LOS ANGELES (AP) — Dozens of federal officers in tactical gear and about 90 members of the California National Guard were deployed for about an hour Monday to a mostly empty park in a Los Angeles neighborhood with a large immigrant population. It wasn’t immediately known if any arrests were made.

Defense officials had said the troops and over a dozen military vehicles would help protect immigration officers as they carried out a raid in MacArthur Park.

The operation in the large park about 2 miles (3.2 km) west of downtown LA included 17 Humvees, four tactical vehicles, two ambulances and the armed soldiers, defense officials said. It came after President Donald Trump deployed thousands of Guard members and active duty Marines to the city last month following protests over previous immigration raids.

Trump has stepped up efforts to realize his campaign pledge of deporting millions of immigrants in the United States illegally and shown a willingness to use the nation’s military might in ways other U.S. presidents have typically avoided.

In response to questions about the operation in MacArthur Park, the Department of Homeland Security said in an email that the agency would not comment on “ongoing enforcement operations.”

More than 4,000 California National Guard and hundreds of U.S. Marines have been deployed in Los Angeles since June — against the wishes of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Last week, the military announced about 200 of those troops would be returned to their units to fight wildfires.

Gov. Gavin Newsom called the events at the park “a spectacle.”

“This is not about going after dangerous criminals,” Newsom said of Trump’s mass deportation agenda. “This is about destroying the fabric of this state.”

LA raid ends abruptly

The defense officials told reporters that it was not a military operation but acknowledged that the size and scope of the Guard’s participation could make it look like one to the public. That is why the officials spoke on condition of anonymity to provide details about the raid that were not announced publicly.

“It’s just going to be more overt and larger than we usually participate in,” one of the officials said before the raid ended abruptly with no explanation.

The primary role of the service members would be to protect the immigration enforcement officers in case a hostile crowd gathered, that official said. They are not participating in any law enforcement activities such as arrests, but service members can temporarily detain citizens if necessary before handing them over to law enforcement, the official said.

Local officials say feds are sowing fear

“This morning looked like a staging for a TikTok video,” said Marqueece Harris-Dawson, president of the Los Angeles City Council, adding if Border Patrol wants to film in LA, “you should apply for a film permit like everybody else. And stop trying to scare the bejesus out of everybody who lives in this great city and disrupt our economy every day.”

Chris Newman, legal director for the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, said he received a credible tip about the operation Monday.

“It was a demonstration of escalation,” Newman said. “This was a reality TV spectacle much more so than an actual enforcement operation.”

Since federal agents have been making arrests at Home Depot parking lots and elsewhere in Los Angeles, Newman said fewer people have been going to the park and immigrant neighborhoods near the city’s downtown.

“The ghost town-ification of LA is haunting, to say the very least,” he said.

Betsy Bolte, who lives nearby, came to the park after seeing a military-style helicopter circling overhead.

She said it was “gut-wrenching” to witness what appeared to be a federal show of force on the streets of a U.S. city. “It’s terror and, you know, it’s ripping the heart and soul out of Los Angeles,” she said. “I am still in shock, disbelief, and so angry and terrified and heartbroken.”

___

Copp reported from Washington. Associated Press journalists Damian Dovarganes and Eugene Garcia in Los Angeles; Julie Watson in San Diego; Sophie Austin in Sacramento, California; and Amy Taxin in Orange County, California, contributed to this report.

NEW YORK (AP) — A coalition of doctors’ groups and public health organizations sued the U.S. government on Monday over the decision to stop recommending COVID-19 vaccinations for most children and pregnant women.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Public Health Association and four other groups — along with an unnamed pregnant doctor who works in a hospital — filed the lawsuit in federal court in Boston.

U.S. health officials, following infectious disease experts’ guidance, previously had urged annual COVID-19 shots for all Americans ages 6 months and older. But in late May, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced he was removing COVID-19 shots from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommendations for healthy children and pregnant women.

Many health experts decried the move as confusing and accused Kennedy of disregarding the scientific review process that has been in place for decades — in which experts publicly review current medical evidence and hash out the pros and cons of policy changes.

The new lawsuit repeats those concerns, alleging that Kennedy and other political appointees at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have flouted federal procedures and systematically attempted to mislead the public.

The lawsuit also notes recent changes to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Kennedy, a leading antivaccine activist before becoming the nation’s top health official, fired the entire 17-member panel this month and replaced it with a group that includes several anti-vaccine voices.

Doctors say Kennedy’s actions are making their jobs harder — with some patients raising doubts about all kinds of vaccines and others worried they will lose access to shots for themselves and their children.

“This is causing uncertainty and anxiety at almost every pediatric visit that involves vaccines,” said Dr. Susan Kressly, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

And it’s happening after U.S. pediatric flu deaths hit their highest mark in 15 years and as the nation is poised to have its worst year of measles in more than three decades, she added.

HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said Kennedy “stands by his CDC reforms.”

Also joining the suit are the American College of Physicians, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Massachusetts Public Health Alliance and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine.

The pregnant doctor, who is listed in the lawsuit as “Jane Doe,” works at a Massachusetts hospital. She had difficulty getting a COVID-19 vaccination at a pharmacy and other sites and is concerned the lack of protection will endanger her unborn child, according to the lawsuit.

The suit was filed in Boston because the unnamed doctor and some others in Massachusetts are among those have been affected by Kennedy’s change, said Richard H. Hughes IV, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs.

The state has figured repeatedly in U.S. public health history.

In 1721, some Boston leaders advocated for an early version of inoculation during a smallpox outbreak. Paul Revere was the first leader of Boston’s health commission. And a legal dispute in Cambridge led to a landmark 1905 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld states’ rights to compel vaccinations.

“We think it is significant and very meaningful” that the case is happening there, Hughes said.

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Some Apple rumors just don’t go away, hanging around in perpetuity either because they reflect things that Apple is actually testing in its labs or because hope springs eternal. A HomePod-like device with a screen? A replacement for the dear, departed 27-inch iMac? Touchscreen MacBooks? The return of TouchID fingerprint scanning via a sensor located beneath a screen? Maybe these things are coming, but they ain’t here yet.

However, few rumors have had the longevity or staying power of “Apple is planning a low-cost MacBook,” versions of which have been circulating since at least the late-2000s netbook craze. And yet, despite seismic shifts in just about everything—three distinct processor instruction sets, two CEOs, innumerable design changes, and global trade upheaval—Apple’s cheapest modern laptops have started around $1,000 for more than two decades.

Last week, supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo (whose Apple predictions aren’t always correct, but whose track record is better than your garden variety broken-clock prognosticators) kicked up another round of these rumors, claiming that Apple was preparing to manufacture a new low-cost MacBook based on the iPhone’s A18 Pro chip. Kuo claims it will come in multiple colors, similar to Apple’s lower-cost A16 iPad, and will use a 13-inch screen.

MacRumors chipped in with its own contribution, claiming that a “Mac17,1” model it had found listed in an older macOS update was actually that A18 Pro MacBook model, apparently far enough along in development that Apple’s beta operating systems were running on it.

The last round of “cheap MacBook” rumors happened in late 2023 (also instigated by Kuo, but without the corroboration from Apple’s own software). As we wrote then, Apple’s control over its own chips could make this kind of laptop more plausible. But if it existed, what would this laptop be good for? Who could buy it instead of a MacBook Air, and who would want to stick to Apple’s current $999 status quo? To commemorate the “budget MacBook” idea becoming infinitesimally more likely, let’s ruminate on those questions a bit.