Los Angeles police officers fired over 1,000 projectiles at protesters on a single day in June as demonstrators pushed back against the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown and decision to deploy the National Guard to the nation’s second largest city.
The police department released a state-mandated report Monday on use of force against protesters that included numbers on bean bags, rubber and foam rounds, and tear gas deployed during days of protests in Los Angeles.
On June 6, police fired 34 rounds at about 100 people. On June 8, police fired 1,040 projectiles at about 6,000 people, including 20 rounds of CS gas, a type of tear gas. Six injuries were reported as a result of those projectiles.
There were 584 police officers responding that day, the department said. Protesters had blocked off a major freeway and set self-driving cars on fire.
The report was concerning to Josh Parker, deputy director of policy at the New York University School of Law Policing Project.
“The sense that I got from that data is that if that’s how you police a protest, then you’re policing it wrong,” Parker said.
The protests have put the use of these types of munitions by law enforcement under scrutiny. After journalists were shot, a federal judge granted a temporary restraining order that blocked LA police from using rubber projectiles and other munitions against reporters.
A protester who was hit and lost a finger filed a civil rights lawsuit against the city of LA and county sheriff’s department.
California in 2021 restricted the use of less lethal munitions until alternatives to force have been tried to control a crowd. Police cannot aim “indiscriminately” into a crowd or at the head, neck or any other vital organs. They also cannot fire solely for a curfew violation, verbal threats toward officers, or not complying with directions given by law enforcement, such as when they order an unlawful assembly to disperse.
“To see such a high number of projectiles discharged in a relatively short time period gives me grave concern that the law and those best practices were violated,” Parker said.
A spokesperson for the Los Angeles Police Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. LAPD was planning a “comprehensive evaluation of each use-of-force incident,” said Chief Jim McDonnell in a statement reported June 23 by the Los Angeles Times.
The days of protests in “dangerous, fluid and ultimately violent conditions” left 52 officers with injuries that required medical treatment, McDonnell said. Officers were justified in their actions to prevent further harm, he said.
Tensions escalated in downtown Los Angeles on June 8 as National Guard troops arrived to patrol federal buildings.
“Agitators in the crowd vandalized buildings, threw rocks, broken pieces of concrete, Molotov cocktails, and other objects toward law enforcement officers,” the report said.
Many protesters left by evening, but some formed a barricade of chairs on one street and threw objects at police on the other side. Others standing above the closed southbound 101 Freeway threw chunks of concrete, rocks, electric scooters and fireworks at California Highway Patrol officers and their vehicles parked on the highway.
Police issued multiple unlawful assembly orders shutting down demonstrations in several blocks of downtown Los Angeles but the crowd remained and munitions were used to bring the situation under control, the report said.
A box that read, “Other de-escalation techniques or other alternatives to force attempted,” was blank.
Parker said departments should plan for when a crowd begins throwing objects or being unruly, drawing on crowd management techniques.
“It’s important that law enforcement agencies not needlessly provoke the crowd” with aggressive language or weapons on display, he said.
Los Angeles sheriff’s deputies far outpaced the LAPD’s use of projectiles. With more than 80 deputies responding, the department deployed over 2,500 projectiles on June 8, the agency reported last week. It also said there were “hundreds to thousands” of people.
The California Highway Patrol, whose 153 officers responded to protesters blocking a major downtown freeway, estimated a crowd of about 2,000 people and used 271 rounds.
The tallies reported by LA police and deputies are high, especially considering the small number of deputies sent by the sheriff’s department, said retired LAPD Lt. Jeff Wenninger, who provides expert testimony for court cases.
“I don’t believe law enforcement officers or commanders truly understand the extent of this law, the restriction it provides,” he said. “And they just default back to old practices.”
Tag Archives: Los Angeles Police Department
USA Today: Federal judge hands press groups wins in lawsuits against LAPD, DHS
- U.S. District Judge Hernan D. Vera issued preliminary injunctions in lawsuits against the Los Angeles Police Department and the Department of Homeland Security over officers’ treatment of journalists.
- Vera wrote that federal officers “indiscriminate use of force … will undoubtedly chill the media’s efforts” to cover protests and that the police department violated both state and federal law.
- Press groups filed lawsuits against both agencies in June following protests over President Donald Trump’s immigration raids in Los Angeles.
A federal judge handed press and civil liberties groups wins in two separate cases against the Los Angeles Police Department and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem over the treatment of journalists covering immigration raid protests.
U.S. District Judge Hernan D. Vera’s preliminary injunctions bar, among other actions, the police department from arresting journalists for failing to disperse or otherwise interfering with journalists’ ability to cover Los Angeles protests. The DHS officers are also barred from “dispersing, threatening, or assaulting” journalists who haven’t “committed a crime unrelated to failing to obey a dispersal order.”
In his Sept. 10 order in the LAPD case, Vera wrote that the department’s “heavy-handed efforts to police this summer’s protests” violated both state and federal law.
In granting the motion in the DHS case, Vera said federal officers “unleashed crowd control weapons indiscriminately and with surprising savagery” during the protests.
“Specifically, the Court concludes that federal agents’ indiscriminate use of force … will undoubtedly chill the media’s efforts to cover these public events and protestors seeking to express peacefully their views on national policies,” Vera wrote.
