a tense situation where federal agents conducted immigration raids, leading to public outrage and protests. Trump's reaction to these protests raises questions about the state of civil liberties and the potential for authoritarian governance in the United States.

Purpose of the Article

The article aims to shed light on the implications of Trump's militarized response to the protests, suggesting that such actions may signal a troubling shift towards authoritarianism. By framing the protests as a threat and labeling demonstrators as "paid insurrectionists," the article suggests an intent to delegitimize dissent and consolidate power.

Public Perception

The framing of Trump’s actions serves to create a sense of urgency and alarm among the public regarding the erosion of democratic norms. By highlighting comments from officials like California Governor Gavin Newsom, the article aims to mobilize public sentiment against perceived government overreach and the potential for civil liberties violations.

Potential Omissions

While the article focuses on the implications of Trump's actions, it may underplay the perspectives of those who support stricter immigration enforcement or view the protests as disruptive. This could create an incomplete picture of the broader societal debate on immigration and law enforcement.

Manipulative Elements

The language used in the article, particularly the term "paid insurrectionists," suggests an attempt to sway public opinion by framing protestors in a negative light. This choice of words can evoke strong emotional reactions, potentially leading to polarization among readers.

Comparison with Other News

When compared to other news sources covering similar issues, there may be a pattern of emphasizing the authoritarian implications of Trump's governance style. This aligns with a broader narrative in media critical of the Trump administration, which often frames his actions as undermining democratic institutions.

Impact on Society and Politics

The escalation of military presence in Los Angeles could lead to increased tensions between federal and local authorities, potentially igniting further protests and civil unrest. This situation might also influence upcoming elections, as public opinion could sway based on perceptions of law enforcement and civil rights.

Support from Specific Communities

The article is likely to resonate more with communities advocating for immigrant rights, civil liberties, and those opposed to authoritarian governance. Conversely, it may not appeal as strongly to individuals who prioritize law and order or support strict immigration policies.

Economic and Market Implications

While the immediate focus is on civil rights, the political climate described could indirectly affect market stability. Companies involved in sectors related to law enforcement or immigration could experience fluctuations in public perception and investment based on ongoing events.

Global Context

In a broader geopolitical context, the article touches on themes of democracy and authoritarianism that resonate globally, particularly in light of rising populist movements. This situation in the US may be viewed as part of a larger trend of democratic backsliding in various countries.

Use of AI in Writing

It is plausible that AI tools could have been employed in drafting or editing this article. The structured presentation and analytical tone suggest a methodical approach that could be enhanced by AI. However, specific instances of AI influence are difficult to pinpoint without direct evidence.

In conclusion, the article serves to raise awareness of the potential dangers posed by Trump's response to protests, framing it within a narrative of authoritarianism and democratic erosion. The overall reliability of the article is bolstered by credible sources and expert opinions, although it may exhibit biases in its framing of events and language choices.

Unanalyzed Article Content

Late last week,Los Angeleswas left stunned as droves of federal US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers bore down on homes, businesses and neighbourhoods across the city in a series of immigration raids.

The anti-ICE protests that followed were swift and furious, fuelled inpart by the reported ill-treatmentof some of the 118 people thought to have been detained, allegedly without judicial warrants. By Friday evening, thousands had taken to the streets in mostly peaceful protests before violence flared in points around the city, with protesters attacking police cars and blocking highways.

Then came the response from the White House. PresidentDonald Trumppromised to crush the opposition on the LA streets, immediately and with military force, by using his powers to send 4,000 National Guard troops to the city.

Yesterday, despite the protests dwindling and remaining largely peaceful, Trump continued to escalate the situation, branding the protesters “paid insurrectionists” with the administration ordering 700 marines into Los Angeles to support law enforcement in an exceptionally rare domestic deployment.

California governor Gavin Newsom has called Trump’s response an “unmistakable step toward authoritarianism”, accusing him of intentionally causing chaos, terrorising communities and endangering democracy. Karen Bass, Los Angeles mayor, also warned that LA was being used by theTrump administrationas a “test case for what happens when the federal government moves in and takes the authority away from the state or away from local government”.

For today’s newsletter, I spoke withPhilippe Sands, the renowned human rights lawyer, on what Trump’s response to the anti-immigration protests could mean for US democracy. That’s after the headlines.

Labour| All pensioners with an income of £35,000 or less a year will have the winter fuel payment restored in full,Rachel Reeves has announced, after weeks of uncertainty over the decision to make a U-turn on scrapping the benefit.

Northern Ireland| Public disorder broke out inBallymena in Northern Ireland, with police saying a number of missiles had been thrown towards officers after crowds gathered near the site of an alleged sexual assault in the town.

Reform| Nigel Faragehas demanded the reopeningof domestic coalmines to provide fuel for new blast furnaces, arguing that Welsh people would happily return to mining if the pay was sufficiently high.

AI| All civil servants in England and Wales will get practical training in how to use artificial intelligence to speed up their work from this autumn,the Guardian has learned. More than 400,000 civil servants will be informed of the training which is part of a drive to overhaul the civil service.

