The Los Angeles Police Department has ended the around-the-clock protection it was providing to former Vice President Kamala Harris, saying the continuous city detail would be withdrawn after public criticism from conservative groups and pressure from the city's police union.
The decision follows a period in which Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass directed LAPD resources to continue safeguarding Harris after President Donald Trump revoked her Secret Service protection earlier this year, shortening an extension that President Joe Biden had granted and that would have continued through July 2026, according to The Los Angeles Times. The Los Angeles Police Protective League, the union representing rank-and-file officers, had publicly criticized the use of city officers for the detail.
In a statement, the union's board said, "Pulling police officers from protecting everyday Angelenos to protect a failed presidential candidate who also happens to be a multi-millionaire with multiple homes and who can easily afford to pay for her own security is nuts." The statement also targeted California Gov. Gavin Newsom, the union said, criticizing officials it viewed as directing police resources toward private protection duties.
The LAPD's withdrawal of the continuous detail came after weeks of public debate over whether municipal officers should be assigned to protect a high-profile political figure whose federal protection had been curtailed. Union leaders argued that officers were being diverted from routine patrol and crime-suppression duties at a time when Los Angeles officials say the city faces significant public-safety challenges.
Mayor Bass had earlier directed local police to provide protection after the Secret Service changes became public. The mayor's office said at the time the move was intended to ensure the former vice president's immediate safety while alternative arrangements were being made. It was not immediately clear what security arrangements would replace the city detail or whether Harris's staff would arrange private security.
Representatives for Harris did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The LAPD also did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the timing and scope of the withdrawal.
The dispute highlights tensions that can emerge when federal protection is altered for former senior officials and state and local authorities consider whether to assume or supplement security responsibilities. Secret Service coverage for former presidents, vice presidents and their immediate families is governed by federal statute and memoranda that have, at times, been adjusted by successive administrations. Local police departments commonly provide additional security on a case-by-case basis, often in coordination with federal agencies and municipal leaders.
Conservative activists who opposed the LAPD detail framed the issue as one of public-resource allocation and equity, saying city officers' time should be focused on local crime and public safety priorities rather than on protecting a wealthy political figure. Supporters of Harris and of robust protection for former officials have argued that threats against public figures can persist after they leave office and that security decisions are ultimately made based on threat assessments.
It remained unclear how long the LAPD had maintained the continuous detail and when the department planned to end any remaining protective posture. City officials and police union leaders said the matter had prompted broader conversations about the appropriate role of local law enforcement in providing security for national political figures when federal protection is withdrawn or altered.