Video
The 1640 Quakers: A Radical Stand for Peace and Equality | History Brief
In an era marked by civil war, religious conflict, and authoritarian rule, the Quakers — formally known as the Religious Society of Friends — emerged in 1640s England as quiet revolutionaries. Rooted in radical ideas of peace, equality, and spiritual integrity, this small group would ultimately influence the foundation of American values in profound ways.
The recently resurfaced documentary-style video “The Quakers of 1640” sheds light on this often-overlooked movement, unpacking the beliefs, persecution, and legacy of the Quakers, and reminding viewers that the roots of American democracy and civil liberties were planted long before the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
Faith as Defiance
Unlike many religious groups of their time, the Quakers rejected church hierarchies, refused to swear oaths, and challenged social norms — including slavery and gender inequality. For their refusal to bow to either the Church of England or the monarchy, they were arrested, beaten, and exiled. And yet, their nonviolent resistance would go on to inspire civil rights leaders centuries later.
The American Connection
When the Quakers found refuge in North America, especially in the colony of Pennsylvania founded by William Penn, they helped shape a culture of tolerance, self-governance, and civil liberty. They advocated for the fair treatment of Native Americans, condemned slavery decades before abolition became a national cause, and championed public education.
These values laid the groundwork for what would become central themes in U.S. history — freedom of conscience, nonviolence, and equality under the law.
Why This History Matters Today
Understanding the story of the Quakers is more than a religious history lesson. It’s a powerful reminder that many of the rights and freedoms Americans hold dear today — freedom of speech, religious liberty, civil resistance — were first defended by outsiders who dared to live their truth, regardless of consequence.
In a time when polarization threatens democratic discourse, revisiting movements like the Quakers helps ground us in the moral courage that built the nation. The video ends not with nostalgia, but with a call: to remember, to learn, and to carry forward the ideals that once made quiet rebels into agents of transformation.
United in protest — a couple dressed in green stand proudly amid flags, chants, and community voices in downtown Los Angeles.
A Peaceful Stand for Migrant Rights: Couple from Pasadena Joins LA March in Green
Los Angeles, June 14, 2025 — Amid chants, waving flags, and determined steps through the streets of downtown Los Angeles, one couple stood out — not for shouting slogans or holding bold signs, but for their quiet presence, calm smiles, and unmistakable solidarity. Dressed in the iconic green jerseys of the Mexican national soccer team, they joined the massive immigrant rights march on Saturday, showing pride, resistance, and unity.
The couple, originally from Pasadena, California, shared that their decision to participate came from a deep belief in justice and compassion for migrant communities. “We’re here to support families, workers, and everyday people who are being treated unfairly,” they said. “Wearing green is just a small way we show who we stand with.”
Though they didn’t carry megaphones, their message was clear: peace, dignity, and solidarity matter. Between them hung a camera and a sign — subtle reminders that documentation and visibility are powerful tools in times of fear and injustice.
As federal immigration raids sweep across the region, their presence offered something rare: hope, humanity, and the strength that comes when people — even strangers — come together for a common cause.
Photos by Hector Razon.
Senator Alex Padilla Forcibly Removed from DHS Press Conference
Los Angeles, June 12, 2025 — U.S. Senator Alex Padilla was forcibly removed, handcuffed, and briefly detained by federal agents during a Department of Homeland Security press conference led by Secretary Kristi Noem in downtown Los Angeles.
Padilla attempted to ask questions about the ongoing federal immigration raids in the city. Security personnel blocked him, pushed him to the ground, and handcuffed him — even after he identified himself as a sitting U.S. Senator.
Later, at an improvised press gathering, Padilla spoke about the incident, emphasizing its broader implications:
"If this is how the Trump administration responds to a senator asking a question… I can only imagine what they’re doing to cooks, to day laborers… in the Los Angeles community."
California officials, including Governor Gavin Newsom and the state’s Democratic senators, condemned the incident as authoritarian and a direct attack on democratic norms. Advocacy groups have demanded accountability and an urgent investigation into the use of force by federal agents.
[Source: Los Angeles Times]
The protest in Downtown Los Angeles escalates on the second day of marches led by children of immigrants.
Los Angeles, June 8, 2025 — For the second day in a row, downtown Los Angeles became the scene of a wave of student-led protests, as hundreds of young people — many of them children of immigrants — walked out of schools and gathered to demand justice for families affected by recent immigration arrests.
The demonstration, initially peaceful, aimed to highlight the emotional and social impact of immigration enforcement actions. Protesters carried signs with messages such as “We Are Not Criminals” and “Families Belong Together,” chanting slogans against what they see as unjust detentions and systemic discrimination.
Witnesses say tensions rose when a group of protesters attempted to block intersections and march toward government buildings. Police intervention led to confrontations that caused the protest to spiral out of control. At least a few arrests were made, and several demonstrators reported being pushed or restrained.
Organizers of the student walkout — many of them first- and second-generation Americans — said the protest was not only about recent arrests, but also about years of marginalization and fear within immigrant communities.
