Connect with us

World

Trump to ‘activate’ Marines to respond to LA protests in major escalation

Published

on

Trump to ‘activate’ Marines to respond to LA protests in major escalation

The Pentagon will send a Marine battalion to Los Angeles in a major escalation of US President Donald Trump’s response to anti-immigration enforcement protests, the United States military has said.

The statement on Monday confirmed the “activation” of 700 Marines to help protect federal personnel and property in the California city, where Trump had deployed the US National Guard a day earlier.

The update came despite opposition from state officials, including California’s Governor Gavin Newsom, who had earlier mounted a legal challenge to the deployment of the National Guard troops.

In a statement, the military said the “activation of the Marines” was meant to help “provide continuous coverage of the area in support of the lead federal agency”.

Speaking to the Reuters news agency, an unnamed Trump administration official said the soldiers would be acting only in support of the National Guard and other law enforcement.

Advertisement

The official said that Trump was not yet invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807, which would suspend legal limitations that block the military from taking part in domestic law enforcement.

Speaking shortly before the reports emerged, Trump said he was open to deploying Marines to Los Angeles, but said protests in the city were “heading in the right direction”.

“We’ll see what happens,” he said.

Reporting from Los Angeles, Al Jazeera’s Rob Reynolds said protests on Monday organised in the city centre by union groups were peaceful.

He noted that the National Guard which Trump had deployed to the city on Sunday played a minimal role in responding to the protests, only guarding federal buildings. That raised questions over why the Trump administration would feel a Marine deployment was needed.

Advertisement

“[The National Guard] didn’t engage with the protesters. They didn’t do much of anything other than stand there in their military uniforms,” Reynolds said.

He added that there is an important distinction between the National Guard, a state-based military force usually composed of part-time reserves, and the more combat-forward Marines, which are the land force of the US Navy.

“Now the Marines, this is a whole different thing. The United States sends Marines overseas where US imperialist interests are at stake, but not to cities in the United States,” he said.

California Governor Newsom’s office, meanwhile, said that according to the information it had received, the Marines were only being transferred to a base closer to Los Angeles, and not technically being deployed onto the streets.

Still, it said the “level of escalation is completely unwarranted, uncalled for, and unprecedented – mobilising the best in class branch of the US military against its own citizens”.

Advertisement

California mounts challenge

The updates on Monday came shortly after Newsom and California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced the state had filed a lawsuit challenging Trump’s decision to deploy the National Guard to Los Angeles.

Newsom has maintained that local law enforcement had the capacity to respond to protests over US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in Los Angeles and the nearby city of Paramount that first broke out on Friday.

The Democratic state leader accused Trump of escalating the situation, saying in a statement that the president was “creating fear and terror by failing to adhere to the US Constitution and overstepping his authority”.

“This is a manufactured crisis to allow him to take over a state militia, damaging the very foundation of our republic,” Newsom said.

 

Advertisement

The California lawsuit argues that the legal authority Trump invoked to deploy the National Guard requires the consent of the state’s governor, which Newsom did not provide.

For his part, Trump indicated he would support Newsom being arrested for impeding immigration enforcement, responding to an earlier threat from the president’s border czar, Tom Homan.

Trump’s response to the protests represented the first time since 1965 that a president deployed the National Guard against the will of a state governor. At the time, President Lyndon B Johnson did so to protect civil rights demonstrators in Alabama.

Protests continue

Protests against Trump’s crackdown – as well as his overall immigration policy – continued on Monday.

Standing in front of Ambiance Apparel in Los Angeles, one of the sites raided by ICE agents last week, Indigenous community leader Perla Rios spoke alongside family members of individuals detained by immigration agents.

Advertisement

Rios called for due process and legal representation for those taken into detention.

“What our families are experiencing is simply a nightmare,” Rios said.

Meanwhile, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) called for protests in cities across the country over the Trump administration’s response to demonstrations, which included the arrest of the union’s California president David Huerta.

Huerta was detained on Friday during immigration raids and charged with conspiracy to impede an officer during immigration enforcement operations.

“From Massachusetts to California, we call for his immediate release and for an end to ICE raids that are tearing our communities apart,” the SEIU said in a statement.

Advertisement

Protesters also gathered in New York and Los Angeles in response to Trump’s latest ban on travellers from 12 countries, a policy critics have decried as racist.

Speaking at a protest in New York City on Monday, Murad Awawdeh, president of the New York Immigration Coalition, said the policy was “a continuation of the Muslim and travel ban under the first Trump administration, which separated families and harmed our communities”.