He went on to condemn individuals who engaged in violent action during such protests, but said “the actions of a relative few does not give DHS carte blanche to unleash near-lethal force on crowds of third parties in the vicinity.”
In taking such actions, Vera wrote, federal officers have “endangered” peaceful protesters, journalists and the broader public.
“The First Amendment demands better,” he wrote.
USA TODAY reached out to the police department and the DHS for comment.
“There’s an old line in policing: We can do this the easy way, or we can do this the hard way,” Adam Rose, press rights chair of the Los Angeles Press Club, said in a news release following the rulings. “Press organizations have been trying to help LAPD for years take the easy way, just asking them to train officers and discipline offenders. They wouldn’t stop resisting. LAPD failed to police themselves. Now a judge is doing it for them.”
The First Amendment Coalition filed the federal lawsuit against the police department in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of the press club and the independent media outlet Status Coup in mid-June.
Days later, a similar lawsuit was filed against Noem over what the plaintiffs, which include the Los Angeles Press Club and the NewsGuild-Communications Workers of America, described as federal officers’ unconstitutional actions against journalists.
Vera issued a temporary restraining order in the LAPD case on July 10 that barred officers from using less-lethal munitions against journalists not posing a threat to law enforcement. The plaintiffs later accused the department of violating the order by hitting journalists with batons and arresting them during an August protest.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/09/15/lapd-dhs-la-press-club-court-wins/86112156007
Daily Beast: U.S. Citizen: I Was Seized by ICE and Held for Days Without Water
Andrea Velez spent two days in a Los Angeles detention center despite telling ICE officers that she is a U.S. citizen.
An American citizen has told how she was held by ICE for 48 hours, claiming she was denied water despite proving her legal status.
Andrea Velez, 32, had just arrived at work in Downtown Los Angeles on June 24 when agents grabbed her and forced her into a car.
Velez told NBC4 News Los Angeles that an immigration raid was going on when she was slammed to the ground. Velez, a graduate of Cal Poly Pomona, who works in fashion was taken into custody while her mother, Margarita Flores, screamed at agents to stop.
“She’s a U.S. citizen,” Velez’s mother, an immigrant from Mexico, said through tears. “They’re taking her. Help her, someone.”
Velez said she was sitting in a detention center and was given nothing to drink for 24 hours. In total she spent two days in detention. She said that the ordeal has left her unable to physically return to work.
“I’m taking things day by day,” she told the station.
The incident had been notorious from the beginning. LAPD officers were called to the scene because it was reported as a “kidnapping” but did not intervene when it became clear it was an ICE action—even though it was against a U.S. citizen, ABC& Los Angeles previously reported.
Velez was charged with assaulting a federal officer while he was attempting to arrest a suspect. A federal criminal complaint alleged that the agent was chasing after a man but Velez stepped into the agent’s path and extended her arm “in an apparent effort to prevent him from apprehending the male subject he was chasing.” The complaint added that her arm hit the agent in the face.
The incident had been notorious from the beginning. LAPD officers were called to the scene because it was reported as a “kidnapping” but did not intervene when it became clear it was an ICE action—even though it was against a U.S. citizen, ABC& Los Angeles previously reported.
Velez was charged with assaulting a federal officer while he was attempting to arrest a suspect. A federal criminal complaint alleged that the agent was chasing after a man but Velez stepped into the agent’s path and extended her arm “in an apparent effort to prevent him from apprehending the male subject he was chasing.” The complaint added that her arm hit the agent in the face.
Velez denied wrongdoing. She said that during the incident, someone grabbed her and slammed her to the ground. She tried to tell the agent, who was in plainclothes, that she was an American citizen. But he told her she was “interfering” and he was going to arrest her.
“That’s when I asked him to show me his ID, his badge number,” she said. “I asked him if he had a warrant, and he said I didn’t need to know any of that.”
Velez said she repeatedly told ICE officers she was a U.S. citizen. When she was taken into a Los Angeles detention center, she gave officers her driver’s license and health insurance card to prove her citizenship status. She was still locked behind bars.
Velez’s family was unaware of her whereabouts for more than a day until lawyers for the family tracked her down.
Later, the Department of Justice (DOJ) dismissed her case without prejudice, meaning it could be reopened if prosecutors decide to.
Velez’s attorneys told NBC Los Angeles that they are exploring legal moves against the federal government.
Between 2015 and 2020, ICE erroneously deported at least 70 U.S. citizens, arrested 674 and detained 121. It is unclear how many have been mistakenly taken amid the Trump administration’s mass campaign to deport 1 million immigrants per year.
In January, U.S. citizen Julio Noriega was looking for work in Chicago when he was swept up in the mass raids. In May, Georgia college student Ximena Arias-Cristobal was detained after police pulled over the wrong car during a traffic stop. In June, a deputy U.S. marshal was detained in Arizona because he “fit the general description of a subject being sought by ICE.” That same month, a Ph.D. student named Job Garcia was tackled and thrown to the ground by ICE for recording a raid in Los Angeles.
A recent lawsuit claims that at least three American-born children have been removed from the country. The sudden banishment includes a 4-year-old boy with stage-four kidney cancer who was receiving critical, life-saving medical treatment in the United States. He was shipped from Louisiana to Honduras in April.
The Daily Beast has reached out to ICE for comment.
DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told the Daily Beast: “FALSE. ICE provided Andrea Velez with water, food, sanitary products, and she was given restroom breaks as needed. The media needs to stop peddling lies and smears that have led to a 1000% increase in assaults against our brave ICE officers.”
Wichita Eagle: Trump Suffers Blow as Poll Reveals Disapproval
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in Los Angeles have reportedly expanded to target individuals without criminal histories. Officials claimed the broadening of enforcement has sparked fear throughout the community, causing residents to stay indoors and avoid public spaces. Mayor Karen Bass expressed concern over the raids, stating they have created a chilling effect that is affecting families and causing a decline in workforce participation.
A NPR/PBS News/Marist poll published in July found 52% of Americans disapprove of Trump’s current approach to immigration enforcement, a shift from earlier support for stricter policies. In contrast, a Gallup poll in 2024 showed 55% of Americans wanted less immigration.
The raids have drawn criticism from local advocacy groups, who argue they disrupt communities and undermine trust in law enforcement. Federal officials, however, defend the actions as necessary to enforce immigration laws and prioritize public safety. The increased enforcement comes amid ongoing national debates over immigration policy and border security.
Bass said, “Los Angeles is a city of immigrants — 3.8 million people and about 50% of our population is Latino. So when the raids started, fear spread. The masked men in unmarked cars, no license plate, no real uniforms, jumping out of cars with rifles and snatching people off the street.”
Local farmers have reported declines in activity due to the expanded ICE raids. Bass criticized agents’ use of masks and unmarked vehicles, saying it fuels fears of kidnappings.
Bass stated that ICE’s tactics are “leading a lot of people to think maybe kidnappings were taking place. How do you have masked men who then say, well, we are federal officials with no identification?”
…Bass stated, “Let me tell you, we have a Los Angeles Police Department that has to deal with crime in this city every single day, and they’re not masked, they stay here. The masked men parachute in, stay here for a while and leave. So you enter a profession like policing, like law enforcement, I’m sorry, I don’t think you have a right to have a mask and snatch people off the street.”
Bass added, “It’s not just the deportation. It’s the fear that sets in when raids occur, when people are snatched off the street. Even people who are here legally, even people who are U.S. citizens, have been detained. Immigrants who have their papers and were showing up for their annual immigration appointment were detained when they showed up doing exactly what they were supposed to be doing.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/trump-suffers-blow-as-poll-reveals-disapproval/ss-AA1JMJWO
AOL: Chokeholds, bikers and ‘roving patrols’: Are Trump’s ICE tactics legal?
An appellate court appears poised to side with the federal judge who blocked immigration agents from conducting “roving patrols” and snatching people off the streets of Southern California, likely setting up another Supreme Court showdown.
Arguments in the case were held Monday before a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, with the judges at times fiercely questioning the lawyer for the Trump administration about the constitutionality of seemingly indiscriminate sweeps by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.
“I’m just trying to understand what would motivate the officers … to grab such a large number of people so quickly and without marshaling reasonable suspicion to detain,” said Judge Ronald M. Gould of Seattle.
Earlier this month, a lower court judge issued a temporary restraining order that has all but halted the aggressive operations by masked federal agents, saying they violate the 4th Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The Justice Department called the block that was ordered by U.S. District Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong “the first step” in a “wholesale judicial usurpation” of federal authority.
“It’s a very serious thing to say that multiple federal government agencies have a policy of violating the Constitution,” Deputy Assistant Atty. Gen. Yaakov M. Roth argued Monday. “We don’t think that happened, and we don’t think it’s fair we were hit with this sweeping injunction on an unfair and incomplete record.”
That argument appeared to falter in front of the 9th Circuit panel. Judges Jennifer Sung of Portland, Ore., and Marsha S. Berzon of San Francisco heard the case alongside Gould — all drawn from the liberal wing of an increasingly split appellate division.
“If you’re not actually doing what the District Court found you to be doing and enjoined you from doing, then there should be no harm,” Sung said.
Frimpong’s order stops agents from using race, ethnicity, language, accent, location or employment as a pretext for immigration enforcement across Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties. The judge found that without other evidence, those criteria alone or in combination do not meet the 4th Amendment bar for reasonable suspicion.
“It appears that they are randomly selecting Home Depots where people are standing looking for jobs and car washes because they’re car washes,” Berzon said. “Is your argument that it’s OK that it’s happening, or is your argument that it’s not happening?”
Roth largely sidestepped that question, reiterating throughout the 90-minute hearing that the government had not had enough time to gather evidence it was following the Constitution and that the court did not have authority to constrain it in the meantime.
Read more:Trump administration asks appeals court to lift restrictions on SoCal immigration raids
Arguments in the case hinge on a pair of dueling Golden State cases that together define the scope of relief courts can offer under the 4th Amendment.
“It’s the bulwark of privacy protection against policing,” said professor Orin S. Kerr of Stanford Law School, whose work on 4th Amendment injunctions was cited in the Justice Department’s briefing. “What the government can do depends on really specific details. That makes it hard for a court to say here’s the thing you can’t do.”
In policing cases, every exception to the rule has its own exceptions, the expert said.
The Department of Justice has staked its claim largely on City of Los Angeles vs. Lyons, a landmark 1983 Supreme Court decision about illegal chokeholds by the Los Angeles Police Department. In that case, the court ruled against a blanket ban on the practice, finding the Black motorist who had sued was unlikely to ever be choked by the police again.
