U.S. Marines arrive in Los Angeles as city prepares for weekend protests

LOS ANGELES — A handful of U.S. Marines stood guard outside the Wilshire Federal Building on Friday afternoon, screening visitors to the installation.
The deployment of the Marines — joining National Guardsmen already stationed there — marked a rare instance of domestic use of American military forces in response to ongoing demonstrations against President Donald Trump's crackdown on undocumented immigrants.
The National Guard has been tasked with protecting federal buildings and accompanying federal agents during immigration operations.
The protests began on June 6 in response to deportation raids that took place in Los Angeles' Fashion District, and escalated to property damage and clashes with police over the weekend. In response, the Trump Administration mobilized 2,000 National Guardsmen — a number which has since doubled — on June 7, then days later summoned 700 Marines from the 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines stationed at Twentynine Palms in San Bernardino County.
Federal immigration agents have continued to conduct raids, and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said at a news conference Thursday that agents have since showed up at schools, emergency rooms and homeless shelters.
Protests have continued daily since the deportation raids began, mostly clustered around the Edward R. Roybal Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse in the city's downtown. Demonstrations have remained mostly peaceful, though protesters have at times clashed with ICE agents attempting to conduct raids in other parts of the city. Since the protests began, Los Angeles Police said they have arrested more than 160 people, and another two dozen people were arrested by the California Highway Patrol and the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
On Friday, the Los Angeles Police Department put out a statement warning protesters against prohibited items at Saturday's No Kings rally, including laser pointers, wooden sticks or plastic/metal pipes, posters or banners not made out of soft material, baseball bats, bear spray or pepper spray, projectile launchers like slingshots, weapons such as firearms or knives, water cannons, glass bottles, shields, open flames, or bricks or other items to be thrown.
The last time members of the American military were deployed in a similar fashion was more than 30 years ago, when Gov. Pete Wilson asked President George H.W. Bush to invoke the Insurrection Act in response to riots that broke out throughout Los Angeles after the police officers charged with the brutal beating of Rodney King were acquitted.
Trump's mobilization of the National Guard without Gov. Gavin Newsom's consent marked the first time since a president had done so in 60 years, when President Lyndon B. Johnson sent National Guardsmen to Alabama to protect civil rights demonstrators marching to Montgomery.
Army Maj. Gen. Scott Sherman, who is overseeing the operations in Los Angeles, previously told reporters the service members 'will not participate in law enforcement activities.'
Initially, military officials said the troops would be tasked with guarding federal buildings, though they later said service members would also be authorized to accompany and protect ICE agents on deportation raids, and to detain anyone interfering with those operations.
Newsom and Bass have excoriated the federal mobilization, with Newsom calling the deployment a 'brazen abuse of power' that 'inflamed a combustible situation' and endangered Angelenos, law enforcement and service members alike.
'Trump is pulling a military dragnet across Los Angeles,' Newsom said in a video address to his constituents. 'It's weakness masquerading as strength.'
The state won a court order Thursday handing control of the National Guard back to Newsom, but an appeals court stayed the ruling until after it hears the case Tuesday.
Also on Thursday, Bass blasted the ICE raids as a 'pretext to federalize the National Guard' and said the deployment of U.S. Marines into an American city 'will target our own citizens.'
Not everyone was opposed to their presence, however. On Friday afternoon, Lavictor Goldsmith, 52, sat on his porch at an apartment complex across the street, surveying the troops as they stood guard outside of the federal building.
'They're a blessing here. Anyone could pull up and shoot the FBI. We can't have that,' said Goldsmith, who said he served 10 years in the U.S. Air Force as a boom operator.
'I hope everything will settle down by the end of summer.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

36 minutes ago

• Yahoo

An inflation surge could swamp Trump's presidency. This one investment will keep your money safe.

