When President Donald Trump put 2,000 National Guard troops under his control on Saturday night and ordered them into Los Angeles, it was billed as an urgent response to quell protests. But it was also a move long in the making. Behind the scenes, the White House and Department of Homeland Security had been working for months to find ways to use the National Guard and the military more broadly to bolster the administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement agenda, multiple people familiar with the internal deliberations told CNN. The discussions have stemmed from a desire to dramatically ramp up nationwide immigration operations and arrest more migrants than ever before — a strategy that has put intense strain on the government’s existing enforcement apparatus. The administration has tried to augment Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s capacity by pulling personnel from multiple agencies. “It’s certainly an expansion, but it’s a needed expansion,” White House border czar Tom Homan told CNN, when asked about the involvement of National Guard in ICE operations in Los Angeles. “We’re trying to use all available resources. That’s why we’re bringing all these other different agencies — ATF, FBI, US Marshals. We got a hell of a job ahead of us.” Homan stressed that members of the National Guard are not enforcing immigration law and are focused on serving as protection for federal property and agents who the administration says have been assaulted. White House pressure Even with thousands of federal agents fanning out nationwide to arrest migrants, the results have up until recently fallen well short of White House expectations, the sources said, leading to leadership shakeups at ICE and tense calls and meetings with Stephen Miller — Trump’s top aide and architect of the administration’s demands for increased arrests and deportations. ICE is now averaging around 2,000 arrests daily, up from around 1,000. Miller has been in the White House Situation Room as Homeland Security and Pentagon officials have provided updates on the situation in Los Angeles in recent days. The message from him has been clear: The administration is not backing down, and they are to proceed with operations. The internal discussions about leveraging the military to support immigration enforcement inside the US, rather than just on the southern border, began as early as February, when the White House and DHS started planning how to mobilize active-duty troops from consenting states as force protection for federal agents. There have also been discussions within the administration, including at the Department of Homeland Security and the Defense Department, exploring whether National Guard units from Republican-led states could be used in non-consenting states since they have more latitude under state orders than when they’re federalized, according to four other sources familiar with the talks. “They are clearly inclined to repeat the LA playbook elsewhere,” said one of the sources familiar with the matter. CNN reached out to the White House for comment. Trump mobilized the California National Guard against the will of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, but the troops were taken from within California, rather than deployed from another state. But the deployment of active-duty Marines to Los Angeles to help with crowd and riot control was also an escalation that left many officials at DoD scratching their heads, people familiar with the matter said. One official said the use of the Marines was intended more as a show of force than out of necessity to control the situation on the ground. The administration is also looking to expand its use of military facilities to hold migrants. Defense Department personnel have conducted tours with Customs and Border Protection at military bases including Travis Air Force Base in California; Camp Atterbury in Indiana; JB McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey; Dover Air Force Base in Delaware; Camp Parks in California; and Fort Walker in Virginia. “Military bases are an option. They were an option under every president I ever worked for, so it’s no different now,” Homan said, stressing the need for more congressional funding. Trump’s massive tax and spending cuts package would provide billions in funding for immigration enforcement. The urgency: ICE detention space is almost maxed out. As of Monday, there were about 55,000 people in ICE custody, according to federal data obtained by CNN. ICE, which relies in part on cooperation with local jails, is only funded for 41,500 beds. “We’re close,” Homan told CNN when asked when capacity would max out. “We’re probably 95% or above.” Request for 20K guard troops The first public sign that the administration was planning to use the guard to help with immigration enforcement came last month, when DHS requested 20,000 guard troops from the Pentagon to help support its operations. DHS asked for troops to help with processing, transportation support, detention support including perimeter security and emergency response inside centers, as well as helping with night operations and rural interdiction, according to the request, obtained by CNN. The Pentagon is still deciding how many National Guard troops it will provide to DHS, a defense official said. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth suggested in testimony on Wednesday that the order Trump signed on Saturday activating the guard troops could apply to other states, in addition to California, and other National Guard units. “Part of it was about getting ahead of the problem, so that if in other places, if there are other riots, in places where law enforcement officers are threatened, we would have the capability to surge National Guard there, if necessary,” Hegseth said on Wednesday. Trump’s order on Saturday night putting “at least” 2,000 National Guard troops under his control did not name a specific location and was very broad — it said that the troops would be deployed “in locations where protests against (federal) functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations.” Hegseth said that “thankfully, in most of those states, you’d have a governor that recognizes the need for it, supports it and mobilizes it, him or herself. In California, unfortunately, the governor wants to play politics with it.” Newsom, for his part, has accused the Trump administration of employing authoritarian tactics. “California may be first – but it clearly won’t end here. Other states are next. Democracy is next,” he said in an address Tuesday evening. Immigration agents are also expected to get help from National Guard units in states where governors have provided permissions and deputized the troops to serve as a force multiplier, a defense official told CNN. In Texas, for example, Gov. Greg Abbott, a staunch Trump supporter, said on Wednesday that his state’s National Guard was ready to respond if protests emerged there. Without Trump invoking the Insurrection Act, which allows for the military to carry out law enforcement functions to quell a rebellion or foreign invasion, the guard cannot make arrests, though they can detain people temporarily until police arrive and provide force protection to federal personnel. ICE posted images on X on Tuesday of guard troops forming a security perimeter around ICE agents as they arrested a man in California. “Military troops are providing protection for federal law enforcement officers as they continue operations to remove the worst of the worst from Los Angeles,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement to CNN. “If any rioters attack ICE law enforcement officers, military personnel have the authority to temporarily detain them until law enforcement makes the arrest.”
