The L.A. Riots Hand Republicans a Political Edge

Trump is overreaching in his deportation efforts, but voters will care more about the violence in the streets.

The Supreme Court’s ruling last week in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services struck a welcome blow for equal treatment under the law. Even better, it was a unanimous decision written by a reliable liberal, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, and praised in a concurring opinion written by a reliable conservative, Justice Clarence Thomas.

Demonstrators march in front of the Federal Building before the curfew imposed by LA Mayor Karen Bass goes into effect. (AFP)

The case involved a heterosexual woman who alleged that she had been denied a job promotion because of her sexual orientation, and that a less-qualified gay candidate had been chosen instead. The court held that federal civil-rights statutes give members of majority groups the same right to sue as minorities. “By establishing the same protections for every ‘individual’—without regard to that individual’s membership in a minority or majority group—Congress left no room for courts to impose special requirements on majority-group plaintiffs alone,” Justice Jackson wrote. Discrimination is discrimination, regardless of whether the target is black, white, gay or straight.

This sort of principled clarity is useful, and it can be contrasted with the fuzzy logic our political class employs as protests against the Trump administration’s immigration raids accelerate. Rioting is wrong, and it ought to be condemned. Yet President Trump and his Democratic opponents seem to believe that it depends on the circumstances.

Mr. Trump had no trouble vilifying troublemakers who were out in force following George Floyd’s murder. But he praised and ultimately pardoned virtually all of the Jan. 6 rioters who assaulted police officers, smashed windows and left feces in the Capitol’s corridors. Mr. Trump is back to denouncing violent street protests again, but only a fool would believe that his law-and-order rhetoric is based on principle rather than political expediency.

Democrats are no less guilty of selective outrage. They rightly condemned the attack on the Capitol, yet they have made excuses for everything from violence against Jews on college campuses to arson and looting at Black Lives Matter demonstrations.

Given the left’s calls to defund the police and abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement, no one is too surprised. Democrats have long considered the welfare of violent offenders to be more important than public safety. Republicans typically have held themselves to a higher standard, and some consistency might help Mr. Trump meet it.

Everyone knows that border security was the president’s top issue when he campaigned for a second term, and polls show that voters trust Republicans far more than Democrats to deal with illegal immigration. Unlawful entries have dropped dramatically this year, but millions of unvetted migrants were allowed into the country under Mr. Trump’s predecessor, and the current administration has vowed to track them down.

The party out of power is learning again that elections have consequences. What Democrats apparently haven’t learned is that street chaos—and those who defend it—plays to the president’s political strengths. Protesters in Los Angeles who are torching vehicles and defacing public buildings with calls for violence aren’t helping their cause. Nor are Democratic officials who are unwilling to acknowledge the role that their crime-friendly policies have played in bringing matters to a head.

Gov. Gavin Newsom insisted that Mr. Trump’s deployment of the National Guard was overkill. “The federal government is taking over the California National Guard and deploying 2,000 soldiers in Los Angeles—not because there is a shortage of law enforcement, but because they want a spectacle,” Mr. Newsom wrote on social media. True, current law-enforcement personnel were likely capable of restoring order, but that doesn’t matter if police can’t do their job because of dangerous sanctuary policies that shield illegal immigrants who have committed violent crimes. Mr. Newsom said Washington “manufactured” a crisis, but it would be more accurate to say that Mr. Trump is trying to resolve a crisis that was caused by progressive policies.

Inevitably, Mr. Trump will overplay his hand. The question is whether Democrats will have the credibility with voters to take advantage when that happens. Mr. Trump said that his deportation efforts would focus on gang members, drug smugglers and violent criminals. The Journal reported this week, however, that the White House, concerned that the number of daily deportations was too low, recently directed immigration agents “to target Home Depot, where day laborers typically gather for hire, or 7-Eleven convenience stores.” An immigration sweep on Friday near a Home Depot helped set off the weekend demonstrations in Los Angeles.

Rejecting Mr. Trump’s deportation agenda outright is a political loser for Democrats. If mandates exist in politics, he has one on illegal immigration. The smarter play for Mr. Trump’s political detractors would be to support his efforts to remove criminal aliens and denounce violent protests everywhere and always. If Justices Jackson and Thomas can find common ground, perhaps anything is possible.