The cry for businesses ravaged during California’s so-called “peaceful protests” to sue Governor Gavin Newsom into financial ruin is resonating with furious shop owners and conservative critics. As anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles left 18 stores looted, five vehicles burned, and $5.2 million in damages, many blame Newsom’s sanctuary policies and lenient approach to crime for fueling the mayhem. While the push to hold him personally accountable strikes a chord with those seeking justice, legal roadblocks and practical realities make it a tough sell, even as the debate intensifies.
The unrest erupted in response to President Donald Trump’s ICE raids, targeting 3,000 daily arrests nationwide. In Los Angeles, protests morphed into riots, with small businesses like an Echo Park taqueria and a Koreatown boutique bearing the brunt. Owners, many from immigrant communities, face crippling losses, often with inadequate insurance. Statewide, protest damages since January 2025 total $12 million, with 47 officers injured and 338 arrests in LA alone. Critics argue Newsom’s SB 54, restricting state cooperation with ICE, and his calls to de-escalate police response invited the chaos by emboldening rioters.
The demand to sue Newsom personally reflects outrage over his leadership. Critics point to California’s Proposition 47, which downgraded theft under $950 to a misdemeanor, and Newsom’s resistance to tougher enforcement as creating a culture of impunity. With 48% of Americans supporting Trump’s raids, many see Newsom’s defiance—labeling deportations “cruel”—as enabling looters who hide behind the “peaceful” protest label. Business owners, backed by GOP lawmakers, argue he should face financial consequences for policies that left their livelihoods in ruins.
Legally, however, the idea is a long shot. Sovereign immunity shields officials like Newsom from personal liability for official actions, and courts rarely hold individuals accountable for policy outcomes. Suing the state or city might be more feasible, but proving Newsom’s policies directly caused looting is daunting. A 2021 Los Angeles lawsuit over 2020 riot damages collapsed due to insufficient evidence linking city inaction to losses. Even successful suits would likely burden taxpayers, not Newsom, as seen in Minneapolis’s $27 million riot payouts.
Newsom’s allies argue he’s not the villain. They blame Trump’s raids, which netted 32,809 arrests including non-criminals, for sparking unrest, with 52% of blue-state voters opposing the policy. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass defends de-escalation to prevent worse violence, and Newsom’s $1 billion public safety budget aims to strengthen policing. They contend lawsuits distract from deeper issues like poverty, which drives protests, and note crime surged nationally, including in red states, during Trump’s first term.
The emotional weight of suing Newsom is powerful. Owners, watching their dreams shattered, feel abandoned by a governor championing sanctuary policies while their stores burn. Yet, the legal and fiscal realities—combined with California’s $692 billion federal tax contribution and $68 billion deficit—suggest taxpayers, not Newsom, would pay. As “No Kings” protests loom and riots scar cities, the call for justice is loud, but targeting Newsom personally may remain a symbolic stand rather than a courtroom victory.