Trump’s move to use military for immigration enforcement was months in the making
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Trump Administration Mobilizes National Guard for Immigration Enforcement Amid Rising Tensions"
TruthLens AI Summary
President Donald Trump's recent decision to mobilize 2,000 National Guard troops in Los Angeles has been described as a response to ongoing protests, but it has roots in a broader strategy to enhance immigration enforcement across the United States. Discussions within the White House and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have been underway for months, focusing on how to leverage military resources to support aggressive immigration operations. As ICE struggles to meet the administration's heightened expectations for migrant arrests, the deployment of National Guard members is part of a strategy to bolster the enforcement apparatus strained by increased operational demands. White House border czar Tom Homan emphasized that the National Guard's role is not to enforce immigration laws directly but to provide protection for federal agents and property, particularly in light of reported assaults on law enforcement officials. This move reflects a significant expansion of resources aimed at addressing the immigration enforcement challenges faced by the administration.
In addition to the deployment of National Guard troops, the Trump administration is exploring the use of military facilities for holding migrants, as current ICE detention capacities are nearing their limits. The DHS has requested additional troops from the Pentagon to assist with various operational needs, including processing and transportation support. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth indicated that the National Guard's activation could extend beyond California, allowing for quick deployment in response to potential unrest in other states. This strategy, however, has faced criticism from state leaders like California Governor Gavin Newsom, who accused the administration of employing authoritarian measures. While the National Guard can provide temporary detainment of individuals until police arrive, they are not authorized to make arrests unless the Insurrection Act is invoked. The administration's approach reflects an ongoing commitment to intensifying immigration enforcement, with the involvement of military resources seen as a necessary step to achieve its goals amidst rising tensions in various regions.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article provides insight into the strategic use of the National Guard by the Trump administration for immigration enforcement, revealing a premeditated plan rather than an impulsive reaction to protests in Los Angeles. This nuanced approach highlights the administration’s ongoing efforts to bolster immigration enforcement through military involvement, raising questions about the implications for civil rights and the broader political landscape.
Strategic Intent Behind the Deployment
The article indicates that the deployment of National Guard troops serves a dual purpose: addressing immediate public safety concerns while furthering a long-term immigration enforcement agenda. The involvement of military personnel is framed as a necessary measure to augment the existing capabilities of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has struggled to meet the administration's ambitious targets for arrests and deportations. This reveals a strategic intention to normalize military involvement in domestic law enforcement, particularly concerning immigration.
Public Perception and Messaging
The narrative constructed around the deployment seeks to present it as a logical response to violence against federal agents, potentially aiming to garner public support by framing the situation as a law-and-order issue. By emphasizing the necessity of using all available resources to protect federal property and personnel, the administration may be attempting to build a perception of urgency and justification for its aggressive immigration policies. This could resonate with segments of the population that prioritize security and support strict immigration controls.
Potential Concealments and Broader Issues
The article subtly hints at the underlying tensions within the administration regarding immigration enforcement results, which have reportedly fallen short of expectations. This context may suggest that the announcement of National Guard involvement is also a way to divert attention from the administration's challenges in effectively managing immigration issues. By focusing on military involvement, the administration may seek to shift the narrative away from internal discontent and operational shortcomings.
Manipulative Aspects and Reliability
While the article presents factual information regarding the deployment of National Guard troops, the framing and language used may exhibit manipulative qualities. The emphasis on the perceived threat to federal agents and the urgent need for military support could skew public perception, potentially inciting fear or reinforcing negative stereotypes about immigrants. The reliability of the article hinges on its presentation of the facts without overt bias; however, the implications and context suggest a calculated effort to influence public sentiment.
Implications for Society and Politics
This development could have far-reaching consequences for civil liberties, the military's role in domestic affairs, and the broader immigration debate. The normalization of military involvement in immigration enforcement could set a precedent for future administrations and policies, raising concerns about the erosion of checks and balances in law enforcement. Additionally, such actions could exacerbate social divisions and heighten tensions in communities affected by immigration issues.
Support Base and Target Audience
The article likely appeals to conservative audiences who support stringent immigration policies and a strong law enforcement presence. By framing military involvement as necessary for maintaining order, the administration may seek to reinforce its support among constituents who prioritize security over civil liberties.
Economic and Market Considerations
The implications of this news on the stock market may be limited but could resonate with companies involved in defense contracting or security services. Increased funding for immigration enforcement and military operations could bolster these sectors, though broader economic impacts may be less direct.
Geopolitical Context
While the article centers on domestic issues, the use of military resources for immigration enforcement can have implications for the U.S.'s international standing, particularly in discussions about human rights and civil liberties. In an era where global migration is a pressing issue, the U.S. approach could influence international perspectives on immigration policy.
AI Influence in Reporting
There is no clear indication that artificial intelligence was employed in the writing of this article. However, if AI tools were used, they might have influenced the structuring of the narrative or the selection of language that emphasizes urgency and threat. AI could potentially steer the tone to evoke a specific emotional response from the reader, thus shaping public perception.
In conclusion, this article presents a complex interplay of strategic communication, public sentiment, and political maneuvering, underscoring the administration's determination to enforce its immigration agenda. The reliability of the article is moderate, as it conveys factual information but also employs a framing that may influence public perception.