LA National Guard Deployment: A Deep Dive into Policing Protests

By Darius Spearman (africanelements)

Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.

The streets of Los Angeles recently witnessed the sight of National Guard troops, a strong reminder of how quickly civil unrest can bring military presence into everyday life. This deployment, undertaken in response to protests tied to immigration enforcement, has stirred deep concern and drawn unsettling comparisons to a dark chapter in American history: the Kent State tragedy. For many within our African American and African Diaspora communities, such events resonate with a painful past, echoing generations of encounters with state power and the use of force during protests. Understanding this recent deployment requires a close look at its context, its historical echoes, and its potential impact on Black and Brown people who often stand at the forefront of social justice movements.

In addition, it is important to examine the reasons behind these protests, the role of federal agencies like ICE, and the legal frameworks that permit military forces to operate within our cities. The implications stretch far beyond the immediate clashes, touching upon issues of civil liberties, community trust, and the delicate balance of power between federal and state authorities. Examining this scenario through the lens of lived experience for Black and Brown people offers crucial insights into the stakes involved.

The Drumbeat of Deployment: Unpacking LA’s National Guard Presence

The Trump administration recently sent 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles. This significant deployment happened after clashes between federal immigration agents and local protesters (The National Guard comes to Los Angeles). The stated purpose was to support federal law enforcement and to address violence occurring near immigration raid locations (The National Guard comes to Los Angeles). Such a move immediately signals an escalation, transforming civilian issues into a matter of military presence.

Moreover, this deployment occurred despite strong objections from California Governor Gavin Newsom. Governor Newsom argued that bringing in the National Guard would only increase tensions and erode the public’s trust in government institutions (Trump is deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops). For people with historical experiences of excessive force, particularly in Black communities, the sight of uniformed troops on American streets often brings more fear than reassurance. This is also why understanding the reasons behind these protests and the role of the involved agencies becomes critically important.

Immigration Enforcement and Community Tensions

This National Guard deployment in Los Angeles was a part of a wider effort by the Trump administration to severely crack down on unauthorized immigration (Over Newsom’s objections). This approach ignited increased tensions and protests, especially in California. A key player in these operations is the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, a federal law enforcement agency under the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement – Wikipedia).

ICE’s primary duty involves protecting the United States from cross-border crime and undocumented immigration by enforcing many federal laws (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement – Wikipedia). The agency employs over 20,000 people and manages an annual budget of approximately $8 billion, making it a very large law enforcement body (Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) | Wex – Law.Cornell.Edu). Its Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) section manages the detention and deportation of individuals believed to be present in the U.S. without proper authorization and who might pose a threat to public safety (ICE – Who We Are). The protests largely stem from objections to these practices, which many see as harsh or unjust, particularly actions like family separation or widespread deportations (ICE – Who We Are). In some confrontations, tear gas has been used, further escalating the conflict between authorities and protesters (Trump is deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops). For our communities, understanding what “violence” is in this context typically means assessing threats to public safety, like property damage or physical harm, which authorities use to justify such deployments.

ICE’s Reach and Resources

Echoes of Kent State: A Troubling History

The comparison of the Los Angeles National Guard deployment to the Kent State tragedy is profound and holds deep meaning for many communities, especially African Americans. This historic event took place on May 4, 1970, when National Guard members opened fire on unarmed student protesters at Kent State University (How the National Guard Became the Go-To for Dealing with Riots). These students were demonstrating against the Vietnam War and President Nixon’s decision to invade Cambodia. Sadly, the confrontation resulted in the deaths of four students, marking a horrifying moment in American history.

Furthermore, the Kent State shootings are widely seen as a turning point, symbolizing governmental overreach and the extreme risks of using military force against civilian protests (How the National Guard Became the Go-To for Dealing with Riots). The anger and further protests that followed across the United States underscored the importance of peaceful assembly and questioned the role of military involvement in domestic law enforcement. For Black Americans, who have faced the National Guard and other uniformed forces during critical moments like the Civil Rights Movement, the memories of Kent State reinforce the urgency of protecting civil liberties and ensuring accountability for those who wield state power. This legacy continues to shape how communities of color perceive deployments like the one in Los Angeles.

