Los Angeles plunged into chaos over the weekend and into early this week, as escalating tensions surrounding federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations sparked street protests, widespread rioting, and a swift military response.
What sparked the unrest?
On Friday, ICE carried out targeted enforcement actions in L.A.’s garment district and other neighborhoods, aiming to arrest undocumented immigrants. The swift raids—highlighted by agents in tactical gear—instantly drew fierce backlash, setting off protests that rapidly escalated into violent confrontations.
Angelenos watched in shock as a wave of unrest erupted, challenging local law enforcement and rattling city leaders. “Some protesters hurled chunks of broken concrete,” prompting LAPD’s deployment of tear gas, flash-bang grenades, and arrests as early as Friday night.
National Guard called in
Faced with intensifying chaos, President Trump dispatched 2,000 National Guard troops initially, with another 2,000 troops sent over the weekend. The declared mission: safeguard federal property and shield personnel amid the turmoil.
By Monday night, federal officials had arrested over 100 individuals connected to the riots.
Public opinion divides sharply
A recent poll on the response reveals sharp divisions among the public. According to a YouGov–type survey, 57% of Americans “strongly or somewhat approve” of the ICE efforts to locate and deport undocumented immigrants in L.A., while 35% disapprove and 9% remain uncertain.
Meanwhile, 42% of voters disapprove of the National Guard deployment, and another 7% remain undecided. The numbers underscore an electorate split—albeit leaning slightly in favor of federal intervention.
Trump doubles down
President Trump strongly defended his actions, painting a dire picture of urban breakdown under Democratic leadership. On Tuesday, he warned that “Los Angeles would be burning to the ground” had he not ordered troops in, drawing a direct line between his intervention and saving the city.
He then launched a scathing critique of California Governor Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass, blaming them for permitting blazes that burned nearly 25,000 homes earlier this year—and for permitting delays in their recovery due to state and local permitting inefficiencies .
In his own words, Trump exclaimed,
“If I didn’t ‘SEND IN THE TROOPS’… that once beautiful and great City would be burning to the ground right now,”
before later going on to say that federal permitting is done, while city and state permitting remains “a total mess.”
From Fetterman to Bondi
Notably, some Democrats have distanced themselves from the unrest. Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman called out fellow party members for supporting the riots, not the peaceful protest that he believes in. In a pointed post on X (formerly Twitter), Fetterman said he stands fully behind “free speech, peaceful demonstrations, and immigration—but this is not that,” describing the rioting as “anarchy and true chaos.” He emphasized that destroying property and attacking law enforcement “loses the moral high ground” .
On the other side, former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi—which news outlets noted as part of the broader GOP response—blasted the situation on Fox News, claiming L.A. resembled “a Third World country.” She criticized the destruction as unacceptable in the United States and warned that the Justice Department would seek federal prosecution for those assaulting law enforcement officers .
A city under curfew
Amid mounting violence—looting incidents at Apple stores, sneaker shops, pharmacies, and more—Mayor Karen Bass declared a local emergency and imposed a nightly curfew from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. Several hundred arrests have been made, and the city has seen damage to around 23 businesses, with losses estimated in the millions.
Curfews are now in effect as officials race to balance public safety with civil liberties, seeking to quell unrest without stifling legitimate estate dissent.
Financial and political fallout
With 700 Marines also activated and a 60-day operational window and costs projected at $134 million, the federal spending impact is steep.
Meanwhile, political stakes are rising: Governor Newsom is challenging the legality of federal troop deployment in court, accusing the administration of abusing presidential power. Los Angeles leaders argue the intervention circumvented democratic oversight .
Nationally, critics debate whether this signals authoritarian impulse or essential federal enforcement, reviving fears of domestic military encroachment last seen during the civil rights era .
Why this matters
- State-federal tensions – With California and the federal government at odds over authority—and filed legal actions highlighting the injunction—this situation tests federalism in real time.
- Immigration under a microscope – The scale and public reaction to ICE’s operation in a major city offers insight into national attitudes and enforcement policies ahead of the 2025 election.
- Protests vs. riots – Millions of Americans support peaceful protest; most analysts note the majority of participants were nonviolent. But images of vandalism and violence have fueled media and policy debates—mirroring polarizing events like January 6, 2021 .
What comes next
- Curfew enforcement and clean‑up: L.A. officials aim to restore calm, clear streets, and begin rebuilding damaged businesses.
- Legal determinations: Courts will weigh the constitutionality of federal troop presence in a sanctuary city that did not request it.
- Political positioning: Newsom and Trump each seek to shape public opinion—Newsom as a defender of civil and immigrant rights, Trump as a strongman restoring order.
- Federal probes: Sen. Josh Hawley is reportedly investigating whether nonprofits funded protests or riots—raising questions about the role of outside forces.
Los Angeles stands at a tense inflection point, torn between protest, law enforcement, and political posturing. What began with federal ICE actions quickly escalated into one of the most volatile domestic scenes in recent memory, amplified by military deployment and national media attention.
The coming days will determine whether the city can stabilize through dialogue and accountability, or whether the bruising civic showdown becomes a template for political polarization and federal intervention citywide.
