Trump Got the Fight He Wanted. Did It Turn Out the Way He Expected?

Immigration raids and mass detentions.
Federal forces deployed to an American city.
Supported by
On June 7, Cruz was walking to buy tamales with her sister in San Bernardino, Calif., when she saw a truck full of landscapers being detained by what appeared to be law-enforcement officers in unmarked uniforms. Cruz, a 28-year-old nurse's assistant, is a first-generation Mexican American who was born in California, but her husband is an undocumented immigrant who worked on a similar landscaping crew. (She asked to be identified by only her last name for her family's safety.) When the Trump administration's raids targeting undocumented immigrants reached the city, word of the arrests spread quickly, but Cruz had not taken the news too seriously until she saw one for herself.
The next week, on the morning of June 13, her husband called to say he'd been working on Waterman Avenue when a truck full of federal agents pulled up. They appeared to be from Homeland Security Investigations, one of the many federal agencies now scouring Southern California for undocumented immigrants. When an officer asked him if he had a visa, he told the truth. Minutes later, he was in the back of a government vehicle, bound for the Metropolitan Detention Center, a federal facility, in Los Angeles.
For nearly a week, such raids had spurred small protests in several cities in the region. Federal agents fired less-lethal munitions at protesters; shortly after, President Trump, casting images of the clashes as evidence of citywide anarchy wrought by undocumented immigrants and their defenders, announced that he was federalizing control of the California National Guard and deploying it to address 'lawlessness.' After protests gave way to rioting on the blocks around the detention center on the night of Sunday, June 8, he announced he was deploying U.S. Marines.
By the morning after the arrest of Cruz's husband, a small number of Marines — deployed to an American state over the public opposition of its elected government — stood around the loading dock of the detention center with M27 rifles and riot shields. They stood alongside soldiers from the California National Guard and officers whose vest patches said 'POLICE — DHS,' denoting their affiliation with the Department of Homeland Security.
Since the George Floyd demonstrations of 2020, Trump had vocally supported deploying the military to quell violent protests on American streets — a move he had flinched at doing at the time but now was at last making. It was a natural conclusion of the story Trump told on the campaign trail last year about what had happened to America — what his enemies had done to America — and what he would do, if elected again, to restore it. 'Order will be restored,' Trump wrote, 'the Illegals will be expelled, and Los Angeles will be set free.'
Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

San Francisco Chronicle​

an hour ago

• San Francisco Chronicle​

California will do anything to protect immigrants — except build them housing

Over the past several weeks, hundreds of thousands of Californians have taken to the streets to protest the Trump administration's increasingly authoritarian efforts to deport the state's undocumented population. There's a moral imperative behind these protests; the vast majority of the people being targeted by federal agents are law-abiding workers with no criminal records. There's a practical one, too: This state cannot function without its migrant workers, particularly our agricultural sector. It isn't just that undocumented workers will accept lower wages than their American counterparts. Farming is hard, skilled labor. Absent changes to federal immigration policy that would allow and incentivize more migrants to come here legally, California doesn't have the trained workforce it needs to feed itself and the nation. (We accounted for 41% of the country's vegetable sales in 2022.) And so, Californians and our politicians have rightly gone to battle with President Donald Trump. Yet as supportive as this editorial board is of these efforts, we'd be remiss if we didn't call something out: This state needs to become as passionate about housing our essential workers as it is about fighting Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It's been just over two and a half years since the deadly shootings in Half Moon Bay put the Dickensian living conditions of California's farmworkers — the vast majority of whom are undocumented — on the national radar. For decades, California had allowed its migrant workers to live in overcrowded, mold-filled housing with bacteria-ridden drinking water. That's if it housed them at all. What's changed? Not nearly enough, according to San Mateo County Supervisor Ray Mueller, whose district includes the site of the 2023 massacre. Building housing on farmland in his district has proven to be a logistical challenge amid drainage issues, sewage concerns and access to drinkable water. Yet trying to build worker housing off-site hits an even more intractable roadblock. 'The coastal community is, by a large majority, supportive of farmworkers,' he said. 'The opposition you run into is around density.' San Mateo County is hardly unique in this regard. In Marin County, for instance, an effort to build housing for the workers, many undocumented, being displaced by the closure of ranches in the Point Reyes National Seashore has been met with a lawsuit by NIMBY groups. This is, of course, unacceptable. And yet, state and local rules still too often empower obstructionism. Mueller said the arduous progress San Mateo County has made in building farmworker housing was mostly achieved using emergency powers that streamlined the usual permitting processes. 'The state was wonderful in getting our project moving,' Mueller said. 'We just need to do that at scale across the state.' We're nowhere close. In 2024, California lawmakers passed a measure to exempt farmworker housing up to 150 units from review under the California Environmental Quality Act. However, this streamlining applied to only two counties: Santa Clara and Santa Cruz. A bill in the state Legislature, AB457 from Assembly Member Esmerelda Soria, D-Merced, would expand those streamlining measures to Fresno, Madera and Merced counties. Over 40% of the state's land is used for agriculture. We're never going to get anywhere with a drip-drop of county-by-county CEQA carve-outs. Assembly Member Damon Connolly, D-San Rafael, told the editorial board he'd be supportive of an effort to expand CEQA streamlining to his district and perhaps even statewide. But even that wouldn't be enough, Mueller said. For many Bay Area farming communities, the California Coastal Commission has its own separate and arduous permitting process. Without streamlining bills to cover this and CEQA, little progress will be made. And now an even greater challenge comes from the Trump administration. Farmworker-specific housing makes easy pickings for federal raids. Mueller says he fears his efforts to build new farmworker housing may have inadvertently 'put a target on the back' of the people he's spent years trying to help. This fear isn't theoretical. Gov. Gavin Newsom's office recently issued a press release saying that federal deportation authorities requested and received the addresses and immigration status of Medi-Cal recipients after the state expanded health insurance benefits to low-income undocumented workers. Tailored government efforts for the undocumented risk creating a paper trail that puts them in danger. 'It is clear that we must reassess our programs to ensure we are doing all we can to protect the personal information of our community,' incoming state Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón, D-Santa Barbara, told the editorial board. We don't have the answer to this quandary on the health care front. But California can do something for migrant workers as it relates to housing — something Limón and too many other California politicians have been reluctant to do. Make it easier to build. AB457 is an admission from legislators that CEQA creates onerous and unnecessary impediments to development. Yet housing streamlining bills such as SB79 from San Francisco state Sen. Scott Wiener, which would exempt developments near transit from CEQA review, provided they comply with local affordable housing mandates and other criteria, are receiving immense political pushback. Undocumented renters in California have virtually the same rights as everyone else in the private rental market under the Immigrant Tenant Protection Act. And landlords are prohibited from disclosing, or typically even asking about, immigration status. But without an adequate housing supply, those protections go to waste. Can most undocumented workers afford to buy a shiny new condo? Almost certainly not. But they could potentially move into older units that open up when other renters decide to buy. And they certainly could benefit from the development of new mother-in-law units — such as those that might have been built had cities like San Diego not just rolled back their accessory dwelling unit laws in the face of community opposition. If California is willing to fight the federal government to keep its undocumented residents here, it should also be willing to fight to ensure they don't live in squalor.