Music| Sly Stone, the American musician who lit up generations of dancefloors with his gloriously funky and often socially conscious songwriting,has died aged 82. With his group Sly and the Family Stone, Stone tied together soul, psychedelic rock and gospel into fervent, uplifting songs, and became one of the key progenitors of the 1970s funk sound.

The speed at which Trump deployed National Guard troops to quell the protests is a sign of just how willing the administration is to flex its power to the absolute constitutional limits.

According to Philippe Sands, none of us should be surprised by the tactics deployed. Throughout his career, Sands has documented and examined the methods used by authoritarian regimes and military dictatorships.

Sands says that the scenes unfolding in Los Angeles should be seen as part of a wider drive to create a sense of emergency, but also to test the limits of the public’s imagination about what is acceptable and what must be resisted.

“People start in one place but very quickly events like we’re seeing in Los Angeles can change the parameters of tolerance,” he says.

What are the LA protests about?

Protests broke out across Los Angeles on Friday after agents from ICE conducted a series of high-profile immigration raids, which were met with horror by many locals. LA’s city council released a statement that the city, which was “built by immigrants and thrives because of immigrants” would not “abide by fear tactics to support extreme political agendas that aim to stoke fear and spark discord in our community.”

Across the weekend, thousands joined anti-ICE demonstrations, with violence flaring at points across the city as police cars were attacked and highways blocked. The authorities responded with teargas and rubber bullets.

What was Trump’s response?

On Saturday, Trump said he was deploying 2,000 National Guard troops to clamp down on the immigration protests, posting on Truth Social: “These radical left protests, by instigators and often paid troublemakers, will not be tolerated.” Yesterday plans were announced to send700 marines to LA, with the administration saying they were there to support law enforcement efforts.

In sending troops, Trump bypassed the authority of the state’s governor Gavin Newsom, who said that the deployment was “purposefully inflammatory”.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) called the images of truckloads of armed National Guard troops arriving in the city “akin to a declaration of war on all Californians”.

How has Trump been able to deploymilitary personnel on to the streets of LA?

It’s a central tenet of American democracy that the US military should not be used against its citizens. While the American constitution makes the president the commander-in-chief of all the armed forces, a set of constitutional and statutory legal constraints are intended to prevent the abuse of this exceptional power.

However there are loopholes, which Trump has been open about his intention to exploit.

First is the 18th-century Insurrection Act, which authorises the president to decide whether to use the military to engage in civilian law enforcement in certain situations. While he has labelled the protesters “insurrectionists”, Trump has stopped short of invoking the Insurrection Act in response to the protests in LA.

Second is the National Guard. While the US president cannot command military forces against US citizens, he is in charge of the use of the National Guard in Washington DC and can request that other states provide additional guard troops to supplement deployments in emergencies.

This weekend is not the first time the National Guard has been sent to Los Angeles. In 2020, troops used smoke canisters and rubber bullets to disperse Black Lives Matter (BLM) protesters in Lafayette Square. In 1992, George HW Bush deployed thousands of troops to quell the riots afterthe police beating of Rodney King.

Yet, significantly, this weekend is the first time since 1965 that a president has sent in the National Guard without being requested to do so by a state governor, something labelled an “outrageous overreach” by Newsom.

Should this fuel fearsTrump is driving the US towards authoritarianism?

In his first term as president, Trump was open about his desire to expand the powers of federal law enforcement and use the military to crush civil protest.

Announcing the deployment of National Guard troops in 2020, Trump said: “If the city or state refuses to take the actions that are necessary to defend the life and property of their residence, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them,” before reportedlyadvocating for BLM protesters to be shot.

Sands is keen to stress we shouldn’t be jumping to hasty conclusions, “but it is obvious there are some warning signs that need to be taken seriously”.

He draws parallel’s with Augusto Pinochet’s Plan Z, where the Chilean dictator concocted a narrative that leftist insurgents were planning a coup to justify violently suppressing dissent and attacking citizens. Now in the US, you have Trump talking about the “enemy within” to describe illegal immigrants and saying they are a threat to law and order. “It’s a very well-used playbook,” says Sands. “You use the power of your office to create a climate of fear, which then allows you to go further than you’d otherwise be able to do, to argue for exceptional circumstances.”

At the same time, some say that in branding those protesting as a “mob” being paid to incite violence, the Trump administration is conflating resistance to his immigration policy with unlawful and dangerous behaviour that the administration claims state authorities can’t deal with.“You might say that what is going on in Los Angeles is a way of testing the limits of what the American people are willing to tolerate, whether in these circumstances they can stomach the sight of troops on the streets of a major American city,” says Sands.

You only have to look at history to see how quickly such actions can become normalised, he adds. “It’s all part of this testing of the public’s capacity to absorb this alongside all the other stuff – banning books, taking people off the streets, deporting without due process. It is a slow creep that takes people past limits that were previously unimaginable.”

Sign up toFirst Edition

Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters

after newsletter promotion

Is this a turning point for US democracy?

