Nithya Raman says she would fire Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell over the city’s ICE protest response, turning a year of anger, cost, and injuries into a test of power at City Hall.
Story Snapshot
- Raman vows to remove the police chief over the handling of anti-immigration raids protests.
- LAPD logged hundreds of arrests and millions in overtime during 2025 unrest.
- McDonnell defends tactics as necessary amid severe violence and officer injuries.
- Chief says the department did not aid immigration enforcement and supports protest rights.
What Raman Is Proposing And Why It Matters
Los Angeles mayoral candidate Nithya Raman said she would dismiss Police Chief Jim McDonnell if elected. She argues the police response to federal immigration raids “did not meet the moment” and left immigrants less safe. Her case centers on crowd control near federal facilities and how officers positioned between agents and protesters shaped trust. The pledge sets up a direct fight over who sets protest rules in Los Angeles and how the city polices dissent.
Raman’s promise arrives as the city still debates the 2025 protests. Those events followed immigration enforcement actions that drew large crowds across Los Angeles. Demonstrations lasted days and spread across neighborhoods. Many people marched peacefully. Some clashes turned violent and chaotic as lines formed around detention sites and downtown streets. The scale of the response, and images of tear gas and less-lethal rounds, hardened views on both sides of the debate.
What The Record Shows About LAPD’s Response
A Los Angeles Police Department report described 435 arrests and more than $12 million in overtime tied to the protests. Chief McDonnell said the protests were “unprecedented” in size and violence during his 45 years in policing. He said nearly 50 officers were injured. He argued those facts justified strong tactics to restore order and protect life. The chief also said response times were under 40 minutes at key flashpoints, citing traffic and crowd density.
McDonnell stated the department does not take part in civil immigration enforcement and does not coordinate with federal immigration officials to conduct raids. He said officers responded to calls for help when protesters confronted federal agents. He also stressed that the department protects First Amendment rights and would arrest only those engaged in violence or vandalism. These statements aimed to separate protest policing from immigration enforcement choices.
The Political Stakes For Los Angeles Voters
Raman’s push to fire the chief taps into broad frustration with government performance. Many Angelenos on the left see policing as too aggressive and too costly. Many on the right see unrest as proof that leaders let chaos spread and then send taxpayers the bill. Both sides see a system that fails to deliver safety, fairness, and restraint at the same time. The next mayor will own how Los Angeles balances those demands on the street.
Nithya Raman drank margaritas as ICE protests ignited LA – now she wants LAPD chief fired over his response https://t.co/dvJrkfpuMK pic.twitter.com/UZyOrYgM6b
— New York Post (@nypost) October 6, 2026
The fight also reflects a national divide. President Trump’s second term has sharpened conflicts over immigration and public order. Cities like Los Angeles sit between federal operations and local values. When protests erupt, police become the visible face of state power. Reviews then focus on crowd-control rules, overtime, and injuries. Voters are left asking whether force prevented harm or made things worse. Clear rules, fast communication, and camera evidence will guide the next chapter.
What To Watch Next
First, watch whether Raman details a replacement and policy plan. Specifics on dispersal orders, projectiles, and tear gas will show how much would change. Second, watch if McDonnell releases more data on injuries, arrests, and uses of force. Transparent numbers can cool rumor and rebuild trust. Third, look for city oversight steps, including audits of tactics and costs. Measurable standards can protect peaceful speech while drawing a bright line against violence.
Sources:
nypost.com, laist.com, abc7.com