“That dooms plaintiffs’ standing here,” the Justice Department wrote.
But the American Civil Liberties Union and its partners point to other precedents, including the San Diego biker case Easyriders Freedom F.I.G.H.T. vs. Hannigan. Decided in the 9th Circuit in 1996, the ruling offers residents of the American West more 4th Amendment protection than they might have in Texas, New York or Illinois.
In the Easyriders case, 14 members of a Southland motorcycle club successfully blocked the California Highway Patrol from citing almost any bikers they suspected of wearing the wrong kind of helmet, after the court ruled a more narrow decision would leave the same bikers vulnerable to future illegal citations.
“The court said these motorcyclists are traveling around the state, so we can’t afford the plaintiff’s complete relief unless we allow this injunction to be statewide,” said professor Geoffrey Kehlmann, who directs the 9th Circuit Appellate Clinic at Loyola Law School.
“In situations like this, where you have roving law enforcement throughout a large area and you have the plaintiffs themselves moving throughout this large area, you necessarily need to have that broader injunction,” Kehlmann said.
Frimpong cited Easyriders among other precedent cases in her ruling, saying it offered a clear logic for the districtwide injunction. The alternative — agents sweeping through car washes and Home Depot parking lots stopping to ask each person they grab if they are a plaintiff in the suit — “would be a fantasy,” she wrote.
Another expert, Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law, said the Los Angeles Police Department chokehold case set a standard that litigants “need to show it’s likely it could happen to you again in the future.”
But, he added: “The 9th Circuit has said, here’s ways you can show that.”
The tests can include asking whether the contested enforcement is limited to a small geographic area or applied to a small group of people, and whether it is part of a policy.
“After the injunction here, the secretary of Homeland Security said, ‘We’re going to continue doing what we’re doing,’” Berzon said. “Is that not a policy?”
Roth denied that there was any official policy driving the sweeps.
“Plaintiffs [argue] the existence of an official policy of violating the 4th Amendment with these stops,” Roth said. “The only evidence of our policy was a declaration that said, ‘Yes, reasonable suspicion is what we require when we go beyond a consensual encounter.'”
But Mohammad Tajsar of the ACLU of Southern California, part of a coalition of civil rights groups and individual attorneys challenging cases of three immigrants and two U.S. citizens swept up in chaotic arrests, argued that the federal policy is clear.
“They have said, ‘If it ends in handcuffs, go out and do it,'” he told the panel. “There’s been a wink and a nod to agents on the ground that says, ‘Dispatch with the rigors of the law and go out and snatch anybody out there.'”
He said that put his organization’s clients in a similar situation to the bikers.
“The government did not present any alternatives as to what an injunction could look like that would provide adequate relief to our plaintiffs,” Tajsar said. “That’s fatal to any attempt by them to try to get out from underneath this injunction.”
The Trump administration’s immigration enforcement tactics, he said, are “likely to ensnare just as many people with status as without status.”
The Justice Department said ICE already complies with the 4th Amendment, and that the injunction risks a “chilling effect” on lawful arrests.
“If it’s chilling ICE from violating the Constitution, that’s where they’re supposed to be chilled,” Chemerinsky said.
A ruling is expected as soon as this week. Roth signaled the administration is likely to appeal if the appellate panel does not grant its stay.
https://www.aol.com/chokeholds-bikers-roving-patrols-trumps-232936992.html
The Intercept: State Cops Quietly Tag Thousands as Gang Members — and Feed Their Names to ICE
Gang databases are often racially biased and riddled with errors. States and cities send their flawed information to immigration authorities.
Police gang databases are known to be faulty. The secret registries allow state and local cops to feed civilians’ personal information into massive, barely regulated lists based on speculative criteria — like their personal contacts, clothing, and tattoos — even if they haven’t committed a crime. The databases aren’t subject to judicial review, and they don’t require police to notify the people they peg as gang members.
They’re an ideal tool for officials seeking to imply criminality without due process. And many are directly accessible to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
An investigation by The Intercept found that at least eight states and large municipalities funnel their gang database entries to ICE — which can then use the information to target people for arrest, deportation, or rendition to so-called “third countries.” Some of the country’s largest and most immigrant-dense states, like Texas, New York, Illinois, and Virginia, route the information to ICE through varied paths that include a decades-old police clearinghouse and a network of post-9/11 intelligence-sharing hubs.
Both federal immigration authorities and local police intelligence units operate largely in secret, and the full extent of the gang database-sharing between them is unknown. What is known, however, is that the lists are riddled with mistakes: Available research, reporting, and audits have revealed that many contain widespread errors and encourage racial profiling.
The flawed systems could help ICE expand its dragnet as it seeks to carry out President Donald Trump’s promised “mass deportation” campaign. The administration has cited common tattoos and other spurious evidence to create its own lists of supposed gang members, invoking the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to send hundreds to El Salvador’s notorious Terrorism Confinement Center prison, also known as CECOT. Gang databases The Intercept identified as getting shared with ICE contain hundreds of thousands of other entries, including some targeted at Central American communities that have landed in the administration’s crosshairs. That information can torpedo asylum and other immigration applications and render those seeking legal status deportable.
