Los Angeles County Declares State of Emergency Over ICE Raids
Los Angeles County better hope it doesn’t face another natural disaster.
The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors declared a local state of emergency due to the ICE raids.
“Declaring a local emergency allows us to move faster to meet that responsibility, and this proclamation is about action and speed,” stated Supervisor Lindsey P. Horvath. “We are listening, we are acting, and we will continue to stand with you, not just today but for as long as it takes.”
The board justified the move by claiming the raids have caused a “climate of fear,” which has led to widespread disruption in daily life and adverse impacts to our regional economy due to decreased attendance at workplaces, the temporary or permanent closure of businesses and restaurants, and increased strain on our local institutions such as schools, hospitals, and places of worship.”
According to the declaration, the raids have hampered the county’s economy, especially…construction and agriculture.
How about those companies hire legal people?
I mean, that’s the easiest way to avoid these troubles. Don’t hire illegal aliens.
This is an unusual move since states of emergencies are meant for natural disasters: “caused by conditions such as air pollution, fire, flood, storm, epidemic, riot, drought, cyberterrorism, sudden and severe energy shortage, deenergization event . . . plant or animal infestation or disease . . . or an earthquake, or other conditions . . .”
Instead of using resources properly, the declaration “allows the county to mobilize resources, expedite contracting and procurement, coordinate interagency response, and request state and federal assistance to protect and stabilize communities that have been impacted by federal immigration raids.”
Let’s hope an earthquake or another fire doesn’t hit the county. They obviously didn’t learn anything from the mistakes that caused the January fires, especially the Palisades Fire, to burn out of control.
Supervisor Kathryn Barger voted against the declaration for those reasons.
“Emergency powers exist for crises that pose life and death consequences like wildfires — not as a shortcut for complex policy issues,” said Barger, according to LAist. “Stretching emergency powers for federal immigration actions undermines their purpose, invites legal challenges and circumvents the public process.”
Barger also pointed out that “[T]he federal government has sole authority to enforce federal immigration law, and local government cannot impede that authority.”
BREAKING: In a statement to @FoxNews, ICE is blasting LA County’s vote today to declare a state of emergency over recent immigration raids, which will give LA County officials the power to provide taxpayer funded rent relief, legal aid, etc to people “affected” by ICE raids. 👇🏻 pic.twitter.com/V5upnuLfQK
— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) October 15, 2025
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Trump should consider requiring every person in the USA receiving a paycheck to prove they are eligible to work in USA.
The deadline should be established after the program’s details are worked out.
If an employee cannot prove they are eligible to work, they will be shown the door.
That is supposed to be the case. Last few times I took a job going back to 94 I had to show either my birth certificate or my passport.
Perhaps, I should emphasize what I meant.
I mean every person in the USA who is already on the books and receiving a paycheck (Notwithstanding they have already provided prove) must prove it again.
For example, Walmart has about 1.6 million employees in USA.
If my idea is accepted, all 1.6 million have to provide prove or they are fired.
Annual would be a good requirement. Since ’86 everyone hired was supposed to have an I-9 form submitted to show the employer had sought to verify the employee work authorization or Citizenship. Many States have recently imposed an additional EU verify requirement. Some like Alabama require it for all employers no matter how big/small, public or private, for profit or non profit. Others like Utah only apply E-verify to large employers (150+ in Utah), some exempt public employment like school districts.
IOW we have a patchwork of requirements and your proposed reform in creation of a simple, straight forward standard for every employer to run every employee every year through E-verify with follow up audits, workplace inspection and enforcement. Well past time to create and deploy severe consequences for employers who seek to turn a blind eye. Even more we should hold the employer accountable for the failures to comply when they outsource these functions. Excuses accepted for failures should not be accepted; they either made a documented, provable good faith effort to comply or they failed to comply.
This all sounds like another one of those laws that inconveniences the law abiding. Like.”gun control” laws.
