Trump Sends Troops to LA as Democrats Fumble Riot Response

Paul Riverbank, 6/11/2025Trump sends troops to LA as immigration protests escalate, challenging state-federal power dynamics.

I've covered civil unrest for three decades, but the scenes unfolding in LA – burning cars illuminating the night sky, Mexican flags waving above masked protesters, and riot gear-clad officers forming battle lines – signal a particularly dangerous convergence of immigration policy and public safety concerns.

Trump's deployment of 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines wasn't entirely unexpected, though the speed of the decision caught many off guard. The move exposed familiar fault lines: Republican lawmakers quickly fell in line while Democratic leaders, including Governor Newsom and Mayor Bass, pushed back hard – perhaps too hard, given the LAPD's admission that the situation had spiraled beyond their control.

The political theater playing out between state and federal authorities would be almost comical if the stakes weren't so high. Newsom's insistence that "local law enforcement didn't need any help" rings hollow against footage of overwhelmed police units retreating from violent confrontations. Meanwhile, Rep. Young Kim's resolution condemning the riots reads like a carefully crafted campaign document, though it accurately catalogs the destruction.

What's truly fascinating is the public's reaction. New polling from Insider Advantage shows 59% of likely voters backing Trump's intervention – including a surprising 37% of Democrats. These numbers suggest Americans might be more pragmatic about law and order than their elected officials.

The contrast with New York City's approach couldn't be starker. Mayor Adams and his team have taken what you might call a "not in my backyard" stance, backed by some unusual political maneuvering. Picture this: NYPD brass meeting Trump at his golf club in New Jersey, hammering out what amounts to a gentleman's agreement to keep federal forces at bay. It's the kind of political dealing that rarely makes headlines but often shapes policy.

As federal forces dig in across Los Angeles, we're watching a master class in the complexities of American federalism. The crisis has become a stress test for our system of government, pushing against the boundaries of state authority, federal power, and local control. More than just a California problem, it's a preview of challenges likely to surface in other cities grappling with immigration enforcement and civil unrest.

I've seen enough of these situations to know that how this plays out in LA will set precedents for years to come. The question isn't just about restoring order anymore – it's about finding sustainable solutions to the underlying tensions that sparked these protests in the first place.

The streets of Los Angeles tell a story we've seen before, yet somehow different this time. What started as peaceful protests against ICE operations has morphed into something far more volatile – leaving city officials scrambling and the White House stepping in with a show of force that's raised eyebrows across the political spectrum.I've covered civil unrest for three decades, but the scenes unfolding in LA – burning cars illuminating the night sky, Mexican flags waving above masked protesters, and riot gear-clad officers forming battle lines – signal a particularly dangerous convergence of immigration policy and public safety concerns.Trump's deployment of 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines wasn't entirely unexpected, though the speed of the decision caught many off guard. The move exposed familiar fault lines: Republican lawmakers quickly fell in line while Democratic leaders, including Governor Newsom and Mayor Bass, pushed back hard – perhaps too hard, given the LAPD's admission that the situation had spiraled beyond their control.The political theater playing out between state and federal authorities would be almost comical if the stakes weren't so high. Newsom's insistence that "local law enforcement didn't need any help" rings hollow against footage of overwhelmed police units retreating from violent confrontations. Meanwhile, Rep. Young Kim's resolution condemning the riots reads like a carefully crafted campaign document, though it accurately catalogs the destruction.What's truly fascinating is the public's reaction. New polling from Insider Advantage shows 59% of likely voters backing Trump's intervention – including a surprising 37% of Democrats. These numbers suggest Americans might be more pragmatic about law and order than their elected officials.The contrast with New York City's approach couldn't be starker. Mayor Adams and his team have taken what you might call a "not in my backyard" stance, backed by some unusual political maneuvering. Picture this: NYPD brass meeting Trump at his golf club in New Jersey, hammering out what amounts to a gentleman's agreement to keep federal forces at bay. It's the kind of political dealing that rarely makes headlines but often shapes policy.As federal forces dig in across Los Angeles, we're watching a master class in the complexities of American federalism. The crisis has become a stress test for our system of government, pushing against the boundaries of state authority, federal power, and local control. More than just a California problem, it's a preview of challenges likely to surface in other cities grappling with immigration enforcement and civil unrest.I've seen enough of these situations to know that how this plays out in LA will set precedents for years to come. The question isn't just about restoring order anymore – it's about finding sustainable solutions to the underlying tensions that sparked these protests in the first place.