“They’re going after the asylum system on every front they can,” said Andrew Case, supervising counsel for criminal justice issues at the nonprofit LatinoJustice. “Using gang affiliation as a potential weapon in that fight is very scary.”
Information supplied by local gang databases has already driven at least one case that became a national flashpoint: To justify sending Kilmar Abrego Garcia to CECOT in March, federal officials used a disputed report that a disgraced Maryland cop submitted to a defunct registry to label him as a member of a transnational gang. The report cited the word of an unnamed informant, Abrego’s hoodie, and a Chicago Bulls cap — items “indicative of the Hispanic gang culture,” it said.
The case echoed patterns from Trump’s first term, when ICE leaned on similar information from local cops — evidence as flimsy as doodles in a student’s notebook — to label immigrants as gang members eligible for deportation. As Trump’s second administration shifts its immigration crackdown into overdrive, ICE is signaling with cases like Abrego’s that it’s eager to continue fueling it with local police intelligence.
Nayna Gupta, policy director at the American Immigration Council, argued that this kind of information-sharing boosts ICE’s ability to target people without due process.
“This opens the door to an incredible amount of abuse,” she said. “This is our worst fear.”
In February, ICE arrested Francisco Garcia Casique, a barber from Venezuela living in Texas. The agency alleged that he was a member of Tren de Aragua, the Venezuelan gang at the center of the latest anti-immigrant panic, and sent him to CECOT.
Law enforcement intelligence on Garcia Casique was full of errors: A gang database entry contained the wrong mugshot and appears to have confused him with a man whom Dallas police interviewed about a Mexican gang, USA Today reported. Garcia Casique’s family insists he was never in a gang.
It’s unclear exactly what role the faulty gang database entry played in Garcia Casique’s rendition, which federal officials insist wasn’t a mistake. But ICE agents had direct access to it — plus tens of thousands of other entries from the same database — The Intercept has found.
Under a Texas statute Trump ally Gov. Greg Abbott signed into law in 2017, any county with a population over 100,000 or municipality over 50,000 must maintain or contribute to a local or regional gang database. More than 40 Texas counties and dozens more cities and towns meet that bar. State authorities compile the disparate gang intelligence in a central registry known as TxGANG, which contained more than 71,000 alleged gang members as of 2022.
Texas then uploads the entries to the “Gang File” in an FBI-run clearinghouse known as the National Crime Information Center, state authorities confirmed to The Intercept. Created in the 1960s, the NCIC is one of the most commonly used law enforcement datasets in the country, with local, state, and federal police querying its dozens of files millions of times a day. (The FBI did not answer The Intercept’s questions.)
ICE can access the NCIC, including the Gang File, in several ways — most directly through its Investigative Case Management system, Department of Homeland Security documents show. The Obama administration hired Palantir, the data-mining company co-founded by billionaire former Trump adviser Peter Thiel, to build the proprietary portal, which makes countless records and databases immediately available to ICE agents. Palantir is currently expanding the tool, having signed a $96 million contract during the Biden administration to upgrade it.
TxGANG isn’t the only gang database ICE can access through its Palantir-built system. The Intercept trawled the open web for law enforcement directives, police training materials, and state and local statutes that mention adding gang database entries to the NCIC. Those The Intercept identified likely represent a small subset of the jurisdictions that upload to the ICE-accessible clearinghouse.
New York Focus first reported the NCIC pipeline-to-immigration agents when it uncovered a 20-year-old gang database operated by the New York State Police. Any law enforcement entity in the Empire State can submit names to the statewide gang database, which state troopers then consider for submission to the NCIC. The New York state gang database contains more than 5,100 entries and has never been audited.
The Wisconsin Department of Justice, which did not respond to requests for comment, has instructed its intelligence bureau on how to add names to the NCIC Gang File as recently as 2023, The Intercept found. Virginia has enshrined its gang database-sharing in commonwealth law, which explicitly requires NCIC uploading. In April, Virginia authorities helped ICE arrest 132 people who law enforcement officials claimed were part of transnational gangs.
The Illinois State Police, too, have shared their gang database to the FBI-run dataset. They also share it directly with the Department of Homeland Security, ICE’s umbrella agency, through an in-house information-sharing system, a local PBS affiliate uncovered last month.
The Illinois State Police’s gang database contained over 90,000 entries as of 2018. The data-sharing with Homeland Security flew under the radar for 17 years and likely violates Illinois’s 2017 sanctuary state law.
“Even in the jurisdictions that are not inclined to work with federal immigration authorities, the information they’re collecting could end up in these federal databases,” said Gupta.
Aside from the National Crime Information Center, there are other conduits for local police to enable the Trump administration’s gang crusade.
Some departments have proactively shared their gang information directly with ICE. As with the case of the Illinois State Police’s gang database, federal agents had access to the Chicago Police Department’s gang registry through a special data-sharing system. From 2009 to 2018, immigration authorities searched the database at least 32,000 times, a city audit later found. In one instance, the city admitted it mistakenly added a man to the database after ICE used it to arrest him.
The Chicago gang database was full of other errors, like entries whose listed dates of birth made them over 100 years old. The inaccuracies and immigration-related revelations, among other issues, prompted the city to shut down the database in 2023.
