Tag Archives: Gavin Newsom

Guard Troops

Pentagon Retreats as Guard Troops Exit Los Angeles Amid Immigration Unrest

Leave a reply

In a dramatic turn of events, the Trump administration has begun pulling back California National Guard troops from Los Angeles, marking a partial retreat from its heavily criticized military response to immigration protests. The sudden withdrawal of 2,000 soldiers, deployed amidst raids on local businesses, hints at a quiet shift in federal strategy. As tensions simmer and political voices clash, questions now arise about the future of the remaining forces, the use of federal power, and the fine line between public safety and political theatre—unfolding under a sky still heavy with unrest.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

  • 2,000 California National Guard troops withdrawn from Los Angeles by Trump administration

  • Original deployment of 4,000 troops was in response to protests over immigration raids

  • Federal raids targeted farms, restaurants, and hardware stores in the Los Angeles area

  • Governor Newsom and Mayor Bass criticize federal overreach and call for complete troop withdrawal

  • Trump claimed LA would be “burning” without military presence

  • Federal appeals court allowed Trump to retain control over Guard deployment

  • One brigade remains in the city with no clear timeline for full demobilization

  • Trump silent on withdrawal after returning to Washington from Pittsburgh

In a move signaling a shift in federal strategy, the Trump administration has begun withdrawing half of the National Guard troops it had deployed to Los Angeles in response to weeks of protests triggered by aggressive immigration enforcement. The withdrawal, affecting nearly 2,000 members of the California National Guard, marks a partial rollback of President Donald Trump’s militarized approach to civil unrest across Southern California.

The protests erupted after a wave of immigration raids conducted by federal authorities targeted farms, restaurants, and hardware stores throughout the Los Angeles area. Tensions quickly escalated, prompting the administration to deploy 4,000 California National Guardsmen on June 7, alongside 700 U.S. Marines tasked with protecting federal properties. The scale and nature of the deployment drew swift and intense backlash from California’s Democratic leaders, who questioned the necessity and legality of the president’s actions.

Pentagon officials stated that the decision to release half of the deployed troops came after assessing the ground situation.

“Thanks to our troops who stepped up to answer the call, the lawlessness in Los Angeles is subsiding,”
said Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell in a statement issued on July 15.

“As such, the Secretary has ordered the release of 2,000 California National Guardsmen (79th IBCT) from the federal protection mission.”

The military deployment was widely seen as a federal show of force amid the unrest. But as demonstrations continued—many of them peaceful—critics increasingly accused the administration of overstepping its authority and fueling tension rather than defusing it. President Trump, defending the original deployment, insisted that federal intervention was essential to maintain order.

“Los Angeles would be burning right now,”
Trump previously claimed,
“if not for the military presence.”

Despite this, Governor Gavin Newsom, who has consistently opposed the militarization of the state’s streets, reiterated his call for a full withdrawal of National Guard personnel.

“While nearly 2,000 of them are starting to demobilize, the remaining guards members continue without a mission, without direction, and without any hopes of returning to help their communities,”
Newsom said in a formal statement.

“We call on Trump and the Department of Defense to end this theater and send everyone home now.”

The governor had earlier taken legal action against the Trump administration over the federalized guard deployment. Newsom and other state officials maintained that the National Guard should serve state emergencies—not be drawn into federal political conflicts.

Meanwhile, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass praised the decision to scale back the military presence. Bass, who had joined legal and civic efforts to oppose the deployment, viewed the withdrawal as a testament to community resilience.

“This happened because the people of Los Angeles stood united and stood strong,”
Bass declared.

“We organized peaceful protests, we came together at rallies, we took the Trump administration to court—all of this led to today’s retreat.”

She added that the city’s fight was far from over.

“We will not stop making our voices heard until this ends, not just here in LA, but throughout our country,”
she said.

According to a Defense Department official who spoke on condition of anonymity, the withdrawn troops belong to one brigade, while another brigade—consisting of several thousand soldiers—remains stationed in the region. Though critics continue to press for full withdrawal, the Pentagon has not indicated a specific timeline for the return of the remaining guardsmen.

The partial drawdown comes even as a federal appeals court ruled in June that the Trump administration could retain operational control over the National Guard under the current mission.

Trump, returning to the White House from a trip to Pittsburgh on Tuesday night, did not respond to a reporter’s question about the withdrawal decision. The president walked past the press pool without offering comment, maintaining silence on a development that has drawn national attention.

As protests continue to ripple across the country over immigration policy and federal enforcement tactics, the events in Los Angeles reflect a broader debate about the limits of presidential authority and the role of the military in managing domestic unrest.

The Pentagon’s decision to withdraw a significant portion of National Guard troops from Los Angeles marks a pivotal moment in the unfolding immigration protest narrative. As military boots leave city streets and political pressure intensifies, the focus shifts to the broader implications of federal power in local crises. While the administration maintains its stance on law and order, the public and state leaders continue to challenge the necessity—and legality—of such deployments. In this evolving landscape, the line between protection and provocation remains thin, and the final act is far from over.

Appreciating your time:

We appreciate you taking the time to read our most recent article! We appreciate your opinions and would be delighted to hear them. We value your opinions as we work hard to make improvements and deliver material that you find interesting.

Post a Comment:

In the space provided for comments below, please share your ideas, opinions, and suggestions. We can better understand your interests thanks to your input, which also guarantees that the material we offer will appeal to you. Get in Direct Contact with Us: Please use our “Contact Us” form if you would like to speak with us or if you have any special questions. We are open to questions, collaborations, and, of course, criticism. To fill out our contact form, click this link.

