The deployment of National Guard soldiers on to the streets of LA by Donald Trump was always deeply controversial – and now it has been deemed illegal, too, by a federal judge.
In late spring in Los Angeles, I observed as peaceful protests against immigration raids turned confrontational.
I watched as Waymos – self-driving cars – were set alight and people waving flags shut down one of the city’s busiest freeways. I saw government buildings spray-painted with anti-government sentiment and expletives. Some people even threw bottles at police officers in riot gear.
In exchange, I saw law enforcement deploy “flash bang” crowd control devices and fire rubber bullets into crowds, indiscriminately, on occasion.
It was chaotic at times, violent, even, in a corner of the downtown area of the city. But I didn’t witness anything that suggested police were on the brink of being overcome by rioters. I didn’t see anything that I believe justified the deployment of 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 marines to the heart of America’s second-biggest city.
But Trump sent them in anyway, against the wishes of the local government. LA mayor Karen Bass condemned the deployment as an act of political theatre and said it risked stoking tensions.
The language Trump used was, arguably, inflammatory, too. He described LA as an “invaded” and “occupied city. He spoke of “a full-blown assault on peace”, carried out by “rioters bearing foreign flags with the aim of continuing a foreign invasion of our country”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
It didn’t reflect reality. The size of the protests were modest, several thousand people marching through a handful of streets in downtown LA, a city which spans 500 square miles and has a population of almost four million.
The majority of the soldiers simply stood guard outside government buildings, often looking bored. Some of them are still here, with nothing to do. Now a judge has ruled that the operation was illegal.
US District Judge Charles Breyer said the Trump administration “used armed soldiers (whose identity was often obscured by protective armour) and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles”.
Read more from Sky News:
French government on brink of collapse
Xi hails ‘great regeneration of China’ at parade
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
In a scathing judgement, he effectively accused the White House of turning National Guard soldiers and marines into a “national police force.”
That breaches a law from 1878, barring the use of soldiers for civilian law enforcement activities.
It is a blow to what some view as the president’s ambition to federalise Democrat-run cities and deploy the National Guard in other states around the country. He had threatened to send troops to Chicago as part of an initiative he says is cracking down on crime, widening the use of National Guard troops, as seen on the streets of Washington DC.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
But since this judge ruled that the deployment of National Guard and marines to LA in June was unlawful in the way it unfolded, Trump may have to be inventive with his rationale for sending soldiers into other US cities in the future.
This legal judgement, though, is being appealed and may well be overturned. Either way, it is unlikely to stem the president’s ambition to act as national police chief.