Not really anymore inconvenience than completing the training and testing to obtain and carry a DL when operating a motor vehicle. E-verify is free and employers already must submit an I-9 at hiring. Making it an annual requirement perhaps at the employee anniversary date of hire doesn’t seem very burdensome. Especially considering the alternatives which allowed artificial wage suppression from an influx of cheap imported foreign labor harming workers and the competition which played by the rules but had their bids undercut by the illegal lower wages of their competition.
So all their contractors were using illegals and work isn’t getting done?
Were a large number of their OWN employees illegal… and now not showing up to work?
Sounds like the Democrats are getting ready to fire on Fort Sumpter again.
Trump should use the Insurrection Act in any place that obstructs federal law from being enforced.
So far at least there aren’t any such places.
But the violent anti-ICE protests are themselves inherently insurrectionist. Their goal is not just to protest one specific federal law, but to deny the authority of all federal laws, and ultimately to overthrow the USA altogether. Antifans make no bones about this. So that alone justifies invoking the Insurrection Act.
So there’s enough criminal aliens that trying to arrest them causes a state of emergency. Sounds like LA County is trying to support Trump deploying the National Guard
Declare national emergency
Because it is
Enough of this crap
So a star of emergency exists because lawns aren’t being mowed. Brentwood, Beverly Hills, West Hollywood, etc. aren’t getting their homes cleaned. Construction crews aren’t showing up to finish remodels or additions. All because these so called progressives pay a contractor who hired illegals so he can pay slave labor wages. LA ICE is still going to continue to pick up illegals and ship them back from whence they came. If interfere the federales will be coming for you next. Better get those trade schools up and running so young men from America can learn a trade. In the meantime you can GFY.
Have you ever watched one of those YouTube videos in which a police officer encounters a “sovereign citizen” who is under the delusion that he has no contract with the state and therefore is not under the state’s jurisdiction?
(But is perfectly happy traveling the state’s roads and pulling over when he sees the blue flashing lights? 🤔)
Having not provided a driver’s license, registration and proof of insurance, the hapless fool is invariably yanked from his car like a sack of potatoes, handcuffed (Ouch! That hurts!) and thrown in the back of the police cruiser.
This action by the Board of Supervisors is no different. It takes a special kind of stupid not to recognize who enforces immigration law and the fact that the Board has exactly no say in the matter.
I mean, I learned that much when I was ten years old watching Schoolhouse Rock on Saturday morning.
You forgot the breaking of the window and the application of the taser. I love those parts.
As someone who has been the applier of the taser, I was always very impressed with how well it worked. I myself “rode the bull” (took the full 5 second ride). Yes, it did suck big time, but when it’s over, it’s over. Unlike pepper spray which just keeps on giving.
Anyway, an assault suspect I tased thanked me for doing it. Said that it cleared his head. Glad to be of service.
And for the sinuses, pepper spray still works.
IMO when confronted with some non compliant idiot who insists on escalation by refusing to exit the vehicle there should be a simple solution set;:
1. Break window
2. Use large size (crowd control version) pepper spray to fill the passenger compartment.
3. Wait for the unruly folks to exit
4. Handcuffs applied
5. Any resistance even slight = taser b/c they’ve demonstrated non compliance and burned any leeway
6. Further resistance= use zip ties to secure their ankles, knees and put a sandbag on their head (spit bags cost too much)
Do that and before long word gets out about refusal to comply with lawful orders. I suspect folks will be far less likely to claim they don’t have to provide a DL when operating a vehicle, step out when requested or seek a physical conflict. Personally I’d be in favor of ‘keeping the peace’ so when folks start irrational screaming and yelling they get an opportunity, maybe two to stop disturbing the peace before pepper spray is applied to end the yelling/disturbance. Align the incentives and most folks will eventually adapt to them. Let folks act a fool with impunity and they will continue.
I’ve watched the relevant youtube videos and I;m always amazing how people act. They ought to show these in high school to show impressionable youth how not to act if they are ever pulled over.
I will say always handcuffing behind the back bothers me. I understand why it is done it is just overkill for some people. Myself I have two bad shoulders a bad back and a bad neck and I know I’d be in a lot of pain if I were handcuffed like that.