The policy, he said, was creating “an immense amount of fear”.

World

Horvath to Heidenreich on 4th-and-goal leads No. 22 Navy to a 17-16 win over Army

Published

on

Horvath to Heidenreich on 4th-and-goal leads No. 22 Navy to a 17-16 win over Army

BALTIMORE (AP) — Blake Horvath to Eli Heidenreich.

That’s the connection that led Navy to such a memorable season — and the two of them came through again on the biggest play of the biggest game.

Horvath threw an 8-yard touchdown pass to Heidenreich with 6:32 remaining — on fourth-and-goal — and No. 22 Navy rallied to beat Army 17-16 on Saturday. Heidenreich, the career and single-season leader in yards receiving for the Midshipmen, caught six of Horvath’s seven completions on the day.

“Who wouldn’t go to him?” Horvath said. “Talk about an all-time Navy legend. You’re going to be talking about Eli Heidenreich for years and years and years.”

Although it was clearly a passing situation, and Heidenreich was Navy’s top target, he was single covered over the middle.

Advertisement

“Tried to bring some pressure on them,” Army coach Jeff Monken said. “Good throw and good catch.”

With President Donald Trump in attendance, Navy (10-2) got its second straight victory over Army (6-6), and the Midshipmen won the Commander-In-Chief’s Trophy for a second straight season. The Black Knights have not beaten a Navy team that was ranked by the AP since 1955.

Horvath was fortunate to have the chance to throw that decisive touchdown pass. On second-and-goal from the 1, he lost the ball while attempting a tush push. Army linebacker Eric Ford had a chance to scoop it up, but Navy running back Alex Tecza lunged over to prevent that, and Heidenreich eventually fell on the ball back at the 8.

“That’s probably the last thing you want to see on the 1-yard line is you turn around and the ball is just bouncing behind you,” Heidenreich said. “I was blocking down. I thought he had pushed in, and kind of out of my peripheral I saw it going behind me.”

On the next play, Horvath was nearly sacked, but he was able to throw the ball toward Tecza as he went down. The ball fell incomplete instead of being caught around the 15, which was just as well for Navy because it made going for it on fourth down a more viable option.

Advertisement

“I kind of felt like we had to,” Navy coach Brian Newberry said. “The nature of what they do offensively, despite how well we played in the second half, you may not get the ball back.”

Even after Heidenreich’s touchdown and an Army punt, Navy still had to escape one more near-turnover. On third-and-3 from the Army 43, the ball popped loose on a run by Horvath, but he was able to catch it out of the air. It came loose again and the Black Knights recovered, but after a review, Horvath was ruled down before the second fumble — a yard short of the line to gain.

Tecza then ran for the first down that enabled Navy to kneel out the clock, and Horvath appeared to wave goodbye at the Army sideline. There was a bit of a ruckus near midfield after the final kneel-down before things eventually calmed down for the traditional singing of the alma maters.

“They want to talk all their crap during the game and act like they’re so tough,” Horvath said. “The excuse last year was that they played a conference championship game before us. This year, we’ll see what it is.”

The Black Knights were trying to turn the tables on Navy after a ranked Army team — which had just won the American Conference title — lost to the Midshipmen last year.

Advertisement

The teams traded touchdown drives to start the game, each lasting 13 plays, 75 yards and over seven minutes. Horvath had a 5-yard scoring run, and Army quarterback Cale Hellums answered with a 2-yarder. Army’s first drive didn’t end until 5 seconds into the second quarter.

Then it was a while before anyone reached the end zone again. With Army up 10-7 late in the second quarter, the ball slipped out of Horvath’s hand while he was looking to pass. Army recovered the fumble at its own 45 with 20 seconds to play and moved into range for a 45-yard field goal by Dawson Jones.

Navy’s defense stiffened in the second half, but the Midshipmen still flirted with disaster. Horvath threw an interception in the third quarter that was initially returned to the end zone — before a replay showed Army’s Justin Weaver had a knee down when he picked off the pass at the Navy 32. The Black Knights had to settle for three — Dawson connected on a career-long 48-yard kick.

Navy’s Wing-T offense has been explosive this season. The Midshipmen entered the day with an FBS-high 10 plays of at least 60 yards. Army mostly kept them contained, but Horvath slipped free for a 37-yard run that set up a third-quarter field goal that made it 16-10.

After Hellums’ underthrown pass was intercepted by Phillip Hamilton, giving Navy the ball at the 50 with 11:19 to play, Tecza’s 24-yard run made it first-and-goal from the 5.