Other departments allow partner agencies to share their gang databases with immigration authorities. In 2016, The Intercept reported that the Los Angeles Police Department used the statewide CalGang database — itself shown to contain widespread errors — to help ICE deport undocumented people. The following year, California enacted laws that prohibited using CalGang for immigration enforcement. Yet the California Department of Justice told The Intercept that it still allows the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office to share the database, which contained nearly 14,000 entries as of last year, with the Department of Homeland Security.
“Each user must document their need to know/right to know prior to logging into CalGang,” and that documentation is “subject to regular audit,” a California Department of Justice spokesperson said.
Local police also share gang information with the feds through a series of regional hubs known as fusion centers. Created during the post-9/11 domestic surveillance boom, fusion centers were meant to facilitate intelligence-sharing — particularly about purported terrorism — between federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. Their scope quickly expanded, and they’ve played a key role in the growth of both immigration- and gang-related policing and surveillance.
The Boston Police Department told The Intercept that agencies within the Department of Homeland Security seek access to its gang database by filing a “request for information” through the fusion center known as the Boston Regional Intelligence Center. In 2016, ICE detained a teenager after receiving records from the Boston gang database, which used a report about a tussle at his high school to label him as a gang member. Boston later passed a law barring law enforcement officials from sharing personal information with immigration enforcement agents, but it contains loopholes for criminal investigations.
In the two decades since their creation, fusion center staff have proactively sought to increase the upward flow of local gang intelligence — including by leveraging federal funds, as in the case between the Washington, D.C., Metropolitan Police Department and the Maryland Coordination and Analysis Center, which works directly with the Department of Homeland Security. An email from 2013, uncovered as part of a trove of hacked documents, shows that an employee at the Maryland fusion center threatened to withhold some federal funding if the D.C. police didn’t regularly share its gang database.
“I wanted to prepare you that [sic] your agency’s decision … to NOT connect … may indeed effect [sic] next years [sic] funding for your contractual analysts,” a fusion center official wrote. “So keep that in mind…………..”
Four years later, ICE detained a high schooler after receiving a D.C. police gang database entry. The entry said that he “self-admitted” to being in a gang, an Intercept investigation later reported — a charge his lawyer denied.
For jurisdictions that don’t automatically comply, the Trump administration is pushing to entice them into cooperating with ICE. The budget bill Trump signed into law on the Fourth of July earmarks some $14 billion for state and local ICE collaboration, as well as billions more for local police. Official police partnerships with ICE had already skyrocketed this year; more are sure to follow.
Revelations about gang database-sharing show how decades of expanding police surveillance and speculative gang policing have teed up the Trump administration’s crackdowns, said Gupta of the American Immigration Council.
“The core problem is one that extends far beyond the Trump administration,” she said. “You let the due process bar drop that far for so long, it makes it very easy for Trump.”
Popular Information: Trump manufactures a crisis in LA
For years, President Trump has dreamed of mobilizing the military against protesters in the United States. On Saturday night, Trump made it a reality, ordering the deployment of 2,000 members of the California National Guard — against the wishes of state and local officials — in response to protests against federal immigration raids on workplaces in and around Los Angeles. By the time Trump issued the order, the protests consisted of a few dozen people at a Home Depot.
The move violated longstanding democratic norms that prohibit military deployment on American soil absent extraordinary circumstances. The last time the National Guard was mobilized absent a request from local officials was in 1965 — to protect civil rights protesters in Alabama marching from Selma to Montgomery.
Trump strongly advocated for using the military to quell racial justice protests in the summer of 2020. He encouraged governors to deploy the National Guard to “dominate” the streets. “If a city or state refuses to take the actions necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them,” Trump said.
Behind the scenes, Trump was even more ruthless. According to a 2022 memoir by former Defense Secretary Mark Esper, Trump asked Esper if the military could shoot at people protesting George Floyd’s murder. “Can’t you just shoot them?” Trump allegedly asked. “Just shoot them in the legs or something?”
On another occasion that summer, according to a book by journalist Michael Bender, Trump announced that he was putting Army General Mark Milley, the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in charge of quelling the protests. This reportedly led to a shouting match:
“I said you’re in f—ing charge!” Trump shouted at him.
“Well, I’m not in charge!” Milley yelled back.
“You can’t f—ing talk to me like that!” Trump said. …
“Goddamnit,” Milley said to others. “There’s a room full of lawyers here. Will someone inform him of my legal responsibilities?”The lawyers, including Attorney General Bill Barr, sided with Milley, and Trump’s demand was tabled. (Trump called Bender’s book “fake news.”)
During a March 2023 campaign rally in Iowa, Trump pledged to deploy the National Guard in states and cities run by Democrats, specifically mentioning Los Angeles:
You look at these great cities, Los Angeles, San Francisco, you look at what’s happening to our country, we cannot let it happen any longer… you’re supposed to not be involved in that, you just have to be asked by the governor or the mayor to come in, the next time, I’m not waiting. One of the things I did was let them run it, and we’re going to show how bad a job they do. Well, we did that. We don’t have to wait any longer.
In October 2023, the Washington Post reported that Trump allies were mapping out executive actions “to allow him to deploy the military against civil demonstrations.”
In an October 2024 interview on Fox News, Trump again pushed for the National Guard and military to be deployed against “the enemy within,” which he described as “radical left lunatics.”