A Roman citizen, when under arrest, was never shackled.
Just sayin’.
“They ought to show these in high school to show impressionable youth how not to act if they are ever pulled over.”
Chris Rock did that.
It didn’t take.
ztakddot,
I’d suggest that anyone who claims an inability to be handcuffed due to physical infirmity shouldn’t be combative in demeanor with LEO much less engaging in resistance.
Same for all the weirdos claiming to be pregnant or having a ‘heart problem’ to avoid less than lethal taser being used. Either comply or be made to comply with minimal non lethal force and if the person is ruling out less than lethal options.. No whining when old school tactics of a Rodney King beat down with batons get used to gain compliance.
CC I wouldn’t be combative in just about every case I can conceive of. That wouldn’t stop LEO from handcuffing me is all I;m saying.
ztakddot,
Why would you be handcuffed if you are not combative in demeanor/action throughout the encounter and are otherwise law abiding?
I get the point about orthopedic injuries and limitations. Got a reconstructed shoulder, a back with several discs jacked, two bad knees, occasional balance issues from TBI. I have come to understand and accept my limitations and adjust accordingly.
It is very different. In all of those videos, the SovCit has actually broken a law, and is thus subject to arrest. He’s been taught that all he has to do is say these magic words and he can’t be arrested, and he finds out that he’s been conned. SovCits who haven’t broken any laws, or who haven’t been caught breaking any, can’t be arrested and can continue their deluded lives in peace until they do break a law. The Board of Supervisors is in a similar position. Its resolution may show that its members are deluded, but they haven’t yet broken any laws. There’s certainly nothing illegal about this resolution. It doesn’t even attempt to interfere with enforcement of the immigration laws. It merely expresses a strong disagreement with such enforcement, which is protected speech.
Sounds kind of insurrection-y to me….just sayin’
Democrats have a very stable attitude towards slavery. Consistent over the centuries.
I predicted this months ago, that this was the new Civil War, that the Feds were going to go against cities in rebellion one by one. Nobody was impressed. Boo hoo.
Federal LEO enforcement of the Federal statutes passed by Congress doesn’t seem like grounds for an ’emergency declaration’. On the other hand providing material assistance to illegal aliens, particularly those with a removal order or criminal warrant seems pretty close to ‘harboring’. It would be a shame if even one felony count was made and the items used in the commission of that felony were seized until after the trial….like the LA County public buildings, CPUs, other electronic devices and bank accounts used in furtherance of a felony criminal activity. Yep a real shame.
What constitutes grounds for an “emergency declaration” is not up to me or you, but to the council. If it thinks the “declaration” is warranted, it has the right to make it. But this doesn’t change anything. It still can’t interfere with federal law enforcement.
I don’t see anything in the post about providing material assistance to illegal aliens. Doing so, while aware that the person has a warrant or removal order out, and with the purpose of preventing that warrant or order from being carried out, would indeed be harboring. But providing general assistance to people who might or might not be on the run wouldn’t be. Even providing general assistance to people who are known to be on the run, but which doesn’t actually assist them in evading arrest, wouldn’t be harboring. For instance helping them with food or rent money doesn’t prevent ICE from arresting them whenever it likes, so it’s not harboring.
8 USC 1324 seems to apply. In summery every illegal alien is ‘on the run’. Those who knowingly or in reckless disregard of illegal alien status provide an inducement to an illegal alien to enter OR remain in the USA have committed the crime of ‘harbouring’.
Here the County govt is stating its intent to provide financial assistance for housing (an inducement) to illegal aliens. Probably also meets conspiracy threshold. Lets go ahead and make the charge to find out what a Jury will have to say. Of course a change of venue is definitely required given that the jury pool and Cray Cray voters who elected such criminal political leaders overlap. The Feds should seek to remove it to a more neutral Federal District say the Middle District of Alabama where the jury pool isn’t tainted by political attachment/investment in the politicians or have a stake even at a remove from the policy acts.
