By Hadia Safeer Choudhry
The violent unrest in Los Angeles following a wave of federal immigration raids has shaken the foundations of American federalism and revealed deep fissures in its political and economic systems. What began as a crackdown on undocumented immigrants has spiraled into a multi-layered crisis: one that pits the federal executive against state governments, endangers the constitutional balance of power, and exposes the critical role of immigrant labour in sustaining the United States economy.
For the outside world, long conditioned to view the U.S. as a stable democratic model, the optics are disorienting: tear gas in the streets of California, Marines placed on high alert against American citizens, and governors threatening economic retaliation against Washington. What unfolded in Los Angeles was not just about immigration enforcement — it was a public display of how political brinkmanship, economic misjudgment, and constitutional ambiguity can converge to destabilise a democracy from within.
A Political Power Struggle in Uniform
The most startling aspect of the Los Angeles riots is not the civil unrest itself, but the government’s militarised response. In early June, federal authorities launched a sweeping operation to detain undocumented immigrants, triggering immediate backlash from California’s state leadership. Governor Gavin Newsom, who had previously championed sanctuary policies, condemned the operation as an assault on state sovereignty.
Rather than invoking the Insurrection Act, which requires a clear breakdown of public order, the White House cited vague provisions about “protecting federal property” to justify sending 2,000 National Guard troops into Los Angeles. An additional 700 Marines were placed on alert — not in a foreign warzone, but in preparation for domestic deployment against U.S. citizens. The state government was bypassed entirely, prompting legal challenges from California and over 20 other states citing 10th Amendment violations.
This marks the most significant federal-state rupture since the 1960s. Previous deployments, such as in Little Rock or during the 1992 LA riots, were made with clearer legal authority or mutual consent. This time, the justification appears politically charged. The federal government seeks to portray California as lawless and its Democratic leadership as incapable — a narrative that plays well with conservative voters ahead of the 2026 midterms.
Reports also emerged that ICE targeted not only undocumented individuals but also legal residents during raids. Community groups have documented cases of excessive force and mass detentions. In response, militias and community defense groups began appearing on the streets. Local authorities warned of an “unprecedented collapse of internal security.”
The Economic Folly of Deporting the Workforce
Beyond the constitutional crisis lies an economic reckoning. Immigrants — especially undocumented workers — are essential to the functioning of several U.S. industries. In California, over 70% of agricultural labour, 40% of construction, and large shares of caregiving and food services rely on immigrant labour.
The ICE raids have already caused 15–20% disruptions in the state’s agricultural supply chains. Crops are going unharvested. Construction projects have stalled. Small businesses, many of which rely on undocumented staff, are cutting hours or closing altogether. And all this amid existing inflation and a fragile labour market.
A 2024 state economic forecast estimated that the deportation of the undocumented workforce could reduce California’s GDP by up to $70 billion annually. On a national scale, economists warn of a 0.5% contraction in GDP if similar policies are adopted across other states.
These deportations also come with high costs. Processing, detaining, and deporting immigrants consumes billions in federal resources — money diverted from healthcare, education, and public infrastructure. Ironically, the very people being deported are often those subsidising these sectors through indirect taxation and consumer spending.
The deeper irony lies in the demographic reality the U.S. faces: an aging population, declining birth rates, and widening labour shortages. Instead of investing in pathways to legalisation and integration, the current policy approach expels the labour needed to sustain growth. It is not only unjust — it is economically irrational.
Democracy at a Tipping Point
The most lasting damage from the Los Angeles crisis may be to the credibility of American democracy itself. When a federal executive overrides elected state leadership, deploys troops without consent, and uses immigration as a political tool, foundational democratic norms are called into question.
The right to protest, the sanctity of state authority, and the guarantee of due process are not optional principles — they are the pillars of a federal democratic system. Eroding them under the pretext of national security is a dangerous precedent. This is not merely a partisan dispute. It is a struggle over the rules that govern how power is exercised in a constitutional republic.
The events in Los Angeles show that in today’s America, crises are no longer addressed through deliberation and compromise, but through unilateralism and escalation. If left unchecked, this approach risks normalising the use of federal power to suppress political dissent and punish disobedient states.
This is not just California’s battle. Already, solidarity protests are sweeping across cities like New York, Chicago, and Dallas. Legal challenges are mounting. The deeper question, however, remains: if a powerful state like California can be forced into submission, what protection do other communities have from future federal overreach?
About Author
Ms. Hadia Safeer Choudhry is an international researcher and an independent freelance writer contributing to global discourse.
