Kristi Noem defends Trump’s troop deployment in LA, invoking Tim Walz’s 2020 handling of George Floyd protests as a cautionary tale.

Noem Warns Against Repeating Past Leadership Failures

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem sharply criticized Minnesota Governor Tim Walz’s handling of the 2020 riots in the wake of George Floyd’s death, using it as justification for the Trump administration’s deployment of federal forces in Los Angeles. Noem defended the current response to anti-immigration enforcement protests, warning against repeating what she described as leadership failures during earlier unrest.

“I was a governor of a neighboring state to Tim Walz and watched him let his city burn,” Noem said Tuesday. “The president and I have talked about this in the past, and he was not going to let that happen to another city and to another community where a bad governor made a bad decision.”

Noem, who served as governor of South Dakota during the 2020 riots, has consistently aligned herself with President Donald Trump’s approach to public safety. Her remarks come amid rising tensions in Los Angeles, where the federal government has dispatched over 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines following widespread demonstrations triggered by recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests.

Walz Reflects on 2020; Newsom Pushes Back on Federal Control

Governor Walz, who took office in 2019, has publicly acknowledged that his response to the George Floyd protests in Minneapolis was delayed. However, he has also defended the broader reaction by the state. “I’m proud of Minnesota’s response. I’m proud of Minnesota’s first responders… firefighters, police, National Guard, and citizens,” Walz said during a 2022 gubernatorial debate.

Walz’s office has not issued a formal response to Noem’s latest comments. Meanwhile, California Governor Gavin Newsom has vocally opposed Trump’s decision to federalize control over National Guard troops in Los Angeles. Newsom argues that the deployment circumvents state authority and is less about safety than political optics.

“This isn’t about public safety,” Newsom posted on X. “It’s about stroking a dangerous President’s ego.” He further claimed that many of the federal troops are currently inactive and stationed in federal buildings without orders, casting doubt on the necessity of the deployment.

Under typical circumstances, National Guard troops operate under dual state and federal authority. However, President Trump invoked a legal provision allowing the federal government to take full control, effectively bypassing Newsom’s oversight.

With immigration protests growing and federal involvement expanding, the debate over who controls the National Guard during times of civil unrest has once again taken center stage. The clash highlights broader tensions between state and federal governments regarding law enforcement, public safety, and political responsibility in moments of crisis.