洛杉矶冲突持续 暴露联邦与州政府巨大分歧

Core Viewpoint - The protests in Los Angeles exhibit significant differences from previous civil unrest, particularly in the divergence between federal and local law enforcement agencies in both narrative and execution [1][2]. Group 1: Differences in Narrative - Historically, during events like the 1992 Los Angeles riots and the 2020 protests following George Floyd's death, federal and local agencies presented a unified front, emphasizing "restoring order" and "condemning violence." In contrast, the current protests have seen open confrontation between these entities, with federal statements framing the unrest within a broader national security or ideological conflict, while local leaders focus on community dissatisfaction with federal immigration actions and the need for restraint and communication [1][2]. Group 2: Differences in Execution - In past incidents, federal law enforcement typically coordinated closely with local command structures. For example, during the 2020 protests, federal police and soldiers collaborated with local forces in information sharing and on-site management. However, due to conflicting leadership opinions in the current situation, the Los Angeles Police Department has repeatedly stated it will not participate in actions by immigration enforcement, prioritizing "maintaining public order" and "protecting property." Additionally, the state government has sued the federal government over troop deployment, further reducing the likelihood of joint operations between the two law enforcement bodies [2]. Group 3: Political Implications - The public disputes between federal and local governments reflect direct results of partisan conflicts, with decisions being made more from a political perspective rather than focusing on public safety. This could lead to two severe scenarios arising from the ongoing tensions [2].