Advertisement

Trump tossed the coin before the game at midfield, then returned at halftime to walk from the Navy sideline to the Army one.

One that got away

Army defensive lineman Jack Bousum, who is from Annapolis, had a big game against his hometown team. He finished with 1 1/2 sacks and a fumble recovery.

The takeaway

Army: The Black Knights were the better team in the first half Saturday but didn’t do much offensively after that.

“They beat blocks,” Monken said. “We didn’t sustain the blocks we needed to.”

Navy: Horvath made some big plays and some bad ones, and the Navy defense was stout in the second half. The Midshipmen finished tied for first in the AAC this year but missed out on the league title game because of tiebreakers. This victory matters more to them anyway.

Advertisement

Up next

Army: Faces UConn in the Fenway Bowl on Dec. 27.

Navy: Faces Cincinnati in the Liberty Bowl on Jan. 2.

___

This story has been corrected to show Army took over at the Navy 32 after Horvath’s interception.

___

Advertisement

Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here and here (AP News mobile app). AP college football: https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and https://apnews.com/hub/college-football

Continue Reading

World

2 US Army soldiers, interpreter killed in Syria ambush attack, Trump warns of ‘very serious retaliation’

Published

on

2 US Army soldiers, interpreter killed in Syria ambush attack, Trump warns of ‘very serious retaliation’

Join Fox News for access to this content

You have reached your maximum number of articles. Log in or create an account FREE of charge to continue reading.

By entering your email and pushing continue, you are agreeing to Fox News’ Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive.

Please enter a valid email address.

Having trouble? Click here.

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump warned Saturday that there will be “very serious retaliation” after a lone Islamic State gunman in Syria killed two U.S. Army soldiers and a U.S. interpreter in an ambush attack.

Advertisement

Chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell announced earlier that the soldiers and interpreter were targeted in the central Syrian town of Palmyra in an attack that left three others wounded. U.S. Central Command said the deaths and injuries were a “result of an ambush by a lone ISIS gunman in Syria.”

“We mourn the loss of three Great American Patriots in Syria, two soldiers, and one Civilian Interpreter. Likewise, we pray for the three injured soldiers who, it has just been confirmed, are doing well. This was an ISIS attack against the U.S., and Syria, in a very dangerous part of Syria, that is not fully controlled by them,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. 

“The President of Syria, Ahmed al-Sharaa, is extremely angry and disturbed by this attack. There will be very serious retaliation,” he added.

SYRIANS MARK FIRST YEAR SINCE ASSAD’S FALL AS US SIGNALS NEW ERA IN RELATIONS

U.S. forces patrol in Syria’s northeastern city of Qamishli in the Hasakeh province, on Jan. 9, 2025.  (Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images)

Advertisement

In comments to reporters outside of the White House on Saturday, Trump also said, “This was an ISIS attack on us and Syria. And again, we mourn the loss and we pray for them and their parents and their loved ones.”

Parnell wrote on X that the attack happened as the soldiers “were conducting a key leader engagement.”

“Their mission was in support of ongoing counter-ISIS/counter-terrorism operations in the region,” he added, noting that “The soldiers’ names, as well as identifying information about their units, are being withheld until 24 hours after the next of kin notification. “

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said that, “The savage who perpetrated this attack was killed by partner forces.”

“Let it be known, if you target Americans — anywhere in the world — you will spend the rest of your brief, anxious life knowing the United States will hunt you, find you, and ruthlessly kill you,” Hegseth also said in a post on X.

Advertisement

Parnell said the attack is currently under investigation. A Pentagon official told Fox News Digital that the attack unfolded in a place where the Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa does not have control.

President Donald Trump meets with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa at the White House on Nov. 10, 2025. A Pentagon official told Fox News Digital that the attack on the soldiers on Saturday, Dec. 13, 2025, unfolded in a place where the Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa does not have control. (Syrian Presidency/Anadolu via Getty Images)

“I’m praying for the brave U.S. soldiers and civilian who lost their lives, those who were injured in this attack, and the families who bear this profound loss,” Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll wrote on X. “The men and women who serve our country represent the very best of our nation. We mourn the passing of these heroes and honor their service and sacrifice.”

A senior U.S. official earlier confirmed to Fox News there were multiple injuries after American service members were ambushed in Syria.

“The United States, CIA and military forces are reportedly deeply involved in securing and stabilizing the situation in Syria,” Dan Diker, president of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, recently told Fox News Digital.