Stay Connected:

Don’t miss out on future updates and articles.

Disneyland Diplomacy Turns Sour as Newsom Slams Vance Over Immigration Woes

Leave a reply

A weekend family trip by Vice President JD Vance to Disneyland has spiraled into a sharp political face-off with California Governor Gavin Newsom, who accused the administration of tearing migrant families apart even as Vance enjoyed family time in the Golden State. As immigration raids shake California—leaving one dead, children detained, and protests erupting—Newsom’s words struck a nerve. With troops on city streets and child labor probes underway, the cheerful amusement park backdrop now clashes with a stormy national debate, where family smiles meet fierce scrutiny over federal immigration moves.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

  • California Gov. Gavin Newsom publicly criticizes VP JD Vance’s Disneyland trip amid immigration raids

  • Vance responds briefly without addressing family separation concerns

  • ICE operations on two California farms lead to hundreds of detentions and one death

  • Ten undocumented minors, including eight unaccompanied, discovered in Camarillo

  • Federal authorities investigating potential child labor violations

  • National Guard and Marines deployed to Los Angeles to support ICE amid protests

  • Newsom denounces military presence and enforcement tactics in California

In a moment where politics intersected sharply with personal leisure, California Governor Gavin Newsom and Vice President JD Vance found themselves locked in a public exchange over immigration policy, triggered by Vance’s recent family trip to Disneyland in Anaheim.

Vice President Vance, accompanied by his wife Usha and their two children, was seen enjoying the popular California theme park over the weekend. However, what might have been a quiet family getaway quickly gained political weight after Governor Newsom took to social media to criticize the administration’s ongoing immigration enforcement actions, particularly those impacting migrant families.

While not naming specific events, Newsom’s post drew a sharp contrast between Vance’s family moments and those families being separated across the country due to recent immigration raids.

“Hope you enjoy your family time, @JDVance,” Newsom wrote in a pointed message on X (formerly Twitter).
“The families you’re tearing apart certainly won’t.”

Vance, for his part, kept his response terse and direct, sidestepping the governor’s broader criticism.

“Had a great time, thanks,” the vice president replied, neither elaborating on the immigration policy nor responding to the accusations of family separation.

The exchange came at a time when tensions surrounding immigration enforcement in California were already running high. Vance’s visit followed closely on the heels of controversial ICE raids at two agricultural sites in the state—operations that saw the detention of several hundred individuals suspected of being undocumented immigrants.

The raids, which took place at farms in Central and Southern California, have drawn sharp criticism from immigrant rights groups and sparked public protests in several cities, including Anaheim—the very location of the vice president’s vacation. Demonstrators held signs and chanted outside the amusement park, objecting not only to the presence of Vance but also to what they described as a widening humanitarian crisis.

Federal officials confirmed that one person was killed during the operations, and several others sustained critical injuries. U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott disclosed that ten minors without legal immigration status were found at a farm in Camarillo—eight of them unaccompanied by adults. Authorities have now opened a formal investigation into the farm’s labor practices, citing concerns over potential child labor violations.

“The presence of unaccompanied minors at these sites is alarming,” Scott said in a brief statement.
“Our teams are working to ensure the safety of these children while we investigate possible labor law violations.”

The timing of the raids was not lost on the public or the press. For weeks, activists across Southern California have been holding demonstrations against federal immigration enforcement, particularly targeting businesses and farms believed to employ undocumented workers. These protests intensified after reports surfaced of harsh conditions and aggressive detainment practices.

In response, the administration ordered the deployment of National Guard troops and Marines to assist federal agents in Los Angeles and surrounding regions. This move drew a strong rebuke from Governor Newsom, who argued that militarizing immigration enforcement only deepens public mistrust and fear among immigrant communities.

“Deploying troops on our own streets in response to peaceful protests and family workers sends the wrong message,” Newsom previously stated.
“This is not who we are as a state.”

With the debate now playing out at the national level—amplified by the involvement of the vice president—the focus returns to the broader implications of immigration policy, enforcement strategy, and the treatment of families caught in its grip.

As politics and policy continue to collide with personal moments and public optics, this latest flashpoint between state leadership and federal power underscores just how deeply immigration remains embedded in America’s social and political fabric.

What began as a simple family retreat for Vice President JD Vance has swiftly unfolded into a national flashpoint, laying bare the deepening divide over immigration enforcement in the United States. Governor Gavin Newsom’s sharp remarks have reignited scrutiny of federal policies that many argue fracture families and fuel unrest. As protests swell and investigations unfold, the clash between leisure and leadership serves as a stark reminder: in today’s America, even a vacation can stir political tempests when the lives of vulnerable communities hang in the balance.

Appreciating your time:

We appreciate you taking the time to read our most recent article! We appreciate your opinions and would be delighted to hear them. We value your opinions as we work hard to make improvements and deliver material that you find interesting.

Post a Comment:

In the space provided for comments below, please share your ideas, opinions, and suggestions. We can better understand your interests thanks to your input, which also guarantees that the material we offer will appeal to you. Get in Direct Contact with Us: Please use our “Contact Us” form if you would like to speak with us or if you have any special questions. We are open to questions, collaborations, and, of course, criticism. To fill out our contact form, click this link.

Stay Connected:

Don’t miss out on future updates and articles.