America's financial outlook has darkened under President Donald Trump's leadership. All three major credit-rating agencies now rank U.S. federal debt one notch below triple-A, and Jamie Dimon, the chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase JPM, has warned of a crack in the U.S. bond market. With the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield BX:TMUBMUSD10Y at 4.4% on Wednesday and the 30-year rate BX:TMUBMUSD30Y at 4.9%, holders of nominal U.S. debt should be prepared for significant real losses. The principal risk is not U.S. sovereign default, but rather unexpected increases in medium- and long-term interest rates, owing to market expectations of higher inflation. Fiscal policy under Trump is unsustainable, as it was under former President Joe Biden — but even more so if the Trump administration's 'big, beautiful' budget passes in anything like its current form. 'I'm at my wit's end': My niece paid off her husband's credit card but fell behind on her taxes. How can I help her? Why the biggest-ever 'triple witching' options expiration could deliver a jolt to Friday's trading Israel-Iran clash delivers a fresh shock to investors. History suggests this is the move to make. 'I prepaid our mom's rent for a year': My sister is a millionaire and never helps our mother. How do I cut her out of her will? I'm 75 and have a reverse mortgage. Should I pay it off with my $200K savings — and live off Social Security instead? The January 2025 Financial Report of the United States Government makes this clear. The U.S. ratio of federal debt held by the public to GDP at the end of the 2024 fiscal year was around 98%, although $4.7 trillion of the $28.3 trillion in federal debt was held by the Federal Reserve — meaning it is erroneously categorized as held by the 'public,' when really the central bank's accounts should be consolidated with those of the federal government. Under current policy and based on the report's assumptions, federal debt held by the public would reach 535% of GDP by 2099. Stabilizing the U.S. debt-to-GDP ratio requires that the annual primary federal deficit (excluding interest payments) fall by an average of 4.3% of GDP over the next 75 years. And yet, the federal deficit and primary deficit were 6.4% and 3.3% of GDP, respectively, in fiscal-year 2024 — far above what can be justified with the economy near full employment. Read: America's debt is at a breaking point — Trump's tax bill might just push it over the edge With the U.S. Congress so dysfunctional, no one has any faith that it will deliver the required deficit reduction. Democrats do not do permanent spending cuts, and Republicans do not do permanent tax increases. The federal government does own about 28% of U.S. land (roughly 640 million acres), as well as other real commercial assets that could yield significant additional nontax revenues if properly managed. But neither party — nor even the misnamed Department of Government Efficiency — appears to have considered this option, so the federal deficit as a share of GDP is likely to rise over the next few years. With no foreseeable improvement in fiscal policy, there are two possible outcomes. First, the U.S. government could default. There has long been a small, but recurrent, risk of a technical, short-lived default if Congress fails to raise, suspend, extend, revise or abolish the federal debt ceiling on time. Fortunately, it has averted this scenario 78 times since 1960, and we expect it to continue doing so. As matters stand, the debt ceiling (including debt held by federal agencies) is set at $36.1 trillion, and debt subject to the limit is also $36.1 trillion. If needed, the Treasury has a highly liquid asset (the Treasury General Account held with the Fed) worth $332.9 billion that it can use to meet its obligations, and it may temporarily use 'extraordinary measures to continue to borrow additional amounts for a limited time.' The second, more likely possibility is that the Fed will monetize enough federal debt to prevent default. Since U.S. federal debt is serviced in dollars, 'printing money' is always an option. But, as the Fed well knows, a large-scale monetization of federal debt would result in significantly above-target inflation. We believe the Fed will do this without its operational independence being revoked by Trump. To get the Federal Open Market Committee to do something it does not want to do, the president would need to control the majority of its 12 voting members. These include the seven members of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors and five (out of 12) regional Federal Reserve Bank presidents who vote at any given FOMC meeting. Neither the president nor Congress can appoint or fire Federal Reserve Bank presidents. The Board of Governors must approve them, and only the board can remove them. The president nominates board members, but the Senate must confirm them. Board members' current term limits imply that, assuming none are fired, Trump will have the opportunity to nominate only two new members. True, with the power to fire board members 'for cause' — meaning 'inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance' — Trump could try to replace a majority of the members with loyalists. But this seems unlikely. Whether the 'for cause' criterion has been met will be contested in the courts, and the Senate would have to confirm Trump's appointees. Read: Trump's pick to replace Fed Chair Powell could rock your mortgage and retirement. Buckle up. Similarly, Congress could revise the Federal Reserve Act to replace the Fed's monetary-policy objectives with a mandate to buy or sell sovereign debt according to the wishes of the Treasury. But this, too, is unlikely. And the same goes for a scenario in which the Treasury sets a rapidly depreciating exchange-rate target for the dollar DXY that can be achieved only through large-scale Fed purchases of U.S. public debt that generate high inflation. However, fiscal dominance — indeed, fiscal capture — is very likely, because the need to avoid a domestic and global financial crisis will force the FOMC's hand. It will do whatever is necessary to prevent a U.S. government default, because the Fed's financial-stability mandate (the Financial Stability Act of 2010 mentions the Fed 179 times) undoubtedly trumps its monetary-policy mandate of maintaining maximum employment, stable prices and moderate long-term interest rates. The Fed cannot credibly threaten to refuse to monetize debt and deficits to compel fiscal retrenchment by the Treasury, let alone Congress. Thus, the Fed will have no choice but to engage in sovereign-debt purchases that it knows to be incompatible with its monetary-policy objectives. With nominal interest rates for medium- and long-term U.S. sovereign debt far below the levels consistent with realistic expectations of future inflation, serious capital losses on nominal debt instruments (public and private) are likely. The inflation surge could be no more than three years away. As the prospect of fiscal capture comes into view, investing in Treasury inflation-protected securities (TIPS) and other indexed public and private debt instruments will become increasingly attractive. Willem H. Buiter, a former chief economist at Citibank and former member of the Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England, is an independent economic adviser. Anne C. Sibert is professor emerita of economics at Birkbeck, University of London. This commentary — 'U.S. Debt Holders Should Brace for Impact' — is published with the permission of Project Syndicate. Read: 'You are going to panic,' Jamie Dimon tells regulators about what will happen when the bond market cracks More: What's at stake if world's most powerful market finally buckles after decades-long U.S. debt splurge 20 companies in the S&P 500 whose investors have gained the greatest rewards from stock buybacks Israel-Iran conflict poses three challenges for stocks that could slam market by up to 20%, warns RBC I'm 51, earn $129K and have $165K in my 401(k). Can I afford to retire when my husband, 59, draws Social Security at 62? 'It might be another Apple or Microsoft': My wife invested $100K in one stock and it exploded 1,500%. Do we sell? Why the stock market will be performing a high-wire act over the summer, according to UBS