Yahoo

an hour ago

• Yahoo

Iran's options against foreign aggression include closing Strait of Hormuz, lawmaker says

DUBAI (Reuters) -Iran could shut the Strait of Hormuz as a way of hitting back against its enemies, a senior lawmaker said on Thursday, though a second member of parliament said this would only happen if Tehran's vital interests were endangered. Iran has in the past threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz to traffic in retaliation for Western pressure, and shipping sources said on Wednesday that commercial ships were avoiding Iran's waters around the strait. "Iran has numerous options to respond to its enemies and uses such options based on what the situation is," the semi-official Mehr news agency quoted Behnam Saeedi, a member of the parliament's National Security Committee presidium as saying. "Closing the Strait of Hormuz is one of the potential options for Iran," he said. Mehr later quoted another lawmaker, Ali Yazdikhah, as saying Iran would continue to allow free shipping in the Strait and in the Gulf so long as its vital national interests were not at risk. "If the United States officially and operationally enters the war in support of the Zionists (Israel), it is the legitimate right of Iran in view of pressuring the U.S. and Western countries to disrupt their oil trade's ease of transit," Yazdikhah said. President Donald Trump is keeping the world guessing about whether the United States will join Israel's bombardment of Iranian nuclear sites. Tehran has so far refrained from closing the Strait because all regional states and many other countries benefit from it, Yazdikhah added. "It is better than no country supports Israel to confront Iran. Iran's enemies know well that we have tens of ways to make the Strait of Hormuz unsafe and this option is feasible for us," the parliamentarian said. The Strait of Hormuz lies between Oman and Iran and is the primary export route for Gulf producers such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, and Kuwait. About 20% of the world's daily oil consumption — around 18 million barrels — passes through the Strait of Hormuz, which is only about 33 km (21 miles) wide at its narrowest point.

Axios

an hour ago

• Axios

Gen Z's stunning partisan split

America's youngest voters are far likelier to vote Republican than their older siblings. Why it matters: Generation Z may be better understood as two distinct sub-generations — divided, in large part, by how they experienced the shock of COVID-19. Stunning stat: The latest iteration of the Yale Youth Poll found extraordinary 18-point partisan gap between younger and older members of Generation Z. When asked whether they'd pick a Democratic or Republican candidate in the midterm elections, voters age 22–29 favored Democrats by 6.4 points, while those age 18–21 favored Republicans by 11.7 points. Zoom in: Rachel Janfaza — a youth political analyst and writer of The Up and Up, a newsletter about Gen Z — breaks down"Gen Z 1.0" and "Gen Z 2.0" based on how old they were during pandemic lockdowns and the rise of TikTok. Gen Z 1.0 graduated high school before COVID. They quarantined in college dorms or apartments with friends and came of age during President Trump's first term — shaped by the Women's March, gun control rallies, and the Black Lives Matter movement. Gen Z 2.0 was in high school or middle school during lockdowns, isolating at home with family and cut off from peers. The backlash to COVID-era policies pushed many younger voters right. And because they entered adulthood under President Biden, "counter-culture" often meant aligning with MAGA, Janfaza says. Between the lines: Older Gen Z-ers came of age on platforms like Instagram and Twitter. Younger Gen Z-ers are native to TikTok. 9% of young adults said they got their news from TikTok in 2020, according to Pew Research. By 2024, that figure had surged to 39%. Trump's campaign seized on that shift early, reaching young voters on TikTok months before Biden or then–Vice President Harris. Many younger men were already plugged into content from MAGA-friendly figures like Theo Von, Joe Rogan and Dave Portnoy, who went on to host Trump on their platforms. Zoom out: As a whole, Americans under 30 still lean Democratic. But the partisan split within Gen Z came into sharp focus during the 2024 election. White men under 20 voted for Trump at higher rates than their late-20s counterparts — and even more than white Baby Boomer men, according to research from Democratic polling group Blue Rose Research. What to watch: Since taking power, Trump has lost significant ground with 18 to 29-year-olds in particular, according to an analysis of polls by data journalists G. Elliott Morris.