“We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics,” Trump said. “And I think they’re the big — and it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.”
Were there “violent mobs”?
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Trump’s mobilization of the National Guard was necessary because “violent mobs have attacked ICE Officers and Federal Law Enforcement Agents carrying out basic deportation operations in Los Angeles, California.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the National Guard would “support federal law enforcement in Los Angeles” in response to “violent mob assaults on ICE and Federal Law Enforcement.”
These claims were directly contradicted by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), which described Saturday’s protests as “peaceful.”
The LAPD statement said it “appreciates the cooperation of organizers, participants, and community partners who helped ensure public safety throughout the day.”
There were some reports of violence and property damage in Paramount and Compton, two cities located about 20 miles south of Los Angeles. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department said it “arrested one person over the protest in Paramount” and “two officers had been treated at a local hospital for injuries and released.” As for property damage, “one car had been burned and a fire at a local strip mall had been extinguished.”
Trump’s order, however, says the unrest in California is so severe it constitutes “a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States” that necessitates the mobilization of military personnel. Although any violence and property destruction is a serious matter, local law enforcement appears fully capable of responding to the situation.
Trump’s Unusual Legal Theory
The Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits using the military for domestic law enforcement without specific statutory (or Constitutional) authority. The most famous exception to the Posse Comitatus Act is the Insurrection Act, which permits the President to deploy the military for domestic law enforcement under specific circumstances. But, historically, the Insurrection Act has “been reserved for extreme circumstances in which there are no other alternatives to maintain the peace.” It also requires the president to issue a proclamation ordering “the insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably to their abodes within a limited time.”
Trump, however, invoked a different federal law, 10 U.S.C. 12406. That provision lacks some of the legal and historical baggage of the Insurrection Act, but it also confers a more limited authority. That is why Trump’s proclamation authorizes the National Guard to “temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur.” In other words, the National Guard is not authorized to engage in law enforcement activities, but to protect others doing that work. It remains to be seen whether the administration will respect these limitations in practice.
Trump is Confused
At 2:41 a.m. on Sunday morning, Trump posted: “Great job by the National Guard in Los Angeles after two days of violence, clashes and unrest.” At the time, the National Guard had not yet arrived in Los Angeles. Trump had spent the evening watching three hours of UFC fighting in New Jersey.
Trump also asserted, without evidence, that those protesting the immigration raids were “paid troublemakers.”
The National Guard arrived in Los Angeles much later on Sunday morning, when the streets were already quiet.
Trump told reporters on Sunday that he did not consider the protests an “insurrection” yet. About an hour later, Trump claimed on Truth Social that “violent, insurrectionist mobs are swarming and attacking our Federal Agents to try to stop our deportation operations.”
Trump’s order mobilizing the National Guard, however, likely inflamed tensions — and that may have been the point. Federal and state authorities clashed with protesters in downtown LA on Sunday afternoon. Law enforcement “used smoke and pepper spray to disperse protesters outside a federal detention center in downtown Los Angeles,” according to the Los Angeles Times.
Salon: Stephen Miller can’t make America white. LA is paying for his impotent rage
Mass deportations were never going to work, so Trump and Miller resort to authoritarian theater
Donald Trump loves authoritarian theater, but let’s not forget that Stephen Miller is also to blame for the violence and chaos in Los Angeles. Last week, the right-wing Washington Examiner reported that Trump’s deputy chief of staff called a meeting with the top officials at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to “eviscerate” them for falling far short of the ridiculous goal he set of 3,000 deportations a day. In their desperation to keep Miller happy, ICE has already been targeting legal immigrants for deportation, mostly because they’re easy to find, due to having registered with the government. ICE agents stake out immigration hearings for people with refugee status and round up people here with work or student visas for minor offenses like speeding tickets, all to get the numbers up. But these actions were not enough for Miller.
“Why aren’t you at Home Depot? Why aren’t you at 7-Eleven?” he reportedly screamed at ICE officials. One ICE leader protested that the agency’s lead, Tom Homan, said they’re supposed to be going after criminals, not people who are just working everyday jobs. Miller reportedly hit the ceiling, furious that arrests aren’t widespread and indiscriminate. Trump has repeatedly implied he was only targeting criminals, but as Charles Davis reported at Salon, that conflicts with his promise of “mass deportations.” Undocumented immigrants commit crimes at far lower rates than native-born Americans. The expansive efforts to find and arrest immigrants in California, which kicked off the protests, appear to be a direct reaction to Miller’s orders to grab as many people as possible, regardless of innocence.
But Miller doesn’t seem to care about crime. Or, perhaps he thinks having darker skin should be a crime. For Miller, the goal of “mass deportations” has never been about law and order, but about the fantasy of a white America. His desire to deport his way to racial homogeneity has always been not only deeply immoral, but pretty much impossible. His impotence shouldn’t breed complacency, however. As the violence in Los Angeles shows, petty rage can lead to all manner of evils.
The term “white nationalist” is often used interchangeably with “white supremacist,” but it has a specific meaning. White supremacists think the government should enshrine white people as a privileged class over all others. White nationalists, however, want America to be mostly, if not entirely, white — a goal that cannot be accomplished without mass violence. That Miller appears to lean more into the white nationalist camp is well known. In 2019, the Southern Poverty Law Center reviewed a pile of leaked emails Miller had sent to media allies that illustrated his obsession with white-ifying America. He repeatedly denounced legal immigration of non-white people and endorsed the idea that racial diversity is a threat to white people. He longed for a return to pre-1965 laws that banned most non-white immigrants from moving to America.