Yahoo

36 minutes ago

• Yahoo

I'm an Economist: 4 Questions To Ask About Tariffs (and 2 Not To Worry About)

President Trump's tariffs has been dominating headlines for months now, prompting concerns about how they may affect everything from grocery bills to investment accounts. While it's tempting to react to every trade policy shift, not all impacts are immediate or relevant to everyday consumers. Trending Now: Try This: Here's a quick breakdown on Trump's tariffs, why they have been implemented, and what everyone knows so far: Tariffs are taxes charged on imported goods. For example, a 10% tariff means a $10 product would have a $1 tax on top, which would make your total $11. President Trump has doubled U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum imports to 50%. There is a 25% tax on imports from both Canada and Mexico and a 10% levy on Canadian energy. Though there has been a lot of back and forth as to the amount, the current tariff on goods from China is 20%. The White House also implemented a 20% tariff on most European Union goods, but halved it to 10% until July 8, 2025, to allow time for trade talks. Trump is mandating that most countries have a 10% 'baseline' tariff on all goods sent to the U.S. GOBankingRates spoke with Jared Ashworth, Ph.D., assistant professor of economics at Pepperdine Graziadio Business School, to determine the four questions you should be asking about tariffs — and the two things you shouldn't worry about. Most consumers don't need to follow every twist in trade policy. However, they do need to understand how tariffs might affect their wallets, savings and investments. Here are four practical financial questions worth asking right now. Uncertainty is the biggest concern about the tariffs. 'In recent months, there have been significant swings in what the actual tariffs will be,' Ashworth said. 'Many of these tariffs could also be rolled back if, for example, a target country changes its trade policy.' This has caused a lot of uncertainty. 'As a result, financial markets have become much more uncertain. Standard advice about risk and uncertainty, like considering your risk aversion or how close you are to retirement, matters even more in this context,' Ashworth said. Many retailers have already or will likely adjust their prices quickly in anticipation of the tariffs. According to Wired, the price of refrigerator staples like apple juice is already increasing, as most apple juice that Americans drink comes from China. Apple juice is just one of the many goods American consumers count on that will likely become more expensive due to the tariffs. 'The goal of tariffs is to allow domestic firms to charge higher prices and compete with the raised prices of international firms,' Ashworth said. Consumers are making big purchases in anticipation of the tariffs. For example, sales of cars and motor vehicles parts were up by 8.8% from last year, according to U.S. Census Bureau data. 'Most people won't be able to gain by making major changes based on broad news,' Ashworth said. 'For example, with cars, even though the vehicles currently on lots weren't directly affected by tariffs, the rush to buy before the tariffs take full effect has driven up prices.' According to USA Today, the manufacturing, construction, transportation, warehousing, retail and supply chain sectors are most likely to be affected by tariffs and are paring back on hiring. Ashworth said individuals should consider shifting investments to companies less affected by tariffs, even though the market expectations are already reflected in stock prices. Healthcare and financial services are among the sectors that are still poised to grow or remain stable, per USA Today. Tariffs can feel like a threat to every part of one's financial life, but not all impacts are immediate or personal. Here's what to set aside for now. The uncertainty about the impact of the tariffs also means that it's hard to know what will happen next or how long the effects will last. 'While the U.S. is part of a globally connected economy, imports and exports still make up a relatively small percentage of the GDP (Gross Domestic Product),' Ashworth said. 'The idea of a full-out trade war often depends on how it's framed, which is part of the problem.' For example, tariffs are viewed as either a measure that protects domestic industries or a policy that punishes countries engaging in unfair trade. 'But those goals can be contradictory,' Ashworth said. 'If tariffs are a punishment, then the once the country reforms its trade practices, we're expected to drop the tariffs, potentially ending the protection for domestic industries.' It's easy to feel powerless when trade policy shifts overnight. But for most consumers, the best response isn't control; it's adaptability. 'While tariffs can affect exchange rates and relative interest rates, most of those impacts aren't something everyday people can or should try to take advantage of,' Ashworth said. 'Unless you have direct influence over national policy, there's little you can do to change it. Instead, focus on staying flexible in this period of heightened uncertainty.' While there isn't much that can be done when it comes to government policy, consumers can take other actions to protect themselves and their finances. 'As with any pressure that raises prices, find ways to reduce consumption and spend less. While tariffs might contribute to a recession, individuals should still prioritize cutting back on spending and increasing savings,' Ashworth said. Caitlyn Moorhead contributed to the reporting for this article. More From GOBankingRates Clever Ways To Save Money That Actually Work in 2025 This article originally appeared on I'm an Economist: 4 Questions To Ask About Tariffs (and 2 Not To Worry About) Sign in to access your portfolio