National Guard’s Domestic Role: Authority and Conflict

The National Guard operates as a military force that a state governor can deploy domestically during emergencies or civil unrest. Its primary function in law enforcement is to provide support to state and local authorities. However, the legal framework governing this is complex.

The Posse Comitatus Act generally prevents federal military forces from engaging in civilian law enforcement duties, but there are specific exceptions for certain emergencies or situations authorized by federal law. Governor Newsom’s strong opposition to the National Guard deployment in Los Angeles highlights the ongoing tension between state and federal authority when it comes to controlling military forces within a state (Trump is deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops). Governors typically have significant authority over their state’s National Guard units, and federal deployments without their consent can lead to disagreements due to differing priorities or legal concerns. When military forces are introduced, particularly in communities that have historically experienced over-policing and state-sanctioned violence, it can profoundly disrupt community relations and worsen existing mistrust. Local law enforcement agencies often prioritize community policing and fostering beneficial relationships, efforts that can be undermined by the presence of a militarized force.

The Guard’s Evolution and Future Concerns

The recent National Guard deployment in Los Angeles raises serious concerns about increased tensions and the appropriate role of military forces in domestic law enforcement (With troops and protests). There are legitimate fears that if public clashes continue, even more significant military involvement, such as the deployment of active-duty Marines, could be mobilized (The National Guard comes to Los Angeles). This escalation of force is especially concerning for African American communities, who have historically been targets of heightened surveillance and militarized responses during times of protest or civil unrest.

Historically, the National Guard has a lengthy record of involvement in civil disturbances. For instance, between 1965 and 1971 alone, there were over 260 deployments to manage such situations (How the National Guard Became the Go-To for Dealing with Riots). Many of these past deployments took place during the Civil Rights Movement and anti-war protests, often leading to tragic outcomes for protesters and bystanders alike. These events underscore the critical need for careful consideration and restraint when deploying military personnel in civilian areas.

National Guard Historical Deployments (1965-1971)

The National Guard itself has undergone significant changes over time. It has become a diverse force, with nearly 20 percent of its members being women and approximately 25 percent identifying as people of color (How the National Guard Became the Go-To for Dealing with Riots). While diversity within military ranks is a step forward, it does not lessen the historical anxieties or the potential for negative outcomes when troops are deployed against civilian populations. The legacy of racial injustice and the disproportionate impact of military force on communities of color emphasize the ongoing relevance of these conversations. The outcomes of such deployments can vary greatly; while some may help maintain public order, others can worsen tensions and erode trust, particularly when local law enforcement efforts are undermined. The scenario serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing challenges in balancing public safety with civil liberties.

Current National Guard Diversity

A Call for Justice and Reflection

The deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles, in response to protests against immigration enforcement, is more than just a local news story. It is a moment that compels us to reflect on historical patterns of state-sanctioned force and their particular impact on marginalized communities. The comparisons to the Kent State tragedy serve as a stark warning about the potential consequences when military power confronts civilian dissent. For our African American and African Diaspora kin, such deployments activate deep-seated anxieties rooted in centuries of fighting for freedom and safety against oppressive systems.

Finally, understanding the intricate roles of agencies like ICE, the legal dance between federal and state authorities over military deployments, and the historical precedents of civil unrest are crucial steps. This understanding enables us to advocate more effectively for equitable treatment, robust civil liberties, and peaceful resolutions to societal disagreements. It is imperative that we continue to critically examine these events and push for policies that protect all people, ensuring that the lessons of history, especially those learned at such a great cost, are never forgotten and always guide our path forward.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Darius Spearman has been a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College since 2007. He is the author of several books, including Between The Color Lines: A History of African Americans on the California Frontier Through 1890. You can visit Darius online at africanelements.org.