Sands says that although warning signs are there, the major difference between a case like Pinochet in Chile – the subject of his new book,38 Londres Street– or other authoritarian regimes, is that so far the Trump administration has not limited – or not been able to limit – the role of the judiciary or the courts in holding the executive to account.

“Judges and lawyers are being attacked, very publicly, but judges have not been removed from office and Congress has not curtailed the powers of the courts,” he says. “In the past it has been very clear that the role of the judges and the courts is the line that divides democracy and dictatorship. Authoritarian regimes such as the Pinochet dictatorship neutralised the courts almost immediately. In the US this hasn’t happened.”

Sands says that Trump’s decision to bypass the state and directly deploy troops to LA will probably lead to a slew of legal challenges. Already the state of California has said it will sue the government accusing the US president of “unlawfully” federalizing the state’s national guard to quell the protests. “The courts and the judiciary’s powers have actually stood firm so far,” he says. “And on occasion we’ve seen the Trump administration blink and roll back when challenged.”

However, he concedes that the jury is out on whether this will remain the case. “Judges in the United States are already under immense pressure,” Sands says. “President Trump’s administration seem to be pushing as far as they can, trying to create cracks and seeing how much they can bend that system.”

As anti-ICE protests spread to other cities across the country, political, public and legal resistance that Trump will face in the coming days in LA could be crucial in determining just how resilient the checks and balances built into the US constitution are in face of the real onslaught that Trump 2.0 has unleashed.

“There is a great deal at stake here,” says Sands. “Warts and all, since 1945 the United States has always seen itself as a beacon for the idea of the rule of law and constitutionalism. If it now descends into classic authoritarianism, the world will be very different.”

Oprah, Stanley Tucci and Selena Gomez love them – but just how safe are those supposedly “nontoxic”ceramic panstaking over your feed? Tom Perkins digs into the murky marketing behind thecookware boom, uncovering how a wellness aesthetic and vague labels are masking potential health risks.Sundus Abdi, newsletters team

I lovedthis piece by Jon Harveyabout howJawsnot only changed the film industry but also kickstarted a pathological fear of sharks that led to years of bloodshed and persecution. Thankfully, this seems to be turning and the most misunderstood of marine animals is having a cultural moment thanks to the dulcet tones of kiddie anthem Baby Shark.Annie

Forget clubbing – people in Britain are now bookinglate-night dinner reservationsinstead. With restaurants staying open later and offering discounts for night-owls,a new night out has emerged.Sundus

Chris Godfrey’s interview withBrad Dourif, who starred alongside Hollywood greats in many legendary movies (from Cuckoo’s Nest to Chucky) and became one of the most beloved of character actors of all time,is a great read.Annie

From a darkly tender comedy about three siblings dodging social services (Just Act Normal) to a woman with terminal cancer chasing the perfect orgasm (Dying for Sex),this roundupof2025’s the best TVis anything but predictable.Sundus

Football| Belgium raced to a three-goal lead inside half an hour, before Wales, rallied to equalise with the side ranked eighth in the world. A perfect Kevin De Bruyne cross in the 88th minute sealed the deal though,ending the match 4-3and leaving Wales second in Group J in the World Cup qualifiers.

Football| Tottenham have approached Brentford over appointing Thomas Frank as their new head coach. The Daneis the club’s No 1 targetto replace Ange Postecoglou, who was sacked on Friday, and there is confidence that a deal will be struck in the next 48 hours.

Rugby union| A leading executive at TNT Sportshas dismissedthe proposed R360 breakaway league as “delusional” while Premiership executives have played down the rebels’ threat, insisting rugby “doesn’t need pop-ups”.

TheGuardianleads with “Labour pledges £14bn for nuclear to get UK off ‘fossil fuel rollercoaster’”. TheTelegraphfollows the same story with “£14 billion for nuclear to keep the lights on”.

TheFinancial Timeshas “Reeves retreat restores winter fuel payments to pensioners”, while theTimesreports “Millions escape winter fuel cuts”. TheMirrorcharacterises the move as “Winter wonderful”, but theMailcalls the chancellor’s comments on the matter “Deluded”. TheSunfollows the story too, under the headline “It was fuelish so say sorry!” and theireports “Winter fuel U-turn gets warm welcome – but Labour MPs warn Reeves: don’t make same mistake on disability benefits”.

Trump, Musk and the end of a bromance

Andrew Rothdetails the explosive falling-outbetween Elon Musk and Donald Trump, and what it tells us about the future of the US presidency.

A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad

At 67, Jean Walters (pictured above) heard church bells drifting through her garden in Meltham, West Yorkshire. On a whim, she decided to learnhow to ring them. What began as a curious hobby turned into a passion. Within a few years, Walters joined the Yorkshire bellringers’ association and marked her 80th birthday by ringing eight different patterns – one for each decade of her life.

A former soprano and teacher who lost her singing voice, Walters found a new way to express herself through bellringing. She says the physical and mental challenge of bellringing leaves her feeling exhilarated. “Its another way of expressing my joy of living.”

Sign up herefor a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every Sunday

And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow.

Quick crossword

Cryptic crossword

Wordiply

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian