The L.A. test case

Photo: AP Images

Some eight months after President Donald Trump’s election signaled an about-face to the zeitgeist of progressivism, views of the unrest on Los Angeles streets as either “protests” or “riots” seem to offer an apt bellwether on prevailing political winds.

As battles between demonstrators and police played out on screen, politicians and media figures clashed over whether the unfolding events are “mostly peaceful protests,” sparked by a series of immigration raids and exacerbated by President Trump’s mobilization of the National Guard, or “riots” instigated by radicals intent on destroying property and obstructing law enforcement.

The most consistent element of President Trump’s political career has been a restrictive stance on immigration, which resonated with a plurality of Americans after illegal crossings reached crisis levels during the Biden administration. But his move to deploy National Guard units on L.A. streets may have rubbed too many Americans the wrong way.

Los Angeles, a sanctuary city in a state with over one-fifth of the nation’s 12 million illegal immigrants, certainly offers a fitting test case.

Samuel Abrams, professor of politics at Sarah Lawrence College and senior fellow at the center-right American Enterprise Institute, posited that the administration could retain support for its agenda, if it shows “restraint.”

“Americans want their cities safe, and what we saw in L.A. plays right into Trump’s narrative of dangerous unlawful people sowing chaos,” he said, adding that many involved in violence seem to overlap with “extreme-left” groups stirring unrest on college campuses. “The question becomes how much balance Trump can show here. If he can stop this and leave, that should be good. If, on the other hand, it looks like the administration is militarizing cities, that’s not going to play well.”

The early polling, taken as National Guardsmen reported for duty, indicated that a sizable plurality of Americans viewed the move negatively. A YouGov poll showed 45% of those surveyed disapproved of the president’s decision, while 38% approved and 17% were undecided.

William Galston, senior fellow at the center-left Brookings Institution, said that a crackdown on illegal immigration maintains wide support, but strong-armed tactics employed against it will put off many in the “center.”

“Trump’s base is fine with this, but that’s not what gave him his victory,” he said. “It’s the people in the middle who decided he was not perfect, but preferable. If he wants to maintain majority support, Trump will have to pay more attention to the people who moved him from 40% to 50%.”

The Resistance

Tensions in Los Angeles helped mobilize the still ill-defined anti-Trump resistance movement. “No Kings” protests were held around the country against the backdrop of a planned Washington parade to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the US Army.

After close to a decade of attempts at painting the president as a criminal, racist, and quasi-fascist failed to prevent his 2024 electoral victory, the American left has changed focus, instead trying to brand his tactics as authoritarian and disrespectful of Constitutional boundaries. In a country hostile to domestic use of the military, images of National Guardsmen in the streets would provide a useful rallying point.

But Professor Abrams told Mishpacha that even as mainstream media works to portray the unrest as peaceful protests and the deployment as overreach, few opinions will be swayed.

“The people on the right get their news from their sources, and vice versa for people on the left,” he said. “The people in the middle, quite frankly, tune this stuff out. This will not sway too many, but endless scenes of destruction will give people more patience to allow Donald Trump to stop this his way.”

There is plenty of footage out of Los Angeles of assaults on police and vandalism of private and public property. Many marches have also been marked by display of the Mexican flag, feeding a narrative that organizers are guided by an anti-American ideology. Taken together, Dr. Galston contended that “people on the left are also making mistakes, very serious ones,” in their strategy to rally support.

“I suspect that you will find widespread disapproval for use of the Mexican flag as a symbol of protest,” he said. “Previous protests organizers were a lot smarter in using the American flag, trying to send the message that what Trump was doing was inconsistent with American values.”

Newsom’s Dilemma

Long before this violence erupted in Los Angeles, California governor Gavin Newsom was in pole position to become a national leader for Democrats. After a career of staunch progressivism, in the wake of the 2024 election, he made concerted efforts to moderate his public statements and policy moves.

The president’s charge that Newsom’s and Los Angeles mayor Karen Bass’s failure to rein in violence and his subsequent decision to send in the National Guard over the governor’s objections forced a public standoff. Amid a stream of combative statements, Governor Newsom filed a federal lawsuit challenging the president’s authority to mobilize the guardsmen, which normally devolves to state authority.

Newsom’s newfound defiance of the president boosts his image in deep-blue California and among much of the Democratic base. Yet playing the role of lead Trump antagonist comes with risks.

“I certainly understand the impulse to play politics, but if the images continue of the mob running the streets, Newsom’s career could be over,” said Professor Abrams. “Poll after poll shows that Americans don’t like lawless behavior. Protecting people who commit violence is not a great platform to run on.”

Diverging Paths

The coastal standoff also offers a test run for what a successful leader looks like for Democrats post-2024.

While many in the Democratic base, Dr. Galston said, are looking for leaders to take an “unyielding” approach toward the president’s agenda, others in the party caution that such an approach is limiting.

“I don’t think the people looking for unyielding opposition to Trump are necessarily thinking in majority-building terms,” he said. “It’s people in the center of the party who are looking for a position that will command a majority.”

Dr. Galston advised that Democrats would find a more durable path toward winning majority support on immigration by calling for strict law enforcement, respect for due-process protections for migrants, and reforming laws to be “fair and enforceable.”

“It begins with support for enforcing the law and securing the border, but it doesn’t end there,” he said. “The rule of law should be enforced firmly, but not arbitrarily. I think there’s a potential majority in the middle for an approach that respects both halves of that duality.”

(Originally featured in Mishpacha, Issue 1066)