“Trump’s mass deportation project is actually a demographic engineering project,” Adam Serwer of the Atlantic explained on a recent Bulwark podcast, pointing to the administration’s expulsion of legal refugees of color while making exceptions to the “no refugee” policy for white South Africans. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau defended the exception by claiming that “they can be assimilated easily into our country.”
But it’s clear this language is code for “white.” By any good-faith definition of the word, thousands of non-white people targeted for deportation have also assimilated. They have jobs. They get married. They have kids. They are part of their communities.
Sure enough, a sea of MAGA influencers have responded to the Los Angeles protests like parrots trained quite suddenly to say “ban third world immigration.”
Charlie Kirk from Turning Point USA followed up by praising Steve Sailer, a white supremacist who peddles debunked “race science” falsely claiming skin color and ethnicity controls IQ. The Groypers, a Hitler-praising group that doesn’t even pretend not to be racist, was ecstatic to see MAGA leaders edge closer to openly admitting to being white nationalists.
Miller’s whites-only dreams aren’t going to happen, though it’s unclear if he’s delusional enough to think otherwise. White non-Hispanic Americans are 58% of the population, according to the Census. That means nearly 143 million Americans — most of whom are citizens— fall outside the strict parameters of what white nationalists like Miller would see as “white people.” Even if the Trump administration met its unlikely goal of deporting 11 million people, this would still be a racially diverse country by any measure. And it’s becoming more diverse: the non-white population is younger and having more children.
If it feels gross to treat human beings like a math problem, that’s because it is. But that’s what we’re dealing with: an administration, led by a would-be strongman and his little deputy, that can’t engineer American demographics, no matter how hard they might try. MAGA Republicans flip out when liberals correctly point out that diversity is America’s strength. But what really makes them crazy is knowing, deep down, that diversity is America’s inevitability.
This impotent rage factor is important for understanding what’s happening in Los Angeles. Trump and Miller can’t achieve their whites-only dreams, so they’re lashing out violently at communities, like in southern California, that remind them of their powerlessness in this department.
Make no mistake: the Trump administration is the instigator here, and not just because they sent ICE in to start nabbing people willy-nilly. As Judd Legum of Popular Information carefully detailed on Monday, the violence began because Trump called the National Guard. Before that, the protests had been relatively small and contained. The Los Angeles Police Department released a statement commending the protesters for their cooperation and peacefulness, which led to a demonstration “without incident.”
Trump started the chaos by sending in the National Guard. He wants violent visuals for right-wing media to run on a constant loop to serve his authoritarian agenda. When the protesters in Los Angeles didn’t give Trump the imagery he wanted, he deliberately escalated and lied about the reasons. Now he is celebrating his victory because of the violence he unleashed. He’s not subtle, and it’s a failure of the media every time they report on the “violence” without noting that Trump was the instigator.
Small, weak men can cause a lot of damage. No one should be complacent about either the violence in Los Angeles or the thousands of lives being destroyed by these deportation schemes. But it’s also important to not be cowed by Trump and Miller’s theater, which they put on in no small part to conceal the myriad ways they will never be as all-powerful as they promised their supporters they would be. Understanding this can help people find the courage needed to fight back, because the best shot that MAGA has at winning is if their opponents give up the struggle. Already the administration’s overreach is creating a backlash:
Deadline: After Dodgers Incident With Federal Agents, Stephen Miller Co-Founded Legal Group Files Employment Complaint Over Team’s DEI Efforts
A legal group co-founded by top White House aide Stephen Miller has filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, seeking an investigation of the Los Angeles Dodgers’ diversity, equity and inclusion policies.
The America First Legal complaint, filed on Monday, claims that the Dodgers’ DEI policies “appear to discriminate against employees, or prospective employees, solely because of their skin color or sex.” They cite a reference on the team’s DEI page that outlines recruitment efforts, including “sponsoring programs geared toward women and people of color.”
Apparently in retaliation for the Dodgers’ refusal to all ICE access to their parking lot:
The complaint follows an incident on June 19 in which masked agents appeared near one of the Dodgers’s gates to its parking lot. Protesters gathered in the area, and the Los Angeles Police Department arrived at the scene, and the agents left. The Dodgers posted that that morning, “ICE agents came to Dodger Stadium and requested permission to access the parking lots. They were denied entry to the grounds by the organization.”

https://deadline.com/2025/07/dodgers-dei-complaint-ice-1236447419
MeidasTouch News: ICE Agents Tried to Raid Dodger Stadium and were Turned Away
Major breaking news today out of Los Angeles: Federal agents with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) attempted to enter Dodger Stadium grounds this morning but were denied entry by the Los Angeles Dodgers organization.
According to reporting from the Los Angeles Times, ICE agents arrived at Dodger Stadium early Thursday morning and requested access to the stadium’s parking lots. The Dodgers refused entry, confirming the incident in a public statement shortly afterward ….
https://meidasnews.com/news/ice-agents-tried-to-raid-dodger-stadium-and-were-turned-away