Advertisement

The injured in Saturday’s attack were taken by helicopters to the al-Tanf garrison, which is near the border with Iraq and Jordan, The Associated Press reported, citing Syrian state media.

ISRAELI OFFICIAL ISSUES STARK WARNING AFTER CHILLING SYRIAN MILITARY CHANTS RESURFACE

U.S. Army soldiers prepare to go out on patrol from a remote combat outpost on May 25, 2021, in northeastern Syria.  (John Moore/Getty Images)

There are currently around 900 U.S. troops in Syria.

The U.S. had eight bases in Syria to keep an eye on ISIS since the U.S. military went in to prevent the terrorist group from setting up a caliphate in 2014, although three of those bases have since been closed down or turned over to the Syrian Democratic Forces.

Advertisement

On Monday, tens of thousands of Syrians flooded the streets of Damascus to mark the first anniversary of the Assad regime’s collapse.

U.S. Army soldiers stand near an armored military vehicle on the outskirts of Rumaylan in Syria’s northeastern Hasakeh province, bordering Turkey, on March 27, 2023.  (Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP 

Those celebrations came a year after former Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad fled the capital as rebel forces swept through the country in a lightning offensive that ended five decades of Assad family rule and opened a new chapter in Syrian history.

Fox News’ Lucas Tomlinson, Ashley Oliver, Jennifer Griffin, Benjamin Weinthal and Ashley Carnahan contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

EU dismisses Russia’s lawsuit against Euroclear as ‘speculative’

Published

on

EU dismisses Russia’s lawsuit against Euroclear as ‘speculative’

Published on

The European Commission has dismissed as “speculative” and groundless a lawsuit launched by the Russian Central Bank against Euroclear, the Brussels-based central securities depository that holds €185 billion in immobilised assets.

In a short statement published on Friday morning, the Russian Central Bank announced the start of legal proceedings for the “recovery of damages” and blamed Euroclear for preventing the release of the assets, which are subject to EU law.

The lawsuit was submitted to the Arbitration Court in Moscow.

Advertisement

The development comes with the EU still hammering out a plan to channel Russia’s sovereign assets into a zero-interest reparations loan to Ukraine, a process with Euroclear at its centre. EU leaders are meant to make a final decision when they meet on 18 December.

“Our proposal is legally robust and fully in line with EU and international law. The assets are not seized, and the principle of sovereign immunity is respected,” Valdis Dombrovskis, the European Commissioner for the Economy, said on Friday afternoon.

“We kind of expect that Russia will continue to launch speculative legal proceedings to prevent the EU from upholding international law and to pursue the legal obligation for Russia to compensate Ukraine for the damages it has caused.”

According to Dombrovskis, all European institutions that have Russian assets, from Euroclear to private banks, will be “fully protected” against Moscow’s retaliation. The EU has controlled €210 billion in assets of the Russian Central Bank since February 2022.

The sanctions regime already allows Euroclear to “offset” any potential loss, he added.

Advertisement

For example, if a Russian court orders the seizure of the €17 billion that Euroclear has on Russian soil, Euroclear will be allowed offset the loss by tapping into the €30 billion that its Russian counterpart, the National Settlement Depository, has stored within the EU.

Additionally, the reparations loan, if approved, will introduce a new mechanism to deal with state-to-state disputes. If Russia seizes the sovereign assets of Belgium in retaliation, Belgium will be allowed to “offset” the lossagainst the €210 billion, while Russia will not recover the amount it has seized when the assets are freed.

The Belgian factor

The legal safeguards are meant to allay the concerns of Belgium, which remains the chief opponent of the reparations loan. Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever has repeatedly warned of the risk a successful legal challenge could pose.

“We put forward a proposal. We are confident in its legality and its court-proof character,” a Commission spokesperson said.

Euroclear, which declined to comment, has previously criticised the reparations loan as “very fragile”, legally risky and overtly experimental.

Advertisement

The lawsuit comes a day after EU countries agreed to trigger an emergency clause to immobilise the Russian Central Bank assets for the foreseeable future.

Under the new law, the €210 billion will be released only when Russia’s actions “have objectively ceased to pose substantial risks” for the European economy and Moscow has paid reparations to Kyiv “without economic and financial consequences” for the bloc – a high bar that is unlikely to be cleared any time soon, if ever.

The indefinite immobilisation is meant to further placate Belgium and Euroclear in order to facilitate the approval of the reparations loan next week.

In a separate statement, the Russian Central Bank said it “reserves the right, without further notice, to apply all available remedies and protections if the proposed initiatives of the European Union are upheld or implemented”.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending