Politics Desk

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s problems with fixing the high cost of living might be giving voters a feeling of deja vu.

Just like the president who came before him, Trump is trying to sell the country on his plans to create factory jobs. The Republican says he wants to lower prescription drug costs, as did Democratic President Biden. Both tried to shame companies for price increases.

Trump is even leaning on a message that echoes Biden’s assertions in 2021 that elevated inflation is a “transitory” problem that will soon vanish.

“We’re going to be hitting 1.5% pretty soon,” Trump told reporters Monday. ”It’s all coming down.”

Even as Trump keeps saying an economic boom is around the corner, there are signs that he has already exhausted voters’ patience as his campaign promises to quickly fix inflation have gone unfulfilled.

Voter frustration

Voters in this month’s elections swung hard to Democrats over concerns about affordability. That has left Trump, who dismisses his weak polling on the economy as fake, floating half-formed ideas to ease financial pressures.

He is promising a $2,000 rebate on his tariffs and said he may offer 50-year mortgages — 20 years longer than any available now — to reduce the size of monthly payments. On Friday, Trump scrapped his tariffs on beef, coffee, tea, fruit juice, cocoa, spices, bananas, oranges, tomatoes and certain fertilizers, acknowledging that they “may, in some cases,” have contributed to higher prices.

But those are largely “gimmicky” moves unlikely to move the needle much on inflation, said Bharat Ramamurti, a former deputy director of Biden’s National Economic Council.

“They’re in this very tough position where they’ve developed a reputation for not caring enough about costs, where the tools they have available to them are unlikely to be able to help people in the short term,” Ramamurti said.

Ramamurti said the Biden administration learned the hard way that voters are not appeased by a president saying his policies would ultimately cause their incomes to rise.

“That argument does not resonate,” he said. “Take it from me.”

Biden on inflation

Biden inherited an economy trying to rebound from the COVID-19 pandemic emergency, which had shut down schools and offices, causing mass layoffs and historic levels of government borrowing. In March 2021, he signed into law a $1.9-trillion relief package. Critics said it was excessive and could cause prices to rise.

As the economy reopened, there were shortages of computer chips, kitchen appliances, autos and even furniture. Cargo ships were stuck waiting to dock at ports, creating supply chain issues. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in early 2022 pushed up energy and food costs, and consumer prices reached a four-decade high that June. The Federal Reserve raised its benchmark interest rates to cool inflation.

Biden tried to convince Americans that the economy was strong. “Bidenomics is working,” he said in a 2023 speech. “Today, the U.S. has had the highest economic growth rate, leading the world economies since the pandemic.”

Though many economic indicators compared with those of other nations at the time largely supported his assertions, his arguments did little to sway voters. Only 36% of U.S. adults in August 2023 approved of his handling of the economy, according to a poll at the time by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.

Trump on inflation

Republicans made the case that Biden’s policies made inflation worse. Democrats are using that same framing against Trump today.

Here is their argument: Trump’s tariffs are getting passed along to consumers in the form of higher prices; his cancellation of clean energy projects means there will be fewer new sources of electricity as utility bills climb; his mass deportations made it costlier for the immigrant-heavy construction sector to build houses.

Former Biden administration officials note that Trump came into office in January with strong economic growth, a solid job market and inflation declining close to historic levels, only for him to reverse those trends.

“It’s striking how many Americans are aware of his trade policy and rightly blame the turnaround in prices on that erratic policy,” said Gene Sperling, a senior Biden advisor who also led the National Economic Council in the Obama and Clinton administrations.

“He is in a tough trap of his own doing — and it’s not likely to get easier,” Sperling said.

Consumer prices had been increasing at an annual rate of 2.3% in April when Trump launched his tariffs, and that rate accelerated to 3% in September.

The inflationary surge has been less than what voters endured under Biden, but the political fallout so far appears to be similar: 67% of U.S. adults disapprove of Trump’s performance, according to November polling data from AP-NORC.

“In both instances, the president caused a nontrivial share of the inflation,” said Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a center-right think tank. “I think President Biden didn’t take this concern seriously enough in his first few months in office and President Trump isn’t taking this concern seriously enough right now.”

Strain noted that the two presidents have even responded to the challenge in “weirdly, eerily similar ways” by playing down inflation as a problem, pointing to other economic indicators and looking to address concerns by issuing government checks.

White House strategies

Trump administration officials have made the case that their mix of income tax cuts, foreign investment frameworks tied to tariffs and changes in enforcing regulations will lead to more factories and jobs. All of that, they say, could increase the supply of goods and services and reduce the forces driving inflation.

“The policies that we’re pursuing right now are increasing supply,” Kevin Hassett, director of Trump’s National Economic Council, told the Economic Club of Washington on Wednesday.

The Fed has cut its benchmark interest rates, which could increase the supply of money in the economy for investment. But the central bank has done so because of a weakening job market despite inflation being above its 2% target, and there are concerns that rate cuts of the size Trump wants could fuel more inflation.

Time might not be on Trump’s side

It takes time for consumer sentiment to improve after the inflation rate drops, according to research done by Ryan Cummings, an economist who worked on Biden’s Council of Economic Advisers.

His read of the University of Michigan’s index of consumer sentiment is that the effects of the post-pandemic rise in inflation are no longer a driving factor. These days, voters are frustrated because Trump had primed them to believe he could lower grocery prices and other expenses, but has failed to deliver.

“When it comes to structural affordability issues — housing, child care, education and healthcare — Trump has pushed in the wrong direction in each one,” said Cummings, who is now chief of staff at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

He said Trump’s best chance of beating inflation now might be “if he gets a very lucky break on commodity prices” through a bumper harvest worldwide and oil production continuing to run ahead of demand.

For now, Trump has decided to continue to rely on attacking Biden for anything that has gone wrong in the economy, as he did last week in an interview with Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle.”

“The problem was that Biden did this,” Trump said.

Boak writes for the Associated Press.

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Federal officials confirmed that a surge of immigration enforcement in North Carolina’s largest city had begun as agents were seen making arrests in multiple locations Saturday.

“We are surging DHS law enforcement to Charlotte to ensure Americans are safe and public safety threats are removed,” Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement.

Local officials including Charlotte Mayor Vi Lyles criticized such actions, saying in a statement they “are causing unnecessary fear and uncertainty.”

“We want people in Charlotte and Mecklenburg County to know we stand with all residents who simply want to go about their lives,” said the statement, which was also signed by County Commissioner Mark Jerrell and Stephanie Sneed of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg education board.

The federal government hadn’t previously announced the push until Mecklenburg County Sheriff Garry McFadden confirmed this week that two federal officials had told him that Customs and Border Protection agents would be arriving soon.

Paola Garcia, a spokesperson with Camino, a bilingual nonprofit serving families in Charlotte, said she and her colleagues have observed an increase in Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents pulling people over since Friday.

“Basically what we’re seeing is that there have been lots of people being pulled over,” Garcia said. “I even saw a few people being pulled over on the way to work yesterday, and then just from community members seeing an increase in ICE and Border Patrol agents in the city of Charlotte.”

Willy Aceituno, a Honduran-born U.S. citizen, was on his way to work when he saw Border Patrol agents chasing people.

“I saw a lot of Latinos running. I wondered why they were running. The thing is, there were a lot of Border Patrol agents chasing them,” he said.

Aceituno, a 46-year-old Charlotte resident, said he himself was stopped — twice — by Border Patrol agents. On the second encounter, he said, they forced him out of his vehicle after breaking the car window and threw him to the ground.

“I told them, ’I’m an American citizen,’ ” he told the Associated Press. “They wanted to know where I was born, or they didn’t believe I was an American citizen.”

After being forcibly taken into a Border Patrol vehicle, Aceituno said, he was allowed to go free after showing documents that proved his citizenship. He said he had to walk back some distance to his car. He later filed a police report over the broken glass.

In east Charlotte, two workers were hanging Christmas lights in Rheba Hamilton’s front yard Saturday morning when two Customs and Border Patrol agents walked up. One agent tried to speak to the workers in Spanish, she said. They didn’t respond, and the agents left in a gray minivan without making arrests.

“This is real disconcerting, but the main thing is we’ve got two human beings in my yard trying to make a living. They’ve broken no laws, and that’s what concerns me,” Hamilton, who recorded the encounter on her cellphone, told the Associated Press.

“It’s an abuse of all of our laws. It is unlike anything I have ever imagined I would see in my lifetime,” the 73-year-old said.

Amid reports that Charlotte could be the next city facing an immigration crackdown, she had suggested the work be postponed, but the contractor decided to go ahead.

“Half an hour later he’s in our yard, he’s working, and Border Patrol rolls up,” she said. “They’re here because they were looking for easy pickings. There was nobody here with TV cameras, nobody here protesting, there’s just two guys working in a yard and an old white lady with white hair sitting on her porch drinking her coffee.”

Local organizations sought to prepare for the push, trying to inform immigrants of their rights and considering peaceful protests. JD Mazuera Arias, who won election to the Charlotte City Council in September, was one of about a dozen people standing watch Saturday outside a Latin American bakery in his district in east Charlotte.

A nearby bakery was closed amid word of the possible immigration crackdown, he said. The government action was hurting people’s livelihoods and the city’s economy, he said.

“This is Customs and Border Patrol. We are not a border city, nor are we a border state. So why are they here?” he asked. “This is a gross violation of constitutional rights for not only immigrants, but for U.S. citizens.”

The Trump administration has defended its federal enforcement operations in Los Angeles, Chicago and other cities as necessary for fighting crime and enforcing immigration laws.

North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein, a Democrat in a state with a Republican-majority Legislature, said Friday that the “vast majority” of those detained in these operations have no criminal convictions, and some are American citizens.

He urged people to record any “inappropriate behavior” they see and notify local law enforcement.

The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department had emphasized ahead of time that it isn’t involved in federal immigration enforcement.

Verduzco writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Maryclaire Dale in Chicago and Brian Witte in Annapolis, Md., contributed to this report.

The longest U.S. government shutdown in history is over, but the fallout will continue to hit two groups particularly hard for months to come: federally funded defense lawyers and the people they represent.

Thousands of court-appointed lawyers, known as Criminal Justice Act panel attorneys, along with paralegals, investigators, expert witnesses and interpreters, haven’t been paid since June after federal funding for the Defender Services program fell $130 million short of what the judiciary requested and ran out July 3. They had been told they would receive deferred payment once Congress passed a new budget, but as the government shutdown dragged on, many couldn’t move forward with trials or take on new clients.

Nationally, CJA lawyers handle about 40% of cases in which the defendant cannot afford an attorney. As many cases have ground to a halt, defendants’ lives have been put on hold as they wait for their day in court. Meanwhile, the federal government has continued to arrest and charge people.

“The system’s about to break,” Michael Chernis, a CJA panel attorney in Southern California, said during the shutdown. He hasn’t taken new cases since August and had to take out a loan to make payroll for his law firm.

Unpaid defense team members in several states said they had to dip into their retirement savings or turn to gig work, such as driving for Uber, to support their families.

Panel attorneys should begin receiving payment as early as next week. Judge Robert Conrad, the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, said in a Thursday memo that the resolution Congress passed to fund the government through Jan. 30 provided an extra $114 million for the Defender Services program “to address the backlog of panel attorney payments.”

But the crisis isn’t over. Conrad said a spending bill pending for the 2026 fiscal year is still $196 million short and funding is likely to run out to pay CJA panel attorneys next June.

The problem is particularly severe in the Central District of California, the largest and one of the most complex federal trial courts in the United States. Out of the approximately 100 such lawyers for the district, about 80 have stopped taking on new cases.

Chernis has a client who lives in Sacramento, but neither Chernis nor a court-appointed investigator have been able to cover the cost of travel to meet with him to discuss the case. The expert they need for the trial will also not agree to travel to Los Angeles to work on the case without payment, Chernis said.

In New Mexico, one judge halted a death penalty case, which is costly and labor-intensive to prepare, and at least 40 lawyers have resolved not to take on new cases even after the shutdown ended if the overall funding shortfall is not resolved.

California’s Central District Chief Judge Dolly Gee wrote in an Oct. 30 letter to Sen. Adam Schiff that the situation had become “dire.”

“These attorneys have sought delays in cases when they cannot find investigators and experts who are willing to work without pay, which has added to the court’s backlog of cases, and left defendants languishing in already overcrowded local prison,” Gee said. “Without additional funding, we will soon be unable to appoint counsel for all defendants who are constitutionally entitled to representation.”

She said judges may have to face the prospect of having to dismiss cases for defendants who can’t retain a lawyer.

Just hours before the government shutdown ended, Judge John A. Mendez in the Eastern District of California did, tossing out a criminal case against a man indicted on a charge of distribution of methamphetamine.

“The right to effective assistance of counsel is a bedrock principle of this country and is indisputably necessary for the operation of a fair criminal justice system,” Mendez wrote.

Everyone in the United States has the right to due process — including the right to legal counsel and a fair and speedy trial, guaranteed by the 5th and 6th Amendments.

Critics of the Trump administration have argued that it is chipping away at that right. Immigrant advocacy groups have made the allegation in multiple lawsuits. Most notably, they cite the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran-born man who was living with his family in Maryland when he was mistakenly deported to El Salvador and imprisoned at a notorious prison. He has since returned to the U.S., but he continues to face the threat of deportation as his case moves through the courts.

President Trump has been circumspect about his duties to uphold due process rights laid out in the Constitution, saying in an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press” in May that he does not know whether U.S. citizens and noncitizens alike deserve that guarantee.

The funding upheaval has delayed Christian Cerna-Camacho’s trial by at least three months. His lawyer said in court filings that one investigator, who has spent hours poring over body-camera recordings, news reports and social media content, was unable to do more work until he is paid.

Cerna-Camacho was arrested in June and is accused of punching a federal officer during a June 7 protest in Paramount against Trump’s immigration raids. He is out on bond but cannot find a construction job while he wears an ankle monitor because it poses a safety risk at the site, his attorney Scott Tenley wrote in a recent court filing.

David Kaloynides, a CJA panel attorney in Los Angeles, couldn’t even communicate with some of his clients during the shutdown because they speak only Spanish, and interpreters were not being paid. His caseload is full to the point where he’s scheduling trials in 2027, while many clients wait in jail, he said.

“We don’t do this appointed work because of the money; we do it because we’re dedicated,” Kaloynides said. “But we also can’t do it for free.”

Ding writes for the Associated Press.

An indictment unveiled this week charging Gov. Gavin Newsom’s former chief of staff with political corruption threw California’s top political circles into chaos — and stirred speculation in the state capital about what triggered the federal investigation.

Authorities have not revealed any targets beyond Dana Williamson and two other influential political operatives associated with the state’s most powerful Democrats, all of whom are accused of fraud and siphoning campaign funds for personal use.

But details contained in the indictment and other public records indicate that the FBI and U.S. Department of Justice had a keen interest in Williamson and other operatives’ involvement in the handling of a legal case involving “Corporation 1.” The facts revealed about “Corporation 1” match details of a controversial sex discrimination investigation that the state of California led into one of the world’s largest video game companies, Santa-Monica based Activision Blizzard Inc.

Williamson — an influential deal-maker and one of the state’s premier Democratic political consultants before and after she ran Newsom’s office — was arrested on corruption charges Wednesday. Two longtime associates, lobbyist Greg Campbell, a former high-level staffer in the California Assembly, and Sean McCluskie, a longtime aide to former state Atty. Gen. and U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, have agreed to plead guilty to related charges.

After Williamson pleaded not guilty in a tearful court appearance Wednesday, her attorney, McGregor Scott, said that federal authorities had charged his client only after first approaching her to seek help with a probe they were conducting into Newsom, the nature of which remains unclear. Williamson declined to cooperate.

The governor has not been accused of any wrongdoing. Still, Republicans already are using the indictments to attack Newsom, who has openly said he is considering a run for president in 2028.

Williamson’s attorney did not offer any specifics on what federal officials may have been investigating.

But numerous threads in the indictment echo details in the Activision saga.

Williamson and Campbell both worked as advisors to Activision Blizzard, according to financial disclosures on file with the state. Williamson reported receiving income from the company prior to her appointment in Newsom’s office, state records show. According to records first filed earlier this year, Campbell disclosed that his lobbying firm started being paid by Activision around the time Williamson joined the governor’s office. Activision reported paying $240,000 to his firm in 2023 and 2024. The amount Williamson was paid from Activision was not disclosed.

Activision officials did not respond to emails requesting comment. Lawyers for Williamson, Campbell and McCluskie also did not respond or declined to comment.

The state’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing in 2021 sued Activision Blizzard, which distributes video games such as “Call of Duty” and “Candy Crush,” alleging that company officials discriminated against women, paid them less than men and ignored reports of egregious sexual harassment.

The complaint alleged that the company: “fostered a pervasive “frat boy” workplace culture that continues to thrive. In the office, women are subjected to “cube crawls” in which male employees drink copious amounts of alcohol as they “crawl” their way through various cubicles in the office and often engage in inappropriate behavior toward female employees. Male employees proudly come into work hungover, play video games for long periods of time during work while delegating their responsibilities to female employees, engage in banter about their sexual encounters, talk openly about female bodies, and joke about rape.”

Activision officials denied the allegations.

The allegations also were investigated by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Activision Blizzard agreed to a consent decree, approved in March 2022, with the agency that required the company to set up an $18-million fund for employees who experienced sexual harassment or discrimination, pregnancy discrimination or retaliation.

Just weeks later, the case drew national attention again when the lawyer overseeing the case for the state’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing, Janet Wipper, was fired by the Newsom administration, and her chief deputy resigned and alleged that she was doing so to protest interference of Newsom’s office in the investigation.

“The Office of the Governor repeatedly demanded advance notice of litigation strategy and of next steps in the litigation,” the deputy, Melanie Proctor, wrote to her colleagues. “As we continued to win in state court, this interference increased, mimicking the interests of Activision’s counsel.”

A member of Activision’s board of directors contributed $40,200 for Newsom’s 2018 gubernatorial campaign, and an additional $100,000 to a committee opposing the 2021 recall campaign against Newsom — an effort that failed.

Newsom’s office denied it was meddling. “Claims of interference by our office are categorically false,” Erin Mellon, Newsom’s then-communications director said at the time.

As case continued to grind through Los Angeles Superior Court, the company stepped up its lobbying presence in Sacramento, according to disclosures filed with the state. Documents show Activision began paying Campbell starting in late 2022 to lobby on its behalf.

Around this time, Newsom announced that he was hiring Williamson to be his chief of staff.

In December 2023 the state announced it had reached a settlement agreement with Activision for $54 million, with the bulk of the funds going to compensate women who had been underpaid. The company did not admit any wrongdoing.

The FBI has made inquires about the Activision settlement, though the focus of the inquiry is unclear. When reached last week, Calabasas attorney Alan Goldstein, who handled a sexual harassment suit against Activision, said he received call from an FBI agent looking to probe California’s settlement — but that he couldn’t recall a “substantive conversation.”

Federal investigators were also looking at how Campbell, Williamson and another Sacramento political consultant, Alexis Podesta, conducted their affairs. In unveiling their charges this week, the U.S. Attorney’s office said the investigation began more than three years ago. All three consultants were members of the Sacramento-based Collaborative, a cooperative of top Democratic political operatives.

Podesta from 2017 to 2020 served as secretary of the California Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, which included the state’s Department of Fair Employment and Housing — the agency that launched the investigation of Activision in 2018.

Williamson received a federal subpoena for information about her handling of a government loan her business had received during the pandemic, according to details in the indictment. The indictment accused Williamson of spending vast sums on luxury items — including a Gucci bag, Chanel earrings and a $150,000 Mexican birthday vacation and party, plus yacht rental and private jet travel — and then claimed them as business expenses on her taxes.

She and Campbell had also allegedly conspired with McCluskie to siphon money from Becerra’s dormant campaign account to pay McCuskie’s wife for a fake, “no-show” job working for Williamson. When Williamson went to work for Newsom, the indictment alleges, Podesta took over handling the pass through payments.

By June 2024, someone in the circle was cooperating with federal investigators and wearing a wire, recording Williamson’s private conversations, according to transcripts included in the indictment.

On Nov.14, 2024, according to the indictment, FBI agents interviewed Williamson, questioning her about the Becerra campaign funds and about the pandemic funds.

Investigators also asked her about her actions “while serving in public office to influence the litigation involving the State of California and a former client –Corporation 1,” according to the indictment. The indictment doesn’t identify Corporation 1., but details match the Activision litigation. The indictment notes that Corporation 1 was Williamson’s former client and that it was involved in settlement discussions over a lawsuit with the state in 2023. It also references a state lawyer who had been fired in connection with the litigation.

Williamson, according to the indictment, told the FBI she did not pass any inside information to Campbell or other associates outside the government. But based on their recorded conversations, the indictment said, investigators believed that was not true.

They alleged that in January 2023, Williamson, shortly after starting as Newsom’s chief of staff, revealed to Podesta that she had “told a high level government attorney to … get [the case] settled.”

The indictment notes that “Corporation 1” was not only Williamson’s former client, but also now Podesta’s current client.

In June 2024, Williamson complained to Podesta that someone had submitted a California Public Records Act request seeking information about meetings and communications between Newsom officials and the company, according to the indictment.

Proctor, the state attorney who resigned in 2022 and had alleged that the Newsom administration was meddling in the Activision case, posted on her Bluesky social media account in July that she had submitted a public records request on May 29, 2024. She also posted the response from Newsom’s office, showing a meeting in January 2024 in the governor’s office between Williamson, Podesta, and Robert Kotick, the former Chief Executive of Activision.

In their June conversation, according to the indictment, Williamson told Podesta “I just wanted to alert you to the PRAS that we’re starting to get,” the indictment stated. (PRAs refer to public records requests.)

“Yeah. Ugh. F— her. They really don’t know who they are messing with,” Podesta responded.

“They really don’t,” Williamson said.

Podesta, who is identified in the indictment as “Co-Conspirator 2” was not charged. On Thursday she sent a message to numerous associates offering her take on the situation.

“While I cannot discuss the details of the ongoing investigation, I want to state plainly that I have always conducted myself –and my business–with integrity.” She also said that she continued to “cooperate fully with federal authorities.”

On Friday afternoon, McCluskie and Campbell appeared in federal court in Sacramento to be arraigned on conspiracy charges in back-to-back proceedings.

Both men had previously reached plea agreements with prosecutors, and will be back in court to enter those pleas, Mcluskie in late November and Campbell in early December.

Prosecutors did not seek detention for either man, but they were ordered to surrender their passports and avoid associating with other co-conspirators.

In brief remarks to reporters, Campbell’s attorney, Todd Pickles, said that his client “takes full accountability for his actions” and would “in appropriate time further discuss the charges.” But, Pickles noted, those charges “do not include Mr. Campbell engaging in advocacy or lobbying on behalf of any client.”

Times staff writers Katie King and Melody Gutierrez contributed to this report.

NEW YORK — When he first came to the United States after escaping civil war in Sierra Leone and spending almost a decade in a refugee camp, Dauda Sesay had no idea he could become a citizen. But he was told that if he followed the rules and stayed out of trouble, after some years he could apply. As a U.S. citizen, he would have protection.

It’s what made him decide to apply: the premise — and the promise — that when he became a naturalized American citizen, it would create a bond between him and his new home. That he would have rights as well as responsibilities, like voting, and that as he was making a commitment to the country, the country was making one to him.

“When I raised my hand and took the oath of allegiance, I did believe that moment the promise that I belonged,” said Sesay, 48, who arrived in Louisiana more than 15 years ago and now works as an advocate for refugees and their integration into American society.

But in recent months, as President Trump reshapes immigration and the country’s relationship with immigrants, that belief has been shaken for Sesay and other naturalized citizens. There’s now fear that the push to drastically increase deportations and shift who can claim America as home, through things such as trying to end birthright citizenship, is having a ripple effect.

What they thought was the bedrock protection of naturalization now feels more like quicksand.

What happens if they leave?

Some are worried that if they leave the country, they will have difficulties when trying to return, fearful because of accounts of naturalized citizens being questioned or detained by U.S. border agents. They wonder: Do they need to lock down their phones to protect their privacy? Others are hesitant about moving around within the country, after stories like that of a U.S. citizen accused of being here illegally and detained even after his mother produced his birth certificate.

Sesay said he doesn’t travel domestically anymore without his passport, despite having a Real ID with its stringent federally mandated identity requirements.

Immigration enforcement roundups, often conducted by unidentifiable masked federal agents in places including Chicago and New York City, have at times included American citizens in their dragnets. One U.S. citizen who says he was detained by immigration agents twice has filed a federal lawsuit.

Adding to the worries, the Justice Department issued a memo this summer saying it would ramp up efforts to denaturalize immigrants who’ve committed crimes or are deemed a national security risk. At one point during the summer, Trump threatened the citizenship of Zohran Mamdani, the 34-year-old democratic socialist mayor-elect of New York City, who naturalized as a young adult.

The atmosphere makes some worried to speak about it publicly, for fear of drawing negative attention to themselves. Requests for comment through several community organizations and other connections found no takers willing to go on the record other than Sesay.

In New Mexico, state Sen. Cindy Nava says she’s familiar with the fear, having grown up undocumented before getting DACA protections — Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals is the Obama-era program that protected from deportation people brought to the U.S. illegally as children — and gaining citizenship through her marriage. But she hadn’t expected to see so much fear among naturalized citizens.

“I had never seen those folks be afraid. … Now the folks that I know that were not afraid before, now they are uncertain of what their status holds in terms of a safety net for them,” Nava said.

What citizenship has meant, and who was included, has expanded and contracted throughout American history, said Stephen Kantrowitz, professor of history at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He said that while the word “citizen” is in the original Constitution, it is not defined.

“When the Constitution is written, nobody knows what citizenship means,” he said. “It’s a term of art, it comes out of the French revolutionary tradition. It sort of suggests an equality of the members of a political community, and it has some implications for the right to be a member of that political community. But it is … so undefined.”

American immigration and its obstacles

The first naturalization law passed in 1790 by the new country’s Congress said citizenship was for any “free white person” of good character. Those of African descent or nativity were added as a specific category to federal immigration law after the ravages of the Civil War in the 19th century, which was also when the 14th Amendment was added to the Constitution to establish birthright citizenship.

In the last years of the 19th century and into the 20th century, laws were passed limiting immigration and, by extension, naturalization. The Immigration Act of 1924 effectively barred people from Asia because they were ineligible for naturalization, being neither white nor Black. That didn’t change until 1952, when an immigration law removed racial restrictions on who could be naturalized. The 1965 Immigration and Naturalization Act replaced the previous immigration system with one that portioned out visas equally among nations.

American history also includes times when those who had citizenship had it taken away, such as after the 1923 Supreme Court ruling in U.S. vs. Bhagat Singh Thind. That ruling said that Indians couldn’t be naturalized because they did not qualify as white, leading to several dozen denaturalizations. At other times, it was ignored, as in World War II, when Japanese Americans were forced into incarceration camps.

“Political power will sometimes simply decide that a group of people, or a person or a family, isn’t entitled to citizenship,” Kantrowitz said.

In this moment, Sesay says, it feels like betrayal.

“The United States of America — that’s what I took that oath of allegiance, that’s what I make commitment to,” Sesay said. “Now, inside my home country, and I’m seeing a shift. … Honestly, that is not the America I believe in when I put my hand over my heart.”

Hajela writes for the Associated Press.

President Trump has publicly split with one of his most stalwart MAGA supporters, calling Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene “wacky” and saying he would endorse a challenger against her in next year’s midterms “if the right person runs.”

His attack on the Georgia Republican — who has been a leading champion of his “Make America Great Again” movement, sporting the signature red cap at President Biden’s 2024 State of the Union address and acting as a go-between for Trump and other Capitol Hill Republicans — appeared to be a resolute break in a dispute simmering for months as Greene has criticized some of the president’s policies and actions.

The three-term U.S. House member has increasingly dissented from Republican leaders, attacking them during the just-ended federal government shutdown and saying they need a plan to help people who are losing subsidies to afford health insurance policies.

Accusing Greene — one of the most right-leaning members of Congress — of going “Far Left,” Trump wrote that all he had witnessed from Greene in recent months is “COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN, COMPLAIN!” adding, of Greene’s purported irritation that he doesn’t return her phone calls, “I can’t take a ranting Lunatic’s call every day.”

In a response on X, Greene wrote Friday that Trump had “attacked me and lied about me.” She added a screenshot of a text she said she had sent the president earlier in the day about releasing the Jeffrey Epstein files, which she said “is what sent him over the edge.”

Greene called it “astonishing really how hard he’s fighting to stop the Epstein files from coming out that he actually goes to this level,” referencing next week’s U.S. House vote over releasing the complete files related to the late convicted sex offender.

The Epstein saga has placed increasing pressure on the president. Epstein emails released this week named Trump several times and indicated that he knew about Epstein’s abuse of underage girls, a claim the president denies.

Greene wrote that she had supported Trump “with too much of my precious time, too much of my own money, and fought harder for him even when almost all other Republicans turned their back and denounced him,” adding, “I don’t worship or serve Donald Trump.”

Trump’s post suggested a firm break with Greene after fissures that widened following this month’s off-cycle elections, in which voters in the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races and elsewhere flocked to Democrats in large part over concerns about the cost of living.

Greene told NBC News this month that “watching the foreign leaders come to the White House through a revolving door is not helping Americans,” saying that Trump needs to focus on high prices at home rather than his recent emphasis on foreign affairs. Trump responded by saying that Greene had “lost her way.”

Asked about Greene’s comments earlier Friday as he flew from Washington to Florida, the president reiterated that he felt “something happened to her over the last month or two,” saying that, if he hadn’t gone to China to meet leader Xi Jinping, there would have been negative ramifications for jobs in Georgia and elsewhere because China would have kept its curbs on magnet exports.

Claiming that people have been calling him wanting to challenge Greene in the primary next year, Trump added, “She’s lost a wonderful conservative reputation.”

Greene’s discontent dates back to at least May, when she announced she wouldn’t run for the Senate against Democratic incumbent Jon Ossoff, while attacking GOP donors and consultants who said they feared she couldn’t win. In June, she publicly sided with Tucker Carlson after Trump called the commentator “kooky” in a schism that emerged between MAGA and national security hardliners over possible U.S. efforts at regime change in Iran.

That only intensified in July, when Greene said she wouldn’t run for governor. Then, she attacked a political “good ole boy” system, alleging it was endangering Republican control of the state.

In recent weeks, Greene has embarked on a wide-ranging media campaign, doing interviews and appearances on mainstream programs aimed at people who aren’t hardcore Trump supporters. Asked on comedian Tim Dillon’s podcast if she wanted to run for president in 2028, Greene said in October, “I hate politics so much” and just wanted “to fix problems” — but didn’t give a definitive answer.

That continued with an appearance on Bill Maher’s HBO show, “Real Time,” followed days later by a Nov. 4 appearance on ABC’s “The View.” Some observers began pronouncing Greene as reasonable as she trashed GOP House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana for not calling Republicans back to Washington to end the shutdown and coming up with a healthcare plan.

“I feel like I’m sitting next to a completely different Marjorie Taylor Greene,” said “The View” co-host Sunny Hostin.

“Maybe you should become a Democrat, Marjorie,” said co-host Joy Behar.

“I’m not a Democrat,” Greene replied. “I think both parties have failed.”

Kinnard writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Jeff Amy in Atlanta contributed to this report.

NEWARK, N.J. — A man has been arrested after federal officials alleged that he destroyed property while trying to confront President Trump ally and New Jersey’s top federal prosecutor, Alina Habba.

The FBI arrested Keith Michael Lisa, 51, agency spokesperson Emily Molinari confirmed Saturday.

Molinari did not say when or where Lisa was arrested, what charges he might face, whether he was in jail or when he might go before a judge. It’s unclear whether Lisa is represented by a lawyer. The federal public defender in Newark, N.J., didn’t immediately respond to an electronic message Saturday asking whether it was representing Lisa.

The FBI on Friday had offered a reward of up to $25,000 for information about Lisa, saying he was wanted on charges of destroying government property and possession of a dangerous weapon inside a U.S. court facility. That bulletin said he tried to enter a federal office building in downtown Newark on Wednesday with a bat and was turned away. Lisa returned without the bat, the bulletin said, and was admitted. He then went to the U.S. Attorney’s office, where Habba works, and destroyed property, the bulletin said.

Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi wrote in a post on X on Saturday that the FBI, U.S. Marshals Service and Homeland Security Investigations had worked together to arrest Lisa.

“No one will get away with threatening or intimidating our great U.S. attorneys or the destruction of their offices,” Bondi wrote.

Habba was previously Trump’s personal lawyer, representing him in various cases and acting as his spokesperson on legal matters. She served as a White House advisor briefly before the president named her interim U.S. attorney in March.

“We got him,” Habba wrote on X on Saturday. “This Justice Department under Attorney General Pam Bondi and our federal partners will not tolerate any acts of intimidation or violence toward law enforcement. So grateful to the FBI, U.S. Marshals Service and U.S. Homeland Security Investigations for their tireless work to capture him. Now justice will handle him.”

Bondi had vowed that federal officials would find and prosecute the perpetrator, writing earlier that “any violence or threats of violence against any federal officer will not be tolerated. Period.”

Trump formally nominated Habba as New Jersey’s permanent U.S. attorney on July 1, but the state’s two Democratic U.S. senators, Cory Booker and Andy Kim, opposed it, stalling the confirmation process.

A few weeks later, as Habba’s 120-day interim appointment was expiring, New Jersey federal judges moved to replace her with her second in command. Bondi then fired that prosecutor and renamed Habba as acting U.S. attorney.

Last month, the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments in a case challenging Habba’s appointment. It hasn’t ruled.

Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s Noah Goldberg, with an assist from David Zahniser and Doug Smith, giving you the latest on city and county government.

Could L.A.’s Zohran Mamdani moment be here?

It’s definitely a long shot. But Rae Huang, a 43-year-old community organizer, minister and dues-paying member of the Los Angeles chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, is making her move, throwing her hat into the ring for mayor of Los Angeles.

The virtually unknown candidate is the deputy director of Housing Now California, a coalition that fights displacement of tenants at the state and local levels.

Huang, who is planning a campaign launch on Sunday, is shying away from comparisons to Mamdani, a democratic socialist who was elected mayor of New York City last week. She has not been endorsed by DSA-LA, though she hopes to be. Nevertheless, she sees next year’s election as a “moment for change.”

“We are in a place in our country and in our political environment where folks feel stuck and afraid,” Huang said in an interview. “They feel like nothing is going to change, and the things that are changing are making things even worse.”

Huang, a Sawtelle resident, has never run for elected office. She faces an extremely uphill battle against Mayor Karen Bass, a veteran politician with close ties to the Democratic Party who has spent much of the year denouncing President Trump’s immigration crackdown in L.A.

Still, Huang could complicate Bass’ reelection bid by playing a spoiler role, pulling away left-of-center voters in a year when the incumbent is facing criticism over her handling of the Palisades fire, a struggling city budget and less-than-optimal public services.

Bass already has a challenger in former Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent Austin Beutner, who has assailed her record in each of those areas. And it’s still not clear whether billionaire developer Rick Caruso, who lost to Bass in 2022, will jump in the race.

The larger the pool of candidates, the more work Bass will have to do in the June primary to secure an outright victory. If she falls below 50% of the vote, she would need to wage an expensive runoff campaign in the November 2026 election.

Doug Herman, a spokesperson for Bass’ campaign, said that under her leadership, “there has been unprecedented progress on the issues that matter most to Angelenos.”

“Homelessness has declined for the first time in two consecutive years, neighborhoods are safer with significant drops in crime, and the Palisades fire recovery continues far ahead of pace with the fastest recovery and rebuilding in California history,” Herman said in a statement. “In addition, there was no better defender of Los Angeles than Mayor Karen Bass when Trump’s ICE raids started and we won a court ruling to help stop the illegal raids and unconstitutional arrests.”

Sara Sadhwani, a politics professor at Pomona College, said the upcoming mayoral election differs from recent L.A. contests that were won by DSA-aligned candidates. In many of those races, DSA-backed challengers ousted incumbents who were already struggling politically, she said.

The same goes for New York City, where former Gov. Andrew Cuomo — Mamdani’s main opponent — was trying to emerge from scandal and stage a comeback, Sadhwani added.

The Democratic incumbent, Eric Adams, was so weakened by his own legal issues that he ended up running as an independent and then withdrawing from the race.

“Bass has her detractors,” Sadhwani said, “but is not in such an embattled position as Eric Adams or even Cuomo, who had stepped down from the governorship amid sexual harassment claims.”

Huang said she is in it to win — and hopes to highlight important issues for people on the left. She wants to expand public housing, make buses free for Angelenos and invest more in unarmed crisis responders.

Sound familiar? Those would pretty much be Mamdani’s talking points.

Huang said she was “hopeful” when Bass was elected. Now, she lobs plenty of criticism at Bass.

She thinks the mayor’s Inside Safe program is allowing too many people to slip back into homelessness. She believes Bass should explicitly support the Venice Dell affordable housing project. And she doesn’t feel the mayor did enough to curb police violence during the summer’s chaotic protests over federal immigration raids.

Huang is not the first to run from Bass’ left. In 2022, late-arriving mayoral hopeful Gina Viola won nearly 7% of the vote, scooping up more than 44,000 votes in the primary after positioning herself as the self-proclaimed “infamous defund-the-police candidate.”

Viola said she is glad to see Huang get into the race, and with much more time to campaign. Viola ran in 2022 with just three and a half months left before the primary. Huang has nearly seven months.

“What she needs to do is [win over] those voters that are so terribly disenfranchised that they don’t have anything to vote for,” Viola said.

Part of getting those potential voters out to the polls is having a strong ground game, knocking on doors and raising money. An endorsement from the local DSA chapter could help Huang get her name out to more Angelenos, Sadhwani said.

DSA members have petitioned to endorse Huang. She needs to receive 50 signatures, which would trigger a vote of chapter members, with 60% required to capture the endorsement.

“It’s certainly exciting to see a left challenger to a status-quo Democrat. That always pushes the conversation in a good direction,” said Claire Palmer, an organizer with DSA-LA.

There has been “enthusiasm” among members about Huang, Palmer said.

As for the DSA-backed members of the City Council?

“I haven’t sat down with them yet,” Huang said.

While four DSA-backed L.A. City Council members celebrated Mamdani’s win with a party at a Highland Park bar on election night, it’s not clear that they have any interest in getting behind a candidate other than Bass.

“Karen Bass is the most progressive mayor we’ve ever had in L.A.,” Councilmember Nithya Raman told The Times at the party.

Bass “has been doing a good job at least in handling this crisis,” Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez said in June, referring to Bass’ handling of the federal immigration raids.

Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez has already endorsed Bass.

State of play

— THE RENT IS TOO DAMN CAPPED: The City Council voted Wednesday to lower the annual cap on rent increases for rent-stabilized apartments to 4%. Many landlords and developers opposed the move, saying it would eat into their bottom line and drive away investment. Council members argued that the changes are needed to keep Angelenos from falling into homelessness.

— WILDFIRE PROBE: Los Angeles County has opened an investigation into State Farm General’s treatment of January wildfire victims following complaints that claims were delayed, denied and underpaid. The state’s largest home insurer received notice of the probe in a letter demanding records and data showing whether the company violated the state’s Unfair Competition Law.

— MISSING INFO: At least one official in the Los Angeles Fire Department was aware of concerns that its firefighters were ordered to stop mop-up operations for a Jan. 1 brush fire that later reignited into the massive Palisades fire. Yet the department’s 70-page after-action report on the Palisades fire didn’t include that information — or any detailed examination of the reignition, The Times reported this week.

— FAREWELL TO A WATCHDOG: One of L.A. County’s most prominent citizen watchdogs is dead at 62. Eric Preven, a resident of Studio City, advocated for increased public access to city and county meetings, filed countless public information requests and regularly offered his views on CityWatch. “It wasn’t just like [he was] shooting from the hip,” said Supervisor Kathryn Barger. “He would do his research.”

— MEMORIES OF MARQUEZ: Environmentalists are mourning the death of Wilmington clean air advocate Jesse Marquez, who battled the Port of Los Angeles for years over emissions from trucks, trains and ships. Marquez, 74, died Nov. 3 from health complications that developed after he was struck by a vehicle while in a crosswalk in January.

— A NEW ROADBLOCK: The proposal from Frank McCourt for a gondola between Union Station and Dodger Stadium faced yet another setback this week, with the City Council urging Metro to kill the project. “This resolution tells Metro that the city of Los Angeles refuses to be bought by shiny renderings and empty promises,” said Hernandez, who represents Chinatown and the stadium area.

— PROTEST POWERS: The council’s Public Safety Committee endorsed legislation this week that would bar the LAPD from using crowd control weapons against peaceful protesters and journalists. The proposal, which now heads to the full council, would prohibit the department from using “kinetic energy projectiles” or “chemical agents” unless officers are threatened with physical violence.

— POLICING THE POLICE: The LAPD took more than a year to begin fully disclosing domestic abuse allegations against its officers, as required by a state law passed in 2021. The revelation came out during a recent hearing regarding an officer who was fired after being accused of time card fraud and physically assaulting her former romantic partner, a fellow cop.

— CHIEF IN CHARGE: The council voted Friday to make Deputy Chief Jaime Moore the city’s newest fire chief. Moore, a 30-year department veteran, said one of his top priorities will be improving morale in a department that has faced heavy criticism for its handling of the Palisades fire. He also plans to seek an outside investigation into missteps by fire officials in the days leading up to that disaster.

— GRILLING GIBSON DUNN: U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter pressed attorneys from Gibson Dunn this week on the fees they’ve been charging the city in the landmark LA Alliance homelessness case. At one point, the firm had 15 lawyers billing the city $1,295 per hour, regardless of their titles or experience.

Carter also voiced his anger over reports that a South L.A. homeless facility had only 44 beds, not the 88 spelled out in a contract awarded to a nonprofit group. The judge set a hearing for Wednesday on whether to hold the city in contempt over what he described as delaying tactics in complying with an order he issued earlier this year.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature initiative to combat homelessness did not launch any new operations this week. The program did move about a dozen people indoors from Skid Row, according to Bass’ team.
• On the docket next week: The council heads out on recess next week, with members taking part in the National League of Cities conference in Salt Lake City. Meetings are also canceled the following week for the Thanksgiving holiday. They’ll be back Dec. 2.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to [email protected]. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

Befriending Bill and Hillary Clinton — and giving them access to his private 757 jet — gave Ron Burkle more insight into world affairs than any graduate program might have.

At one point the billionaire businessman was on half of all the trips the former president made abroad. Burkle says he met 47 world leaders in 47 countries. There was a private meeting Clinton held with Nelson Mandela that went on for hours; Burkle was in the room.

Burkle, who never finished college, says he found the travel so enlightening that he structured his son’s schooling around it, arranging for a private tutor to join them on the jet so his child could join the international trips with Clinton.

“I’m not a political junkie,” Burkle said. “I’m not trying to become an ambassador or be in the middle of every election every cycle. … A lot of people are in it because they want to go to the parties or be on the Kennedy Center Board. It is not about that for me.”

Burkle talked about the experiences during an expansive interview with the Los Angeles Times this week, in which he also expressed ambivalence about Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, reflected on his now-dissolved $15-million business partnership with Bill Clinton and explained why he is cohosting a fundraiser for Republican presidential candidate John Kasich.

The trips became a springboard for the billionaire jetsetter to put his own mark on international affairs. UCLA is home to the Burkle Center for International Relations, now prominent on the circuit of world leaders and diplomats visiting Los Angeles.

The investor talks about politics as a kind of entryway to more interesting people and pursuits.

In the case of Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), his enthusiasm for her career led him into a friendship with her husband, Richard Blum, a fellow billionaire who also has a taste for adventure and international exploration.

“I just think her husband is a fascinating and complex guy,” Burkle said. “He spends time with the Dalai Lama. He has a foundation in the Himalayas. … He and I just became friends.”

Burkle, who is perhaps the world’s most successful supermarket magnate, says he began working in his dad’s store at an early age and spent his life singularly focused on working and investing until well into his 30s.

“I wasn’t curious about anything but work and making money,” he said. “Then I got curious about art. I got curious about politics and international relations.”

Like most big donors, he says there was nothing transactional at all about his plunge into high-stakes political giving. And as is typically the case, such protestations are met with skepticism. The close political relationships have been undeniably good for his business.

NEWSLETTER: Get the day’s top headlines from Times Editor Davan Maharaj >>

Burkle has boosted the careers of politicians who went on to control pension funds that invest massive amounts with his firm, Yucaipa. He’s had a former president on his payroll, ostensibly able to open doors nobody else can.

When Burkle did not want embarrassing details in his divorce records available to the public, California lawmakers and a governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, to whom he had been donating generously passed a state law allowing him to seal them.

Burkle insisted the legislation was not crafted at his behest, but it became known in Sacramento as the “Burkle bill” nonetheless.

Now, his value to Democratic politics lies not just in his checkbook — but also in his house.

The property known as Greenacres, once owned by silent film star Harold Lloyd, is host to some three dozen fundraising events each year, often for Democrats or progressive causes.

Burkle estimates more than $200 million has been raised there for candidates and nonprofits since he moved in in the 1990s.

Even fellow high-rollers in Hollywood, who grumble that Burkle never stepped up to write multimillion dollar checks to super PACs the way other liberal billionaires have, lament that Hillary Clinton does not currently have access to the fundraising machine that is Greenacres.

“I bought a house that has its own life, independent of me,” Burkle said.

He became enamored with the property when he attended a fundraiser there. The event, he recalls, was very much an introduction to life on the high-stakes political fundraising circuit, particularly in Los Angeles.

“The first time I went to a fundraiser there, the tickets were $1,000 and $5,000,” he said. “I asked, ‘What’s the difference?’ They said, ‘Parking.’ ”

Burkle’s ambivalence about Hillary Clinton’s candidacy is puzzling to other Democratic power players.

The Clintons are well known to value loyalty. And Burkle may ultimately test whether he can step back in the inner circle after stepping so far out of it. He’s raising money for Kasich but leaving open the possibility that he will rejoin the Clintons soon enough.

One story Burkle shared about an interaction with Hillary Clinton when she first ran for president in 2008 — and he helped her raise millions of dollars — suggests he’s well aware of the kind of loyalty the Clintons expect.

Burkle recalled that she was bewildered when Bill Richardson, who had been secretary of Energy in the Clinton administration, began publicly contemplating not supporting her White House bid — which he ultimately did not.

Burkle said then Sen. Clinton called him between votes on the floor of the Senate.

Burkle recalled: “She asked me: ‘Is he really not going to vote for me? Bill watched the Super bowl with him.’ ”

MORE: Get our best stories in your Facebook feed >>

ALSO

Gov. Jerry Brown again preaches prudence in $170.7-billion California budget

State lawmakers move forward on regulating online fantasy sports sites

Is California doing enough to find owners of ‘unclaimed’ funds before pocketing the money?

There hasn’t been a “substantiated” allegation of sexual abuse by staff against an inmate in the nation’s largest jail system since 2021.

At first glance, the statistic — based on Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department data — might appear to indicate that a federal law called the Prison Rape Elimination Act has finally accomplished its mission more than two decades after it was enacted by Congress.

But a broad array of local oversight officials and advocacy groups are raising eyebrows over the claim, and bringing new scrutiny to how the Sheriff’s Department investigates allegations of sexual abuse made by inmates against their jailers.

L.A. County incarcerates about 13,000 people — including roughly 1,500 women — throughout its network of jails watched over by sheriff’s deputies.

Sheriff’s Department records show that between January 2022 and September 2025, inmates filed 592 allegations of abuse and harassment against staff. None were deemed “substantiated,” which the Sheriff’s Department defines on its website as “an allegation that was investigated and determined to have occurred.”

The suggestion that there has not been enough evidence to support even one alleged incident by staff against an inmate in nearly four years has struck some tasked with monitoring the Sheriff’s Department as absurd.

“When you have this many complaints and you have zero that are founded, there is something wrong with the process,” said George B. Newhouse, a member of the L.A. Sheriff Civilian Oversight Commission.

L.A. County’s Office of Inspector General and advocacy groups, including the Anti-Recidivism Coalition and Peace Over Violence, also shared concerns about the lack of substantiated allegations during a Nov. 4 virtual discussion of the federal Prison Rape Elimination Act, or PREA. The law was enacted in 2003 in an effort to reduce widespread sexual abuse behind bars.

In 2012, the federal government instituted a set of rules known as PREA standards, which laid out steps that jail and prison operators are required to take to prevent and reduce sexual abuse and harassment between inmates and staff.

L.A. County Sheriff’s Department Sgt. Ryan Vaccaro said the department “has zero tolerance for sexual abuse and sexual harassment.” He added that monthly town hall meetings are held in jails to educate inmates about PREA and record any questions and complaints they have about the federal standards.

“Our team is dedicated to ensuring our residents know we have a zero-tolerance policy and know how to get help when they need it,” he said. “All PREA allegations are documented and processed promptly, thoroughly and objectively.”

During a public meeting last month, Hans Johnson, the chair of the Civilian Oversight Commission, pressed John Barkley, assistant director and PREA coordinator at the Sheriff’s Department, to explain the lack of substantiated reports, and how long it typically takes for allegations to be investigated.

Dozens of the harassment and abuse claims identified in the sheriff’s department records are listed as “pending,” which the department defines on its website as an “allegation still under investigation.”

“It kind of beggars credulity that that number of complaints could be raised and that none could be substantiated,” Johnson said. “It’s just a red flag.”

Barkley said “every case is investigated” and found to be either “substantiated, unsubstantiated or unfounded.” He said “every situation is different. The thing that we’re mandated to do is to do the investigation promptly and to do it thoroughly.”

In a statement a colleague read aloud at the Nov. 4 forum, Portland, Ore., resident Frank Mendoza said that while he was incarcerated at L.A.’s Twin Towers Correctional Facility in 2006, “officers at the jail repeatedly harassed me because I was openly gay” and one beat and raped him in his cell.

“I was then left in the cell naked, bloodied, and completely humiliated,” Mendoza said in his statement. “I tried to report what happened. First, I told the officer on the next shift who found me on the floor of my cell, and all he did was order me to get dressed. That was the norm. Officers didn’t tell on one another.”

Mendoza alleged he wasn’t provided medical treatment or examined for injuries caused by the assault. When he reported the rape, he found that “without a forensic exam, it was impossible to build a criminal case.”

Now, Mendoza gives voice to other people who have been victims of sexual abuse and harassment while incarcerated through his advocacy work as a member of Just Detention International’s Survivor Council.

“It’s clear the county still has a lot of work to do to ensure the safety of people in detention,” he said. “At the same time, the fact that such a hearing is happening is evidence to me of a culture shift and that people are listening.”

The Sheriff’s Department also tracks inmate-on-inmate allegations, which accounted for 296 reports of sexual abuse or harassment between January 2022 and June 2025. Of those, 28 were classified as “substantiated.”

The numbers have spiked since then, with 82 inmate-on-inmate allegations between July and September 2025. Of those claims, the department deemed five involving sexual abuse to be “substantiated,” along with another five claims of sexual harassment.

During that three-month period, inmates made 121 sexual abuse and harassment claims against staff, none of which have been identified as “substantiated” by the Sheriff’s Department.

Arthur Calloway, co-vice-chair of the Civilian Oversight Commission, asked at the October meeting whether the sheriff’s department could be trusted to investigate inmate claims against its own employees.

He added that, “if it was all objective, there would be some substantiated ones actually to trickle out” from claims filed since January 2022.

Barkley responded that “many of those” unsubstantiated outcomes are “dictated on whether the D.A. takes the case.” He added that “if the D.A. decides that they’re not going to prosecute the case with inmate-on-inmate, then it is going to be an unsubstantiated.”

The L.A. County district attorney’s office said in a statement that the Sheriff’s Department first conducts internal investigations of allegations of criminal activity. Then, the department “may present their investigation to our Justice System Integrity Division (JSID) to determine whether criminal charges should be filed,” the statement said.

The Sheriff’s Department can also opt “to discipline their employee administratively in addition to, or in lieu of, seeking criminal charges,” the statement said.

The prosecutor’s office noted that substantiated and unsubstantiated are terms used by the Sheriff’s Department for “administrative purposes,” not legal outcomes.

“JSID reviews all cases presented to them by law enforcement using the standard of whether charges can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt,” the D.A.’s office said.

The Sheriff’s Department said in a statement that sexual abuse cases are investigated internally and that when they are “determined to meet the elements of a crime,” they “are submitted to the District Attorney’s Office.”

The department said that since January 2022, four such cases “resulted in administrative investigations and five were/are being investigated by” the department’s Internal Criminal Investigations Bureau. None of those have been deemed “substantiated.”

“Substantiated allegations, often require cooperation and some sort of evidence, which can make them more challenging,” the Sheriff’s Department said. “However, unsubstantiated allegations are more common because it has a lower threshold.”

Dara Williams, assistant inspector general, said it “would be much better if all complaints were investigated by people who were outside the chain of command.”

Otherwise, she said, when sheriff’s department employees are the ones determining “what triggers an investigation, there is some bias.”

Inspector General Max Huntsman told The Times that he believes the Sheriff’s Department is “not in compliance with PREA in many senses,” such as its internal policies and the physical state of its aging correctional facilities.

At the public meeting last month, Barkley, the PREA coordinator at the Sheriff’s Department, explained that a sergeant must record every sexual abuse and harassment allegation in a dedicated database by the end of the shift when it is received. After that, he said, the allegation is automatically sent to sheriff’s leaders and the inspector general’s office.

At the conclusion of the meeting, Johnson, the chair of the Civilian Oversight Commission, called on the Sheriff’s Department to take steps to ensure it is conducting fair and thorough reviews of all inmate allegations.

“It is unacceptable to have no substantiated cases reported,” he said.

WASHINGTON — On the campaign trail, Donald Trump was unapologetic about putting America first. He promised to secure the nation’s borders, strengthen the domestic workforce and be tough on countries he thought were taking advantage of the United States.

Now, 10 months into his second term, the president is facing backlash from some conservatives who say he is too focused on matters abroad, whether it’s seeking regime change in Venezuela, brokering peace deals in Ukraine and Gaza or extending a $20-billion currency swap for Argentina. The criticism has grown in recent days after Trump expressed support for granting more visas to foreign students and skilled immigrant workers.

The cracks in the MAGA movement, which have been more pronounced in recent weeks, underscore how Trump’s once impenetrable political base is wavering as the president appears to embrace a more global approach to governing.

“I have to view the presidency as a worldwide situation, not locally,” Trump said this week when asked to address the criticism at an Oval Office event. “We could have a world that’s on fire where wars come to our shores very easily if you had a bad president.”

For backers of Trump’s MAGA movement, the conflict is forcing some to weigh loyalty to an “America first” ideology over a president they have long supported and who, in some cases, inspired them to get involved in the political process.

“I am against foreign aid, foreign wars, and sending a single dollar to foreign countries,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who in recent weeks has become more critical of Trump’s policies, said in a social media post Wednesday. “I am America First and America Only. This is my way and there is no other way to be.”

Beyond America-first concerns, some Trump supporters are frustrated with him for resisting the disclosures about the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and his network of powerful friends — including Trump. A group of Republicans in the House, for instance, helped lead an effort to force a vote to demand further disclosures on the Epstein files from the Justice Department.

“When they are protecting pedophiles, when they are blowing our budget, when they are starting wars overseas, I’m sorry, I can’t go along with that,” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said in a CNN interview. “And back home, people agree with me. They understand, even the most ardent Trump supporters understand.”

When asked to respond to the criticism Trump has faced in recent weeks, the White House said the president was focused on implementing “economic policies that are cutting costs, raising real wages, and securing trillions in investments to make and hire in America.”

Mike Madrid, a “never Trump” Republican consultant, believes the Epstein scandal has sped up a Republican backlash that has been brewing as a result of Trump deviating from his campaign promises.

“They are turning on him, and it’s a sign of the inviolable trust being gone,” Madrid said.

The MAGA movement was not led by a policy ideology, but rather “fealty to the leader,” Madrid said. Once the trust in Trump fades, “everything is gone.”

Criticism of Trump goes mainstream

The intraparty tension also has played out on conservative and mainstream news outlets, where the president has been challenged on his policies.

In a recent Fox News interview with Laura Ingraham, Trump was pressed on a plan to give student visas to hundreds of thousands of Chinese students, a move that would mark a departure from actions taken by his administration this year to crack down on foreign students.

“I think it is good to have outside countries,” Trump said. “Look, I want to be able to get along with the world.”

In that same interview, Trump said he supports giving H-1B visas to skilled foreign workers because the U.S. doesn’t have workers with “certain talents.”

“You can’t take people off an unemployment line and say, ‘I’m going to put you into a factory where we’re going to make missiles,’” Trump argued.

Trump in September imposed a $100,000 fee for H-1B visas for skilled workers, a move that led to confusion among businesses, immigration lawyers and H-1B visa holders. Before Trump’s order, the visa program had exposed a rift between the president’s supporters in the technology industry, which relies on the program, and immigration hard-liners who want to see the U.S. invest in an American workforce.

A day after Trump expressed support for the visa program, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem added fuel to the immigration debate by saying the administration is fast-tracking immigrants’ pathway to citizenship.

“More people are becoming naturalized under this administration than ever before,” Noem told Fox News this week.

Laura Loomer, a far-right activist and close ally of Trump, said the administration’s position was “disappointing.”

“How is that a good thing? We are supposed to be kicking foreigners out, not letting them stay,” Loomer said.

Polling adds on the heat

As polling shows Americans are growing frustrated with the economy, some conservatives increasingly blame Trump for not doing enough to create more jobs and lower the cost of living.

Greene, the Georgia Republican, said on “The Sean Spicer Show” Thursday that Trump and his administration are “gaslighting” people when they say prices are going down.

“It’s actually infuriating people because people know what they’re paying at the grocery store,” she said, while urging Republicans to “show we are in the trenches with them” rather than denying their experience.

While Trump has maintained that the economy is strong, administration officials have begun talking about pushing new economic policies. White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett said this week that the administration would be working to provide consumers with more purchasing power, saying that “we’re going to fix it right away.”

“We understand that people understand, as people look at their pocketbooks to go to the grocery store, that there’s still work to do,” Hassett said.

The acknowledgment comes after this month’s elections in key states — in which Republicans were soundly defeated — made clear that rising prices were top of mind for many Americans. The results also showed Latino voters were turning away from the GOP amid growing concerns about the economy.

As Republicans try to refocus on addressing affordability, Trump has continued to blame the economic problems on former President Biden.

“Cost, and INFLATION, were higher under the Sleepy Joe Biden administration, than they are now,” Trump said in a social media post Friday. He insisted that under his administration costs are “tumbling down.”

When millions of European immigrants came to the United States in the 19th century only to be scorned by mainstream society, it was the Catholic Church that embraced them, taught that keeping the customs of one’s native lands was not bad and created systems of mutual aid and education for the newcomers that didn’t rely on the government.

The 1960 election of John F. Kennedy, an Irish American Catholic, showed that the U.S. was ready to expand its definition of who could become president. Labor organizers like Cesar Chavez, Dorothy Day and Mother Jones pushed for the dignity of workers while frequently citing the woke words of Jesus — the Sermon of the Mount and the Beatitudes among the wokest — as the fuel for their spiritual fire.

Catholicism is the faith I was baptized in, the one I embraced as a teen and that’s the bedrock for my moral code of comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable. My work desk covered with statues and devotional cards of Jesus, Mary and the saints is a physical testament to this.

But I’m also one of the 72% of U.S. Catholics that a Pew Research Center survey from earlier this year. found don’t attend weekly Mass, which we’re obligated to do.

I stopped going early on in my adulthood because the Church became something I didn’t recognize.

The bishops and cardinals who preached we should follow Jesus’ admonition we should tend to the least among us presided over a child sex abuse scandal in the 1990s and 2000s that cost parishioners billions of dollars in legal settlements and their ethical high ground. The obsession that too many of those same church leaders had over abortion and homosexuality — which Christ never talked about — over social justice matters during the Obama administration left me disappointed. Their continual condemnation of pro-choice Catholic Democratic politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden for taking Communion while staying silent about Donald Trump’s constant violations of the Ten Commandments was rank hypocrisy.

The Pew Research Center found 55% of my fellow faithful voted for Trump. Key Catholics have blessed Trump’s uglier tendencies: A majority of them rules over our revanchist Supreme Court while the president’s team features a vice president who’s a convert and a rogue’s gallery of influential insiders that bear surnames from previous generations of Catholic diasporas — Kennedy, Rubio, Bovino, Homan among the worst of the worst.

Yet I remain a Catholic because you shouldn’t turn your back so easily on institutions that formed you and you don’t cede your identity to heretics. The election of Pope Leo XIV, the first American to head the Holy See, to succeed Pope Francis stirred in me the sense that things might change for the better as our country worsens.

Now, without naming him, the U.S. Catholic hierarchy has rebuked Trump on his signature issue and one close to my heart in a way that shows my hope hasn’t been in vain.

Clergy attend the 2021 Fall General Assembly meeting of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in Baltimore, Md.

(Julio Cortez/Associated Press)

This week the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops released a so-called “special message” to blast Trump’s deportation Leviathan, decrying its “vilification of immigrants” “the, indiscriminate mass deportation of people” and how hundreds of thousands of residents have “arbitrarily lost their legal status.” Citing passages from across the Bible — the Gospel, the Old Testament, the Letters of Paul — to argue for the human worth of the undocumented and the holy mandate that we must care about them, it was the first time since 2013 that American bishops collectively authored such a statement.

Even as a majority of U.S. Catholics have gone MAGA, support for the special message was overwhelming: 216 bishops voted in favor, 5 against, and there were 3 abstentions. Their missive even concluded with a shout-out to Our Lady of Guadalupe, the brown, pregnant apparition of the Virgin Mary who’s the patroness of the Americas for Catholics.

Talk about someone who would get deported if la migra saw Her on the street.

The cruelty this administration has shown throughout its deportation campaign — families torn apart as easily as the Constitution; U.S. citizens detained; wanton federal violence that a federal judge in Chicago described as “shock[ing] the conscience” — has become one of the most pressing moral issues of our times. The call by Catholic bishops to oppose this wrong is important — so like a voice crying in the wilderness, the church must set an example for the rest of the country to follow.

This example already is being set in parishes across Southern California.

Priests and deacons have marched at rallies and prayed for those detained and deported from Orange County to downtown L.A. and beyond. Dolores Mission in Boyle Heights has let local activists stage know-your-rights workshops since Trump won last November. While L.A archbishop José H. Gomez and Diocese of Orange bishop Kevin Vann, the two most senior Catholic prelates in the region, have spoken out forcefully against immigration raids, some of their local brother bishops have pushed harder.

Diocese of San Bernardino Bishop Alberto Rojas has allowed Catholics who are afraid of la migra to skip Mass since July after immigration agents detained migrants on church property, arguing “such fear constitutes a grave inconvenience” for his flock. In San Diego, Bishop Michael Pham — who’s been in his seat for only four months — helped launch a program encouraging religious leaders to accompany migrants to immigration court to bear witness to the injustices inside and has participated himself.

Expect to hear gnashing of the teeth from the conservative side of church pews about how everyone should respect the rule of law and to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s as if there ever was a Pope Donald. Already, Trump border czar Tom Homan has cried that the bishops are “wrong” for issuing their pro-immigrant letter and suggested they focus on “fixing the Catholic Church.”

But Homan’s dismissal and that of his fellow travelers doesn’t make the bishop’s admonition against Trump’s policies any more prophetic. The president’s immigration dictates are out of Herod — no less an authority than Pope Leo described them in October as “inhuman,” told a delegation of American bishops that “the church cannot remain silent” on those outrages and stated in a separate speech that such abuse was “not the legitimate exercise of national sovereignty, but rather grave crimes committed or tolerated by the state.”

The Catholic Church never will be as progressive as some want it to be. Even as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops released its message, the group elected as its next president Diocese of Oklahoma City Archbishop Paul Coakley, whose public politics have so far mostly aligned with those of his deep-red state. But on the issue of dignity for immigrants during the Trump era, U.S. bishops have been on the right side of history — and God. They criticized Trump’s Muslim ban and his move to separate undocumented parents from their children during his first administration and have kept a watch on his attempt to cancel the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which allows some people who came to this country as children to legally remain in the U.S.

We’re about to enter the Christmas season, a holiday based on the story of a poor family seeking shelter in an era when their kind was rejected by the powers that be and ultimately had to flee home. It’s the story of the United States as well, one too many Americans have forsaken and that Trump wants all of us to forget.

May Catholics remind their fellow Americans anew of how powerful and righteous standing up for the stranger is.

When Donald Trump apologized for saying in 2005 that he could grope women because of his celebrity, he immediately pointed to Bill Clinton as having done worse. Trump appeared before a debate alongside Clinton’s accusers and again mentioned the former president’s past while onstage with Hillary Clinton. But Trump’s argument was undercut when more women publicly came forward with allegations that he had groped or kissed them without consent.

Here’s a look at the pasts of both Trump and Bill Clinton and accusations against them.

Donald Trump

In a screen grab of a 2005 “Access Hollywood” video, Donald Trump prepares for his cameo on “Days of Our Lives” with actress Arianne Zucker and Billy Bush, right, then “Access” co-host. (Getty)

(Getty)

1977, 31-year-old Trump

Trump marries his first wife, Ivana Trump

Donald Trump Jr. is born

Early-1980s, 30-something Donald Trump

Allegation: While Trump was seated next to her on a plane, businesswoman Jessica Leeds said, he lifted her armrest and touched her inappropriately.

“He was like an octopus,” Leeds, now 74, told the New York Times. “His hands were everywhere.”

Response: Trump called it a “ridiculous tale.” At a rally in North Carolina, he said, “She would not be my first choice.”

1981, 35-year-old Trump

Ivanka Trump is born.

1984, 38-year-old Trump

Eric Trump is born.

1989, 43-year-old Trump

Allegation: Ivana Trump used the word “rape” in a 1992 deposition during their divorce to describe an encounter with Trump when they were married in 1989. In 2015, after the allegation resurfaced, she said it was “without merit” and that she had made it “at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald.”

Response: After the allegation resurfaced last summer, Michael Cohen, a lawyer for the Trump Organization, incorrectly said that a man cannot legally rape his wife. Many states have laws outlawing marital rape. Trump distanced himself from that statement.

Early 1990s, 40-something Trump

Allegation: Kristin Anderson told the Washington Post that when she was at a Manhattan nightclub, someone sitting next to her “touched her vagina through her underwear.” Anderson said she fled the couch and only then realized it was Trump. 

Response: “Mr. Trump strongly denies this phony allegation by someone looking to get some free publicity. It is totally ridiculous,” Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks said to the Post.

1991, 44-year-old Trump

Ivana Trump files for divorce.

1992, 45-year-old Trump

Accusation: Donald Trump reportedly talked about dating young girls once they reached maturity. A 1992 wire service report said he joked to 14-year-old girls that he’d be dating them “in a few years.” In CBS footage from around the same time, he says of a 10-year-old girl that he’d be “dating her in 10 years.”  

Response: Trump has not commented specifically on those allegations.

Accusation: Jill Harth filed a sexual assault lawsuit against Trump, alleging that while working on a beauty competition with him, he harassed her to the point of what she called “attempted rape.”

“He pushed me up against the wall, and had his hands all over me and tried to get up my dress again,” she told the Guardian. “And I had to physically say: ‘What are you doing? Stop it.’”

Response: In an interview with CNN on Friday, Trump said he was the victim of a political smear campaign.

1993, 46-year-old Trump

Tiffany Trump is born.

Trump marries Marla Maples.

1997, 50-year-old Trump

Trump and Marla Maples separate.

Accusation: Temple Taggart told the New York Times that when she was Miss Utah, Trump kissed her on the lips without consent.

Response: Trump has denied the allegations.

1998, 51-year-old Trump

Accusation: During a press conference with Gloria Allred on Thursday, Karena Virginia said Trump approached her after the 1998 U.S. Open tennis tournament in Flushing, N.Y. He then grabbed her arm and touched her breast.

 “Don’t you know who I am?” Virginia said Trump asked her when she flinched.

Response: “Gloria Allred, in another coordinated, publicity seeking attack with the Clinton campaign, will stop at nothing to smear Mr. Trump,” Trump spokeswoman Jessica Ditto said. “Give me a break. Voters are tired of these circus-like antics and reject these fictional stories and the clear efforts to benefit Hillary Clinton.”

1999, 52-year-old Trump

Trump and Marla Maples divorce

2003, 56-year-old Trump

Accusation: Mindy McGillivray says Trump groped her at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida while she was working with a photographer at the site. She was 23.

Response: Trump has denied the allegations.

2005, 58-year-old Trump

Trump marries Melania Trump

Allegation: Trump makes lewd comments about groping women. 

Response: Apologized, calling it “locker room talk,” while dismissing it as a distraction.

Accusation: Natasha Stoynoff of People magazine says Trump groped her while she was waiting for Melania Trump to return for an interview.

“Within seconds, he was pushing me against the wall, and forcing his tongue down my throat,”

Response: Trump called the story a “total lie.”

Accusation: Rachel Crooks says Trump kissed her without permission outside an elevator bank at Trump Tower in Manhattan when she was 22.

Response: Trump denied the allegations. When questioned by a New York Times reporter, he told the journalist, “You are a disgusting human being.”

2006, 59-year-old Trump

Barron Trump is born.

Allegation: During a Saturday press conference with Gloria Allred, adult film star Jessica Drake said she met Trump in 2006 at a golf tournament in Lake Tahoe where she said he made sexual advances toward her and two friends.

“When we entered the room he grabbed each of us tightly in a hug and kissed each one of us without asking permission,” Drake said, releasing a posed photo she took with Trump at the event.

Drake said that later, Trump or a “male speaking on his behalf” offered her $10,000 and use of his private jet for sex. She said she declined.

Response: “This story is totally false and ridiculous. The picture is one of thousands taken out of respect for people asking to have their picture taken with Mr. Trump,” Trump’s campaign said in a statement. “Mr. Trump does not know this person, does not remember this person and would have no interest in ever knowing her.”

2007, 60-year-old Trump

Accusation: Former “Apprentice” contestant Summer Zervos says Trump invited her into his bungalow at the Beverly Hills Hotel and proceeded to kiss her against her will, groped her and shoved his genitals towards her.

Response: “To be clear, I never met her at a hotel or greeted her inappropriately a decade ago. That is not who I am as a person, and it is not how I’ve conducted my life,” Trump said in a statement.

Bill Clinton

President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky.

(Getty Images)

1975, 29-year-old Bill Clinton

Bill Clinton marries Hillary Rodham.

Mid-1970s to 1992, 30- to 40-something Clinton

Allegation: Dolly Kyle Browning, a high school friend of Clinton’s, said she had an occasional sexual relationship with him over about 15 years. 

Response: Clinton has not publicly responded. 

1978, 32-year-old Clinton

Allegation: Juanita Broaddrick said in 1999 that when Clinton was Arkansas governor, he invited her to a hotel room where she said he kissed, then raped her.

Response: Clinton denied the allegations.

1980, 34-year-old Clinton

Chelsea Clinton is born.

1982, 36-year-old Clinton

Allegation: In 1998, Elizabeth Ward Gracen said she had had a consensual one-night stand with Clinton when he was Arkansas governor in 1982. It was the same year she won the title of Miss America.

Response: Clinton denied the allegations.

1983, 37-year-old Clinton

Allegation: In 1994, 1958’s Miss Arkansas, Sally Perdue, said she had an affair with Clinton the previous year. She claimed that a Democratic staffer told her not to reveal any information, and was warned “they knew that I went jogging by myself and he couldn’t guarantee what would happen to my pretty little legs.”

Response: He has not publicly responded to the allegation.

1991, 44-year-old Clinton

Allegation: Paula Jones said a state trooper asked her to meet then-Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton in his hotel room. Jones said that Clinton dropped his pants and underwear and told her to “kiss it.” She refused.

Jones sued Clinton for sexual harassment in 1998, prompting the investigation that culminated in the revelation of Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky. 

Response: Clinton settled a sexual harassment suit with Jones with no apology or admission of guilt. 

1980-1992, 45-year-old Clinton

Allegation: During Clinton’s presidential campaign in 1992, Gennifer Flowers said she had had a 12-year sexual relationship with him.

Response: Clinton admitted to a sexual affair with Flowers while under oath in 1998.

1993, 46-year-old Bill Clinton

Allegation: In 1998, Kathleen Willey alleged Clinton groped her without permission in the Oval Office.

Response: Clinton denied the encounter while under oath in 1998.

1995-1996, 49-year-old Bill Clinton

Allegation: Monica Lewinsky’s affair with Bill Clinton surfaced in 1998, when Lewinsky’s friend Linda Tripp learned that she had signed an affidavit in the Paula Jones case denying her relationship with Clinton. Tripp handed secret recordings of Lewinsky’s account of the affair to investigator Kenneth Starr.

Response: Clinton initially denied the allegations. 

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” he said famously. 

Clinton later admitted to the affair, and the House of Representatives voted to impeach him.

Updated at 11:10 a.m. on Oct. 24, 2016: This story was updated with Jessica Drake’s statements.

Updated at 1:20 p.m. on Oct. 20, 2016: This story was updated with Karena Virginia’s statements.

This article was originally published at 3:35 p.m. on Oct. 19, 2016.

[email protected]

Twitter: @cshalby

ALSO:

Melania Trump echoes Hillary Clinton as she defends her husband

More women accuse Trump: ‘You do not have a right to treat women as sexual objects just because you are a star’

New sex assault allegations against Trump: ‘He was like an octopus’

NEW YORK — Acceding to President Trump’s demands, U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi said Friday that she has ordered a top federal prosecutor to investigate sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s ties to Trump political foes, including former President Clinton.

Bondi posted on X that she was assigning Manhattan U.S. Atty. Jay Clayton to lead the probe, capping an eventful week in which congressional Republicans released nearly 23,000 pages of documents from Epstein’s estate and House Democrats seized on emails mentioning Trump.

Trump, who was friends with Epstein for years, didn’t explain what supposed crimes he wanted the Justice Department to investigate. None of the men he mentioned in a social media post demanding the probe has been accused of sexual misconduct by any of Epstein’s victims.

Hours before Bondi’s announcement, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that he would ask her, the Justice Department and the FBI to investigate Epstein’s “involvement and relationship” with Clinton and others, including former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers and LinkedIn founder and Democratic donor Reid Hoffman.

Trump, calling the matter “the Epstein Hoax, involving Democrats, not Republicans,” said the investigation should also include financial giant JPMorgan Chase, which provided banking services to Epstein, and “many other people and institutions.”

“This is another Russia, Russia, Russia Scam, with all arrows pointing to the Democrats,” the Republican president wrote, referring to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of alleged Russian interference in Trump’s 2016 election victory over Bill Clinton’s wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Big names in Epstein’s emails

Trump, Bill Clinton, Summers and Hoffman were all mentioned in the documents released this week — a collection of emails Epstein exchanged with friends and business associates, news articles, book excerpts, legal papers and other material.

Epstein kept in touch with Summers and Hoffman via email, according to the documents, and wrote to other people about Trump and Clinton being in his company at various times over the years — though nothing in the messages suggested any wrongdoing on the men’s part.

Clinton has acknowledged traveling on Epstein’s private jet but has said through a spokesperson that he had no knowledge of the late financier’s crimes. Neither Clinton nor Trump has been accused of wrongdoing by any of the women who say Epstein abused them.

Summers, who served in Clinton’s Cabinet and is a former Harvard University president, previously said in a statement that he has “great regrets in my life” and that “my association with Jeffrey Epstein was a major error of judgment.”

Messages seeking comment were left for Hoffman through his investment firm, Greylock, and with a spokesperson for JPMorgan Chase.

After Epstein’s sex trafficking arrest in 2019, Hoffman said he’d had only a few interactions with Epstein, all related to his fundraising for MIT’s Media Lab. He nevertheless apologized, saying that “by agreeing to participate in any fundraising activity where Epstein was present, I helped to repair his reputation and perpetuate injustice.”

None of Epstein’s victims has accused Hoffman of misconduct.

Bondi, in her post, praised Clayton as “one of the most capable and trusted prosecutors in the country” and said the Justice Department “will pursue this with urgency and integrity to deliver answers to the American people.”

Clayton, the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission during Trump’s first term, took over in April as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York — the same office that indicted Epstein and won a sex trafficking conviction against Epstein’s longtime confidante, Ghislaine Maxwell, in 2021.

Trump changes course on Epstein files

Trump has raised questions about Epstein’s death in jail a month after his arrest and suggested while campaigning last year that he’d seek to open up the government’s case files.

But Trump has changed course in recent months — blaming Democrats and painting the matter as a “hoax” — amid questions about his own friendship with Epstein and what knowledge he may have had about Epstein’s years-long exploitation of underage girls.

On Wednesday, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released three Epstein email exchanges that referenced Trump, including one from 2019 in which Epstein said the president “knew about the girls” and another from 2011 in which he said Trump had “spent hours” at his house with a sex trafficking victim.

The emails did not say what Trump knew and did not give any details of what Trump did while at Epstein’s house. White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt accused Democrats of having “selectively leaked emails” to “create a fake narrative to smear President Trump.”

Soon after, Republicans on the committee disclosed what they said was an additional 20,000 pages of documents from Epstein’s estate. Among them were emails Epstein wrote, including many where he commented — often unfavorably — on Trump’s rise in politics and corresponded with journalists.

Other emails show Epstein keeping up friendly relationships with academic and business leaders, including Summers and Hoffman, well after he pleaded guilty in 2008 and served 13 months in jail for procuring a person under 18 for prostitution.

Epstein and Summers discussed politics, arranged calls with each other and spoke on more intimate matters, according to the emails, including about a woman Summers had interactions with. Epstein’s advice to him: “You care very much for this person. You might want to demonstrate that.”

Sisak and Bedayn write for the Associated Press.

The FBI was secretly listening last year when a high-ranking advisor to Gov. Gavin Newsom unleashed a stream of profanities as she vented about a public records request from an unnamed individual.

“Double f— her!” said Dana Williamson, Newsom’s chief of staff, repeating the f word throughout the conversation. She also called another person an “a—,” according to federal court documents made public this week.

Before Wednesday, few people outside of California’s political bubble likely knew Williamson’s name.

Now she’s engulfed in a scandal involving political consultants and illicit payments that threatens to haunt her former boss, Newsom, as he challenges President Trump and looks toward the 2028 presidential race.

A smart and savvy negotiator who bridged Sacramento’s overlapping worlds of government, business and labor, Williamson is also someone who picked unnecessary fights and launched cruel missives, political consultants and friends said this week.

Federal agents arrested Williamson Wednesday at her home in Carmichael, a Sacramento suburb. Her lawyer, former U.S. Atty. McGregor Scott, was furious about how the arrest was handled, saying she was seriously ill and in need of a liver transplant.

Federal prosecutors allege that she conspired to funnel money out of one of her one-time client’s state campaign accounts for bogus services, and falsified documents related to her COVID loan.

She also is accused of lying on her tax returns about luxury items and services, including a $150,000 birthday trip to Mexico, that she allegedly sought to pass off as business expenses, according to the government.

Williamson, who pleaded not guilty to the charges this week, appeared in a courtroom in Sacramento. She appeared solemn during the hearing, at one point reportedly lifting her cuffed hand to wipe away a tear, and left without talking to reporters.

Court documents filed this week paint an image of both a conniving player and a fragile individual. “I’m scared,” she wrote in a February 2022 text message to a colleague as they discussed the alleged money-laundering scheme, which was allegedly in the early planning stages.

Public affairs consultant Steven Maviglio has known her since the two worked in President Clinton’s administration — and then later the administration of Gov. Gray Davis. He is now trying to put together a legal defense fund for her.

He described Williamson as a “no nonsense, no BS, get it done” person who was “straight-talking, sometimes to the point of offensive to people.”

She regularly dropped f-bombs, he added.

In another recording captured by the FBI, Williamson joined two colleagues last year in a restaurant near the state Capitol in Sacramento. The government was asking questions about money she received through her COVID loan.

She complained about the “f—” drama and said her Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan got “popped” — before adding another swear word. According to federal officials, she created false contracts in an attempt to show the COVID money was appropriately used.

There is little sympathy from her detractors. Gil Duran, the former press secretary to Gov. Jerry Brown, who worked alongside Williamson, likened her to a “mafia boss” in an interview with CNN. She also has numerous defenders in Sacramento, many of them women, who view her as a tough and inspiring figure.

The details in the federal filings sent shock waves beyond Sacramento and the state Capitol this week.

“I’m stunned about the allegation and find it hard to believe,” said Alison Gaulden, who supervised Williamson when she worked as an associate vice president of public affairs for Planned Parenthood Mar Monte from 2002 to 2004.

Gaulden described her as “incredibly bright and well versed in policy. I’ve admired how she grew in her career.”

Williamson, who grew up in Santa Rosa, moved between the private and public sectors, and was employed by three governors, Davis, Jerry Brown and Newsom.

At Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (PG&E), she worked alongside two other women who would be remarkably influential in her life: Nancy McFadden, the late advisor to Brown and Alexis Podesta, a longtime California political insider who also appears in the federal court documents filed this week.

Podesta is the person identified as “Co-Conspirator 2,” but has not been charged and is cooperating with investigators, according to her attorney.

Williamson was hired as a senior advisor for Brown and was later promoted to Cabinet secretary.

While working for Brown, Williamson publicly advocated for children’s health, testifying in favor of legislation that would eliminate the state’s personal-belief exemption for childhood vaccines. She said the issue was meaningful to her because she was a mother of four.

“Usually, staff doesn’t speak on bills, the great thing about the governor is that he respects that we are people first,” Williamson told the San Francisco Chronicle. “This was important to me.”

Business advocates appreciated her direct approach when she worked for Brown.

“She was very straightforward, she was a good person to work with,” said Stuart Waldman, president of Valley Industry and Commerce Assn. He said he hadn’t dealt with her in years.

She flip-flopped between private and government work, drawing criticism from groups like Consumer Watchdog for her “revolving door” career.

In one episode, she was allegedly seen negotiating for her energy clients in Brown’s office as the state hammered out details over a grid deal, drawing outrage from the watchdog group.

She started her own government relations firm, Grace Public Affairs, which handled an array of campaigns, including the online sports betting initiative Proposition 27, which appeared on the 2022 ballot, but failed to pass.

Her clients included California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, and former Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra, whose campaign fund was allegedly raided by Williamson, and others.

By 2017, she had a close group of female friends, who had also risen to the top of their professions. But to those who weren’t in her inner circle, she was all elbows, one political insider said this week.

At the California Democratic Party headquarters in downtown Sacramento, a bronze statue of Williamson’s then-5-year-old daughter was installed as part of a campaign to promote female empowerment following Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s 2016 loss.

Those behind the statue included Williamson’s friends Robin Swanson, a Democratic communications consultant, and Angie Tate, then a chief fundraiser for the California Democratic Party.

The installation was intended to mimic the “Fearless Girl” statue at New York’s Wall Street, which shows a 4-foot young woman looking defiantly at the famous charging bull statue.

In 2022, Newsom’s office announced Williamson was joining his office as chief of staff. Though the two weren’t particularly close when she joined, she quickly became part of his inner circle, Politico reported at the time.

Anthony York, Newsom’s former communications director and a former L.A. Times reporter, told Politico at the time that Williamson was not intimidated by the governor’s celebrity status. “She gives zero f—s, which is part of what makes her so great,” York said.

During her time in Newsom’s office, she worked with former Senate leader Darrell Steinberg on the successful passage of Proposition 1, which borrows billions of dollars for mental health services, and was a personal issue for her family.

“I had a particularly tough experience with my husband that I learned a lot from… when the incident happened with him, I learned about all the holes in the system,” she told KQED.

She moved from Elk Grove last year to Carmichael, purchasing a home for $1.695 million, according to property records. The records show her linked to several homes in Elk Grove, including one that went into foreclosure in 2012.

Williamson would send off combative messages, including social media posts or texts, often at night. Among her targets: California Labor Federation President Lorena Gonzalez and U.S. Rep. Kevin Kiley (R-Rocklin), whom she called an “entertaining idiot” on X.

She took aim at former Assemblymember Kevin McCarty during his campaign last year for Sacramento mayor. She called him a “devil” on X and urged others not to vote for him, before her comment was taken down a few days later.

Newsom placed Williamson on leave when she informed him last year she was under criminal investigation. Her last day in office was in November 2024. At the time, the governor said in a statement that “her insight, tenacity, and big heart will be missed.”

This week, a spokesperson for the governor struck a different tone: “Ms. Williamson no longer serves in this administration. While we are still learning details of the allegations, the Governor expects all public servants to uphold the highest standards of integrity.”

SAN FRANCISCO — The California Supreme Court may reveal Thursday whether it intends to uphold Proposition 8, and if so, whether an estimated 18,000 same-sex marriages will remain valid, during a high-stakes televised session that has sparked plans for demonstrations throughout the state.

By now, the court already has drafted a decision on the case, with an author and at least three other justices willing to sign it. Oral arguments sometimes result in changes to the draft, but rarely do they change the majority position. The ruling is due in 90 days.

Chief Justice Ronald M. George, who wrote the historic May 15, 2008, decision that gave same-sex couples the right to marry, will be the one to watch during the hearing because he is often in the majority and usually writes the rulings in the most controversial cases.

Most legal analysts expect that the court will garner enough votes to uphold existing marriages but not enough to overturn Proposition 8. The dissenters in May’s 4-3 marriage ruling said the decision should be left to the voters.

One conservative constitutional scholar has said that the court could both affirm its historic May 15 ruling giving gays equality and uphold Proposition 8 by requiring the state to use a term other than “marriage” and apply it to all couples, gay and straight.

“The alternatives are for the court to accept Proposition 8 and authorize the people to rewrite the Constitution in a way that undermines a basic principle of equality,” said Pepperdine law professor Douglas Kmiec. If the court overturns Proposition 8, “that is the short course toward impeachment.”

The court is under intense pressure. Opponents of gay marriage have threatened to mount a campaign to boot justices who vote to overturn the initiative. The last time voters ousted state high court justices was in 1986, when then-Chief Justice Rose Bird and two colleagues lost a retention election.

On the other side, the Legislature has passed two resolutions opposing Proposition 8, and protests are being planned statewide to urge the court to throw out the measure.

Thousands are expected to descend Thursday on the San Francisco Civic Center to watch the hearing live on a giant outdoor screen, just steps from the courtroom where the justices will be prodding lawyers in a jammed courtroom.

“It is one of the most important cases in the history of the California Supreme Court,” said Mark Rosenbaum, legal director of the ACLU of Southern California. “The core tenet of our constitutional democracy is that fundamental rights of historically disadvantaged minorities are not dependent on the whim of the majority.”

The challenges to the initiative are based on novel legal theories. Gay rights lawyers argue that the measure was an illegal constitutional revision, rather than a more limited amendment. The court has struck down constitutional amendments passed by voters as impermissible revisions only twice in its history, and there are relatively few precedents on the subject.

“While no case forecloses the revision argument, there is no case that really supports it, and most of the cases mildly cut against it,” said UC Davis law professor Vikram Amar.

Upholding existing same-sex marriages would be a lower hurdle for the court, Amar and other scholars said.

“There is enough ambiguity in Prop. 8 that the court could easily interpret the measure as not applying to existing marriages,” Amar said. “That is a legally plausible interpretation, and it is so clearly the just interpretation that I think getting four votes for that seems easier.”

State Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown’s office will ask the court to uphold the marriages and strike down the initiative as an illegal repeal of an inalienable right without compelling justification. Brown’s argument is even more novel than the revision challenge, which his office said had no merit.

The Proposition 8 case has attracted more friend-of-the-court briefs than the marriage dispute that led to last year’s historic ruling — the previous record-holder. Most of the outside groups that have weighed in have asked the court to overturn the initiative.

Pepperdine’s Kmiec said replacing the word “marriage” with another term would both leave intact the court’s May 15 ruling and deter a recall campaign that could damage the court as an institution. He said couples could still marry in their religious communities.

That would “restore a religious meaning to a word that is a religious word,” he said. Kmiec, a Catholic, said he reluctantly voted for Proposition 8 “because of the instructions of my faith community” but felt “entirely unsatisfied” with the outcome.

“I am not sure Ron George wants to be remembered as the chief justice who denied the principle of fundamental equality,” the law professor said. “It is not a legacy we should ask anyone to live with, and it is wholly unnecessary.”

George, a moderate Republican, is considered a swing vote on the court and, until the marriage decision, was widely regarded as cautious. Scholars have said the marriage ruling would be pivotal to his legacy on the court.

“It is difficult to imagine, although obviously plausible, that the majority of justices who ruled in the marriage cases would so quickly endorse an undermining of at least a significant portion of their ruling,” said Kate Kendell, executive director of the San Francisco-based National Center for Lesbian Rights.

Pepperdine law school Dean Kenneth Starr, hired by the Proposition 8 campaign, will urge the court to uphold the measure and declare that existing same-sex marriages are no longer valid. Benefits, such as inheritance, acquired by couples during their marriages would not be taken away, but couples would have to register as domestic partners to protect their future rights.

“The people ultimately decided,” Starr wrote in his final brief in the case. “Under our system of constitutional government, that is the end of the matter.”

—

[email protected]

Times staff writer Jessica Garrison also contributed to this report.

The hearing is scheduled to be shown live from 9 a.m. to noon Thursday on the California Channel, available to cable customers. (A list of local channel numbers for this service is available at www.calchannel.com/channel “> www.calchannel.com/channel /carriage/ .) The hearing also will be streamed live on www.calchannel.com .

Reporting from Washington — It was classic Donald Trump: The president, angry and embarrassed that most Philadelphia Eagles players planned to boycott the traditional White House victory celebration for Super Bowl champs, dramatically lashed back with his own punishing spin.

Not only did Trump disinvite the entire team late Monday, but he transformed the celebration on Tuesday to dramatically inflame the culture war he ignited two years ago — casting the mostly African American players as unpatriotic and ignoring their protests both of police brutality and of Trump’s perceived divisiveness.

The president, in an early morning Twitter statement, said the White House would hold an alternative celebration of patriotism for the fans, “where we will proudly be playing the National Anthem and other wonderful music.”

“NFL, no escaping to the Locker Rooms!” Trump added, referring to the league owners’ new policy of requiring players to stand for the pregame playing of the national anthem or stay off the field. Though that policy is largely viewed as a response to the president’s pressure, Trump made plain that he was not satisfied; he’s called in the past for owners to force players to stand or be fired.

Later, at the fete on the South Lawn with military bands at the ready, Trump briefly opened the program before an audience that seemed to have fewer than the promised 1,000 Eagles fans, bolstered by a number of administration aides.

“I want to use this opportunity to explain why young Americans stand for the national anthem,” Trump said. “Maybe it’s about time that we understand. We stand to honor our military, and to honor our country and to remember the fallen heroes who never made it back home.”

The president’s reaction this week was more dramatic than his response to a similar snub last year by the 2017 National Basketball Assn. champion Golden State Warriors. That reflects not only his long-running fight with professional football players about the flag and the anthem, but also renewed tensions between Trump and the National Football League that date to the 1980s. Trump failed then both in acquiring an NFL team and in challenging the NFL commercially as a prominent owner in a new, rival sports league, the USFL, which subsequently folded.

Since the campaign, Trump has often used the NFL player protests to rally his supporters and distract from other controversies. Polls show a plurality of Americans, and large majorities of whites and Republicans, do not support the player protests.

As Trump was attacking the Eagles, a variety of other controversies swirled and vied for attention.

Former campaign chairman Paul Manafort was accused by federal prosecutors of witness tampering in his tax and money-laundering case. Trump’s press secretary and lawyer were under fire for falsely saying Trump did not dictate the misleading statement last year about a meeting that Trump’s son, son-in-law and Manafort had with a Russian lawyer promising “dirt” on rival Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign.

Trump himself faced new questions after his tweet Monday that he had the “absolute right to PARDON myself.” And he was being assailed for ignoring a new study estimating that about 4,600 Americans died from the hurricanes last year in Puerto Rico, not 16 or 17 as he’d said in the past.

The Eagles’ snub presented yet another controversy, but one Trump sought to turn to advantage.

“These cultural issues that stir controversy, they’re winners for the president,” said one Trump ally who speaks with the president and his top aides regularly and requested anonymity.

No Eagles players knelt in protest during the 2017 season. Torrey Smith, a former Eagles player, tweeted, “The President continues to spread the false narrative that players are anti-military.”

Many pro athletes on championship teams, especially African Americans, have been conflicted about White House visits during the Trump presidency, or simply stayed away. The Warriors had their invitation for a visit with Trump rescinded after publicly equivocating about attending.

LeBron James of the NBA’s Cleveland Cavaliers, arguably the league’s most influential player, told reporters on Tuesday that “no matter who wins” the NBA Finals now underway between the Cavs and the Warriors, “no one wants to go anyway” to the White House. Warriors star guard Stephen Curry agreed.

Trump, on Twitter, noted that he’d hosted celebrations at the White House for other professional and college teams and sports, including NASCAR, the Chicago Cubs, Houston Astros, Pittsburgh Penguins, New England Patriots, the University of Alabama and Clemson University.

Trump decided late Monday, less than 24 hours before the planned Super Bowl tribute, to instead make it “a celebration of the American flag,” as White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders called it in a statement Tuesday. Fewer than 10 players out of more than 70 who were eligible had been expected to attend, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Sanders blamed the Eagles for botching the visit. She said 81 people from the team — including employees, coaches, managers and players — had accepted invitations to come, along with 1,000 fans. With only a small number of players expected, the team tried Friday to reschedule the event, Sanders said, to a time when Trump planned to be overseas.

The White House said that “despite sensing a lack of good faith” on the Eagles’ part, it tried to work with the team “to change the event format that could accommodate a smaller group of players.”

“Unfortunately, the Eagles offered to send only a tiny handful of representatives, while making clear that the great majority of players would not attend the event, despite planning to be in D.C. today,” she said. “In other words, the vast majority of the Eagles team decided to abandon their fans.”

In a statement, the NFL Players Assn. said it was “disappointed” with Trump’s decision to disinvite the team, adding that it led to the cancellation of several “player-led community service events for young people in the Washington, D.C., area.”

“The NFL players love their country, support our troops, give back to their communities and strive to make America a better place,” the union said.

The Eagles ownership released a statement Monday night that did not mention Trump or the canceled visit, calling it “an inspiration” to watch “the entire Eagles community come together.”

Individual players showed more frustration. The team’s star tight end, Zach Ertz, tweeted angrily after Fox News, Trump’s media ally, used file footage of Eagles players kneeling in prayer to falsely suggest they were kneeling in protest during the anthem.

“This can’t be serious,” Ertz wrote. “Praying before games with my teammates, well before the anthem, is being used for your propaganda?! Just sad, I feel like you guys should have to be better than this.”

Fox News issued a rare correction on Twitter.

Some of Pennsylvania’s Democratic lawmakers also weighed in. Sen. Bob Casey wrote on Twitter, “I’m skipping this political stunt at the White House and just invited the Eagles to Congress.”

Follow the latest news of the Trump administration on Essential Washington »

[email protected] | Twitter: @noahbierman

Special correspondents Eli Stokols and Eliza Fawcett contributed to this report.

UPDATES:

2:35 p.m.: This article was updated with details of White House celebration.

This article was originally published at 12:15 p.m.

ORLANDO, Fla. — The daughter of a Hollywood screenwriter who was imprisoned and blacklisted during the anti-communist Red Scare has decried Florida’s new social studies teaching standards that other critics have warned rehabilitate shameful aspects of the McCarthy era.

“The new Florida standards you write about are appalling,” Mitzi Trumbo said late Thursday in an email to the Associated Press. “History should never be rewritten to match the politics of the day, as history has valuable lessons to teach.”

The standards approved Thursday for middle- and high-school students by the Florida Board of Education include instruction on the use of “‘McCarthyism’ as an insult” and how using the terms “red-baiter and Red Scare” is identified with “slander against anti-communists.”

The standards soften decades of criticism of former U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy, who led a political movement to root out what he labeled communism in government, the civil rights movement and artistic communities in the late 1940s and early 1950s. The public inquisitions, ideological loyalty tests and firings of that period are often viewed as a shameful chapter in U.S. history.

The Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union fueled concerns in the late 1940s about communist Soviet spies infiltrating American life, including the movies and U.S. government. Many of the targets of McCarthy and the U.S. House Un-American Activities Committee were banned from jobs and career opportunities for a decade or more.

One of them, Dalton Trumbo, who wrote the screenplays for classics including “Roman Holiday” and “Spartacus,” used other names or had colleagues take credit for screenplays he wrote in the 1950s because he was on a Hollywood blacklist.

Mitzi Trumbo said she and her two siblings had “some difficult and painful experiences growing up in the 1950s” because of their father’s time in prison and the repercussions of him being on the blacklist.

During the 1940s, Trumbo had been the highest-paid screenwriter in Hollywood. He was also a member of the Communist Party, supporting unions, equal pay and civil rights.

When Trumbo and nine other members of the film industry were called before the House Un-American Activities Committee in 1947, they refused to answer questions about their communist affiliations and were found in contempt. Trumbo landed in federal prison for 11 months.

While blacklisted, Trumbo wrote screenplays under a pseudonym or fronted by others, including “Roman Holiday” and “The Brave One,” whose scripts won Academy Awards. It wasn’t until 1960 when Trumbo was able to get public credit for the screenplays “Exodus” and “Spartacus.” This period of his life was recounted in the 2015 film, “Trumbo,” starring actor Bryan Cranston.

Other blacklisted Hollywood figures included actress Lee Grant, singer and actress Lena Horne and actor and director Charlie Chaplin.

Florida’s new teaching benchmarks were prompted by a law signed by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis in 2024 requiring instruction on “the consequences of communism” to prepare students against purported indoctrination in higher education.

“It is our responsibility to make sure future generations can thrive and they learn how to think, not what to think,” Layla Collins, a member of the State Board of Education, said during Thursday’s standards meeting.

The move follows the Republican-controlled Legislature’s designation of Nov. 7 as Victims of Communism Day in Florida’s public schools, to include at least 45 minutes of instruction on figures such as Mao Zedong and Fidel Castro.

Under the new standards, Florida teachers should instruct on efforts by “anti-communist politicians,” such as McCarthy, the House Un-American Activities Committee and Presidents Truman and Nixon.

Teachers also are instructed to identify “propaganda and defamation” used to “delegitimize” anti-communists.

“Instruction includes using ‘McCarthyism’ as an insult and shorthand for all anti-communism,” the new standards said. “Instruction includes slander against anti-communists, such as red-baiter and Red Scare.”

Trumbo, who exchanged email messages with the Associated Press from her Northern California home, said she didn’t want to be interviewed by telephone or video because she wasn’t comfortable talking about politics, “especially in today’s political climate.”

“I am glad people are speaking out about the actual history of the period and are explaining how careers and lives were destroyed by HUAC and McCarthyism,” she said, “and how dangerous such political repression is to our freedom of speech and to democracy itself.”

Schneider writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON  — The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups urged the Supreme Court on Friday to block new California laws that will require thousands of companies to disclose their emissions and their impacts on climate change.

One of the laws is due to take effect on Jan. 1, and the emergency appeal asks the court to put it on hold temporarily.

Their lawyers argue the measures violate the 1st Amendment because the state would be forcing companies to speak on its preferred topic.

“In less than eight weeks, California will compel thousands of companies across the nation to speak on the deeply controversial topic of climate change,” they said in an appeal that also spoke for the California Chamber of Commerce and the Los Angeles County Business Federation.

They say the two new laws would require companies to disclose the “climate-related risks” they foresee and how their operations and emissions contribute to climate change.

“Both laws are part of California’s open campaign to force companies into the public debate on climate issues and pressure them to alter their behavior,” they said. Their aim, according to their sponsors, is to “make sure that the public actually knows who’s green and who isn’t.”

One law, SB 261, will require several thousand companies that do business in California to assess their “climate-related financial risk” and how they may reduce that risk. A second measure, Senate Bill 253, which applies to larger companies, requires them to assess and disclose their emissions and how their operations could impact the climate.

The appeal argues these laws amount to unconstitutional compelled speech.

“No state may violate 1st Amendment rights to set climate policy for the Nation. Compelled-speech laws are presumptively unconstitutional — especially where, as here, they dictate a value-laden script on a controversial subject such as climate change,” they argue.

The emergency appeal was filed by Washington attorney Eugene Scalia, a son of the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

The companies have tried and failed to persuade judges in California to block the measures. Exxon Mobil filed a suit in Sacramento, while the Chamber of Commerce sued in Los Angeles.

In August, U.S. District Judge Otis Wright II in Los Angeles refused to block the laws on the grounds they “regulate commercial speech,” which gets less protection under the 1st Amendment. He said businesses are routinely required to disclose financial data and factual information on their operations.

The business lawyers said they had appealed to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals asking for an injunction, but no action has been taken.

Shortly after the chamber’s appeal was filed, state attorneys for Iowa and 24 other Republican-leaning states joined in support. They said they “strongly oppose this radical green speech mandate that California seeks to impose on companies.”

The justices are likely to ask for a response next week from California’s state attorneys before acting on the appeal.

As Jaime Moore prepares to take the helm of the Los Angeles Fire Department, he said he plans to commission an outside investigation into missteps by fire officials during the mop-up of a small brush fire that reignited days later into the destructive Palisades fire.

Mayor Karen Bass had requested a probe late last month in response to reporting by The Times that firefighters were ordered to roll up their hoses and leave the burn area, even though they had complained that the ground was still smoldering.

Moore — a 30-year department veteran whose appointment was confirmed Friday by the Los Angeles City Council — said the reports have generated “understandable mistrust” in the agency.

The Times found that at least one chief assigned to LAFD’s risk management section knew about the complaints for months, but that the department kept that information hidden despite Palisades fire victims pleading for answers about whether more could have been done to protect their community.

On Wednesday, Moore told the council’s public safety committee that bringing in an outside organization to investigate the LAFD’s handling of the Jan. 1 Lachman fire would be one of his first moves as chief.

“Transparency and accountability are vital to ensure that we learn from every incident and is essential if we are to restore confidence in our Fire Department,” Moore said. “As fire chief, I will focus on rebuilding trust, not just with the public, but within the LAFD itself.”

Federal investigators say the Lachman fire was deliberately set on New Years’ Day and burned underground in a canyon root system until it was rekindled by high winds on Jan. 7. LAFD officials have said they believed the earlier fire was fully extinguished.

Moore said one of his top priorities is raising morale in a department that has come under heavy criticism for its handling of the worst wildfire in city history, which killed 12 people and destroyed thousands of homes.

In the days after the Jan. 7 Palisades fire, The Times reported that LAFD decided not to pre-deploy any engines or firefighters to the Palisades — as they had done in the past — despite being warned that some of the most dangerous winds in recent years were headed for the region.

An LAFD after-action report released last month described fire officials’ chaotic response, which included major staffing and communication issues.

Moore — who has the backing of the United Firefighters of Los Angeles City, the union that represents firefighters — said his other priorities include better preparation for major disasters, with a focus on pre-deployment and staffing, as well as for the 2026 World Cup and the 2028 Olympics.

“I’ve got skin in the game,” he said, adding that his son is an LAFD firefighter. “We need to address the amount of calls they’re going on, and make sure that they’re going on the right calls with the right resources, and if that means us having to change our department model, so be it. I have the courage to do that.”

He also said he wants to expand the LAFD’s technological capabilities and better deploy the equipment it already has, like the thermal imaging cameras and heat-detecting drones that officials did not deploy during the Lachman fire mop-up.

“We are now requiring them to be used, and we’re not picking up any type of hose until we know that we’ve been able to identify through the use of the drone, thermal imaging cameras to ensure that those surface hot spots are all taken care of,” he said.

“I wish it didn’t take this for us to have to learn the lesson about using the tools we already have,” Councilmember Traci Park replied.

Park grilled Moore on reporting by The Times that firefighters warned a battalion chief about the Lachman fire not being fully extinguished.

“We know now that our own firefighters on the ground were offering warnings that it was still too hot, that it was still too smoldering,” Park said. “For Palisades residents and Angelenos across the city who have questions and concerns, what would you say to them at this point?”

Moore referred back to independent investigation he plans to launch.

“I want to know why it happened, how it happened, and take the necessary steps to ensure that never happens again,” he said.

The Times reviewed text messages among firefighters and a third party that indicated crews had expressed concerns that the Lachman fire would reignite if left unprotected. The exchanges occurred in the weeks and months after the Palisades fire.

In one text message, a firefighter who was at the Lachman scene Jan. 2 wrote that the battalion chief in charge had been told it was a “bad idea” to leave because of visible signs of smoldering terrain, which crews feared could start a new fire.

A second firefighter was told that tree stumps were still hot at the location when the crew packed up and left, according to the texts. And another said in texts last month that crew members were upset when directed to leave the scene, but that they could not ignore orders.

The firefighters’ accounts line up with a video recorded by a hiker above Skull Rock Trailhead late in the morning on Jan. 2 — almost 36 hours after the Lachman fire started — that shows smoke rising from the dirt. “It’s still smoldering,” the hiker says from behind the camera.

A federal grand jury subpoena was served on the LAFD for firefighters’ communications, including text messages, about smoke or hot spots in the area of the Lachman fire, according to an LAFD memo. It is unclear if the subpoena is directly related to the arson case against Jonathan Rinderknecht, who is accused of setting the Jan. 1 fire and has pleaded not guilty.

Complaints that the city and state failed to properly prepare for and respond to the Palisades fire are the subject of numerous lawsuits and a Republican-led inquiry by a U.S. Senate committee.

In addition to the pre-deployment issue, the LAFD’s after-action report found other problems during the Jan. 7 fire fight. The initial dispatch called for only seven engine companies, when the weather conditions required 27. Confusion over which radio channel to use hampered communication. At one point in the first hour, three L.A. County engines showed up requesting an assignment, and received no reply. Another four LAFD engines assembled, but waited 20 minutes without an assignment. In the early afternoon that day, the staging area — where engines were checking in — was overrun by fire.

Moore said he is closely evaluating the 42 recommendations in the report to make sure they are properly implemented.

Bass announced Moore’s selection last month after conducting a nationwide search that included interviews with fire chiefs of other cities. She had ousted Kristen Crowley, who was chief during the Palisades fire, citing deployment decisions ahead of the extreme weather, and appointed interim Fire Chief Ronnie Villanueva in February.

Moore — who said he grew up in the Mar Vista and Venice area — joined the LAFD as a firefighter in 1995, working his way up the ranks in various assignments throughout the city, including supervising arson investigations and serving as a spokesperson for the agency, according to his resume. He most recently was deputy chief of Operations Valley Bureau, directing the response to emergencies across 39 fire stations.