“This is our voice — for our parents, our neighbors, our future,” said a 17-year-old protester. “We’re not just students. We are the children of this city.”
As the unrest subsides, several advocacy groups are calling on city leaders to investigate the police response and open a dialogue about protecting immigrant families in Los Angeles.
EXEMPT? LAPD Officers, Many Latino, Accused of Brutality Against Teen Protesters in Downtown LA
Los Angeles, June 9, 2025 — What began as a peaceful student-led protest in downtown Los Angeles erupted into chaos after clashes between LAPD officers and teen demonstrators turned violent. The protest, organized in response to recent immigration arrests, was led largely by the children of immigrants demanding justice for their families.
A now-viral image from the scene shows LAPD officers physically restraining young protesters — some still in school clothes, others wearing protective gear — as chaos unfolded in the streets.
A Controversy Within the Community
The situation has drawn sharp criticism — not only for the violence used but also for the ethnic background of several officers involved. Many in the immigrant and Latino communities are grappling with a complex emotional response: the very people tasked with protecting the city — many of whom share cultural roots with the protesters — are now accused of turning against their own.
“This is deeper than police violence — this is personal,” said Erika Mendoza, a community advocate. “When brown officers hurt brown youth, it shakes our sense of identity and belonging.”
Protest Turns Tense
Witnesses say the protest remained peaceful until students attempted to march toward City Hall, blocking intersections. Police moved in to contain the crowd, and physical confrontations quickly followed. Several demonstrators were reportedly detained or shoved, leading to calls for an independent investigation.
Signs carried by protesters read “We Are Not Criminals” and “You Can’t Deport Our Dreams.” Many expressed fear, not only for their families’ futures but for the growing mistrust between youth and law enforcement.
Call for Reform
Experts and activists are urging the city to take action. “This isn't just about excessive force — it's about identity, systemic pressure, and how Latino officers are positioned within policing,” said Dr. Elena Ramírez, a UCLA sociologist.
Community leaders are calling for:
- An independent review of police conduct during the protest
- Cultural sensitivity and de-escalation training for officers
- Open dialogue between LAPD and immigrant youth organizations
National Guard Troops Arrive in Los Angeles to Quell Protests on Orders from Trump
By Erwin Chemerinsky
Dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law – Opinion Voices Contributor
The use of the military to suppress protests is something typically associated with dictators in foreign countries — and, as of Saturday night, also with a president of the United States. When President Trump federalized 2,000 members of the California National Guard, deploying them in response to protests against federal immigration authorities, he sent a chilling signal about his willingness to use the military against demonstrators.
What Does Federal Law Say?
There are two relevant aspects of federal law:
- One law allows the president to federalize a state’s National Guard.
- Another allows for the use of the military in domestic situations.
However, neither of these laws appears to provide legal authority for what occurred on Saturday.
Under 10 U.S.C. § 12406, the president can take control of a state’s National Guard if:
- The United States or its territories are invaded,
- There is a rebellion against the federal government,
- Or regular forces are insufficient to enforce federal laws.
This is the statute President Trump has cited. But it is highly questionable whether the protests against ICE constitute a “rebellion against the authority of the government.”
Moreover, this statute does not authorize the direct use of armed troops. The Posse Comitatus Act generally prohibits the use of the military within the U.S. unless an exception applies — such as the Insurrection Act of 1807.
What Is the Insurrection Act?
On Sunday, Trump said he was considering invoking this act, which allows the use of troops in three scenarios:
- At the request of a state governor or legislature
This does not apply here, as California Governor Gavin Newsom opposes the federalization of the National Guard.
- To enforce federal law when the courts are unable to function
This is also not applicable, since courts are operating normally.
- When there is insurrection, domestic violence, or conspiracy that obstructs the execution of laws and deprives citizens of constitutional rights
This was the clause President Eisenhower used in 1957 to send troops to Little Rock, Arkansas, when the governor refused to comply with federal desegregation orders.
This third clause is the most likely legal justification the Trump administration might invoke. It includes broad language, such as:
“…opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.”
Legal Ambiguity and Presidential Power
The Insurrection Act does not clearly define key terms such as “insurrection,” “rebellion,” or “domestic violence.” In 1827, the Supreme Court ruled that the decision to invoke these powers belongs solely to the president and is not subject to challenge.
There have been calls over the years to reform this expansive law, but such efforts have failed, largely because the act has been used so infrequently. Still, the president retains sweeping powers, like a loaded weapon waiting to be used.
A Line That Must Not Be Crossed
There is a strong historical norm in the United States against using federal troops in domestic affairs — especially without a request from a state governor. But Trump has shown a disregard for such norms.
Deploying the military internally should be a last resort. The Trump administration’s readiness to use this authority so quickly is alarming. It sends a clear message: the federal government is willing to quell protests by force.
The protests in Los Angeles do not justify federalizing the National Guard. While some demonstrations against ICE have turned violent, they have been small in scale, and local law enforcement is capable of handling them without military involvement.
In light of the authoritarian tendencies we have witnessed from this administration, this decision should concern all of us.