Newsweek

40 minutes ago

• Newsweek

White House Rose Garden Bulldozed as Work Starts Paving It Over

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Construction has commenced on projects at the White House ordered by President Donald Trump, with the Rose Garden having been bulldozed as work begins to pave it over. Why It Matters Since his return to the White House, Trump has transformed the Oval Office, making some of the most significant changes to the room's appearance in modern presidential history. There have been gold medallions, gold vermeil figurines, gold eagles and gilded Rococo mirrors added. It has also been reported that Trump wishes to build a ballroom in the White House, similar to the one he has at his Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago. A labor crew works in the White House Rose Garden on June 9, 2025. A labor crew works in the White House Rose Garden on June 9, 2025. BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images What To Know On Monday of this week, reporters noticed that work had begun in the Rose Garden. The Associated Press reported that the project will be completed in approximately two months, citing a White House official who was not authorized to comment publicly. This same official said that employees of the National Park Service, which maintains the White House grounds, had started the work. Images show the process of paving over the Rose Garden, first with construction crews digging up the grass, then poles and mud in the garden area. The most recent images show the garden covered in what looks to be gravel. Ongoing construction is seen in the Rose Garden at the White House on June 17, 2025. Ongoing construction is seen in the Rose Garden at the White House on June 17, previously said he would pave over the Rose Garden because the grass is always wet, and it's an inconvenience for women in high heels. The president also recently oversaw the installation of two flagpoles on the front lawns of the White House, both of which measure 30.5 meters (100 feet) in height. The Rose Garden at the White House being paved over on June 17, 2025. The Rose Garden at the White House being paved over on June 17, Rose Garden was established in 1913 by Ellen Wilson, the wife of President Woodrow Wilson. It was later redesigned by President John F. Kennedy to serve as a space for outdoor ceremonies. It has since become a regular venue for various events, including receptions, press briefings, and other occasions. First lady Melania Trump redesigned the garden in 2019, during her husband's first term. The renovations drew backlash at the time and led to a petition asking for the changes to be reversed. What People Are Saying White House Communications Director Steven Cheung, in a statement shared by The New York Times in March: "The White House has not been given any tender, loving care in many decades, so President Trump is taking necessary steps in order to preserve and restore the greatness and glory of 'the People's House.'" What Happens Next It is unclear when construction on the White House Rose Garden will conclude. Plans for a new ballroom have not been revealed yet.