1. To sustain a harboring charge, the defendant must have known that the subject had a warrant or removal order out.
2. Federal crimes must be tried in the state and district where they are alleged to have occurred. There is no such thing as removal to a different district. That’s why if a crime were to be committed in the bit of Yellowstone National Park that’s in Idaho it couldn’t be tried at all.
Or in reckless disregard for whether a person is/is not an illegal alien. They don’t have to have a removal order only the inability to demonstrate lawful status to be in the USA. There’s no ‘blind eye’ on this. If they don’t require demonstration of lawful status that’s reckless disregard….precisely b/c they didn’t ask the question.
The proclamation/EO itself seems to satisfy this because IMO, properly viewed it isn’t just ‘performance theater’ instead it is a blatant and defiant ‘admission against interest’. Well past time to begin viewing these sorts of political statements for exactly what they are; evidence.
Meh, rule 21 currently doesn’t allow the prosecution request for venue change. A defendant CAN make a request and be granted the change so a trial can occur outside the District of the offense. Always seemed to me an unequal and non equitable rule that leads to kind of where we are now; in essence not just inviting jury nullification but nullification by the entire District CT. Given the highly partisan judicial nomination process coupled with the partisan ‘resistance’ movement it seems clear that the People, represented by the US Attorney won’t always get a fair shake. Probably time for a rewrite on the rule and if we need a test case to urge it along use this one. If Congress gotta do it for the Judiciary and perhaps strip away the delegation to the Judiciary to make rules of procedure while making changes.. so be it.
It’s not Rule 21, it’s the US constitution. Change of venue is unconstitutional, unless the defendant waives his rights. Even then it requires a very good reason; but without the defendant’s waiver it’s outright unconstitutional.
Which means Congress can’t change it.
As for what you must know or reasonably suspect for it to be an offense, there are dozens of legal sites out there giving advice on this clause, and they all say that it’s not enough that the person is here illegally, there must be a warrant or removal order out on them. Otherwise they’re not fugitives. So to be in breach the defendant must know or ought to know about the warrant or order.
Oh my god, it’s an emergency that the law is being enforced. Whatever shall we do? Oh, let’s make sure that we pay the rent of all of these freaking criminals as well as their legal expenses. I think if the people of commiefornia have so much extra cash laying around and we shouldn’t be sending them one dime a federal funding to waste on illegal aliens.
Copying the songs they wrote for the Cali COVID hymnal?
Except the whole states’ colored girls were singing the doo-wop behind the COVID one.
Now, ain’t none of ’em singin’.
This action moves the needle significantly closer to a finding of insurrection. Now if Portland or Chicago would just copy them, we could have some REAL fireworks!
Not really. The protesters are already in insurrection. The cities are carefully not.
Wait until they find that their cop reservoir has dried up and there’s nothing inside those empty police cars.
That’s when LA starts using Antifa in a law-enforcement capacity – complete with a salary, benefits, and (most importantly) almost limitless access to weapons. I am convinced that process is already underway in Chicago and Portland, where the police are being slowly shoved to the side in favor of direct Communist terrorism.
I am old enough to remember what all of those things – and more – happened during widespread BLM/Antifa terrorist attacks, the totally unnecessary Wuflu lockdowns, and the Communist economic policies enacted by the state. No state of emergency was declared then.
LA County has officially recognized Donald Trump as a force of nature.
That’s an amazingly funny observation!
So illegal aliens, who have no right to work in the United States or even live here, are such a major percentage of the work force in LA county that their absence constitutes an official State of Emergency as the county’s economy simply cannot function without these slaves/illegal laborers.
Got it.
Heh. As much as I think this is a dumbass action by the LA gov’t, it’s perfectly legal. They have the broad authority to declare a state of emergency in their city for nearly any reason they wish and they’re choosing to abuse it.
I would like to note that Trump also has broad authority to declare a state of emergency, insurrection, and foreign invasion. Whether or not he is abusing that power mostly comes down to your politics. But he does have broad authority.
It’s more than just LA City. This is the LA County Board of Supervisors. But otherwise you are 100% correct.