The scenes of a city militarized by Marines and federalized National Guard soldiers, protesters waving the Mexican flag, and legal challenges are expressions of a political battle between Republican President Donald Trump and Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom.
But they are also the result of larger tensions: a clash of visions on immigration and civil rights, a battleground for the conflict between federalism and centralism, and a catalyst for social mobilization in migrant communities, among others.
On a higher level, Los Angeles is a laboratory for the limits of presidential power, but also for the resilience of civil society.
The crisis is framed within the context of the federal immigration policy promoted by the Trump administration, which has intensified raids and deportations.
California, and Los Angeles in particular, have historically adopted sanctuary-space postures, with laws and policies that limit local cooperation with federal immigration agents.
The state government views the military intervention as a violation of federalism and California’s autonomy.
At the same time, the confrontation between President Trump and Governor Gavin Newsom reflects partisan polarization: Trump uses the rhetoric of a “city overrun by criminals” to mobilize his base. During the COVID-19 pandemic, these same migrants were considered “essential workers” by Trump.
Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta are responding with legal action and accusations of abuse of federal power. For the governor, the president’s actions are “an unequivocal step toward authoritarianism.”
On a social level, the events are also a battleground between opposing visions of national identity and migrant rights.
The immigration protests in LA are a response to the use of police operations against migrant communities and the threat of mass deportations, but they have spread in the wake of the militarization of the city, whose center has been declared an “unlawful assembly site.”
For progressive groups, the presence of Mexican flags reflects an affirmation of cultural identity and resistance.
For conservative groups, the flags are evidence of “disloyalty” and fuel the narrative of an “invasion,” even though many of the protesters are U.S. citizens.
But beyond any political analysis, what is unacceptable are acts of violence or vandalism by protesters, nor are any acts of abuse of force by police or military personnel who were trained to use lethal force but not to deal with a civil society that has the right to peaceful protest.
We must pay close attention. Los Angeles could mark a turning point in the country’s history because the constitutional limits of presidential power, state autonomy, and the role of migrant communities in the future of the United States are at stake.
