Tensions Rise Over Defense Secretary’s Comments on Marine Deployment in Los Angeles
Los Angeles, CA – June 15, 2025: A political firestorm erupted this week after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth suggested that Marines stationed at Camp Pendleton could be mobilized to respond to protests against immigration raids in Los Angeles. The remarks came amid President Donald Trump’s order to deploy 4,000 National Guard personnel and 700 active-duty Marines to the city in response to escalating demonstrations over mass deportations.
During a tense House Armed Services Committee hearing, Hegseth repeatedly refused to commit to obeying federal court orders that might block the deployment of active-duty troops for domestic law enforcement. Pressed by lawmakers, Hegseth stated, “We should not have local judges determining foreign policy or national security policy for the country,” raising alarm about the administration’s willingness to challenge judicial authority.
California Governor Gavin Newsom condemned the potential use of active-duty troops against American citizens, calling it “deranged behavior” and filing a lawsuit to halt the federal intervention. Newsom argued that the deployment of military forces for crowd control violates the Posse Comitatus Act, which restricts the use of the military in domestic law enforcement unless the Insurrection Act is invoked.
Hegseth defended the administration’s actions, asserting that the deployment was necessary to ensure the safety of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents conducting raids. “We believe ICE agents should be allowed to be safe in doing their operations and we have deployed National Guard and the Marines to protect them in the execution of their duties because we ought to be able to enforce immigration law in this country,” Hegseth said.
The Pentagon estimates the cost of deploying the National Guard to Los Angeles at $134 million, with funds drawn from operations and maintenance accounts. Hegseth indicated the deployments would last 60 days, but did not rule out extending them if deemed necessary.
Local officials and civil liberties groups have voiced concerns that the use of military force to quell protests could set a dangerous precedent for future domestic deployments, especially in cities with large immigrant populations. The debate has intensified scrutiny of the administration’s immigration enforcement tactics and the balance of power between federal and state authorities.
As legal challenges proceed and protests continue, the situation remains fluid, with the potential for further escalation depending on court rulings and the administration’s response.