President Trump illegally usurped Gov. Gavin Newsom’s command of the California National Guard by ordering a surge troops deployed into Los Angeles and across the state amid protests against the White House’s mass deportation program last year, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday.
The two-one decision split the president’s own appointees to the court, with Judge Eric D. Miller of Seattle siding with Judge Jennifer Sung of Portland, a Biden pick, and Judge Mark J.Bennett of Honolulu dissenting.
“The order exceeded the President’s statutory authority and encroached on Congress’s calling forth power, in violation of the constitutional separation of powers,” Sung wrote for the majority, calling Trump’s order “unconstitutional.”
The decision also appeared to foreclose what California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta called “the Trump Administration’s transparent attempt” to preserve its right to call up California troops again under the same obscure statute — a novel legal maneuver administration lawyers said let the president seize command without invoking the far stronger Insurrection Act.
The 9th Circuit trio was among the first to weigh the law last June, after Trump federalized 4,000 National Guard soldiers in response to unrest over immigration enforcement in Los Angeles.
California sued. US District Judge Charles R. Breyer quickly ruled to block the deployment. But Sung, Bennett and Miller stayed his order, finding that the California deployment could go forward under an obscure and virtually untested subsection of the law.
That decision set a “great level of deference” as the standard of review for deployments, meaning courts had very little power to test the president’s rationale for sending troops into American streets.
At the time, the decision represented one of the president’s most sweeping second-term victories: a plug-and-play legal mechanism to deploy soldiers against civilians in cities across the country.
In Portland that fall, another 9th Circuit panel stayed U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut’s order to stand down troops, using the first trio’s precedent.
The Portland decision — based in part on data the Department of Justice later admitted was false — prompted an extraordinary filing by Judge Jay Bybee, who all but pleaded with the court to rehear the case and interpret the law differently.
“There is no greater threat to the sovereignty of the states than an assertion of federal control over their domestic affairs,” Bybee wrote.
The issue quickly found its way to the Supreme Court, after a 7th Circuit panel found the president had provided “insufficient evidence” for deployment even under the 9th Circuit’s deference standard.
On Dec. 23, the Justices adopted a celebrated Georgetown scholar’s academic reading of the statute, saying it only allowed the president to commandeer national guard troops if the situation had already outmatched the standing army.
On Friday, the 9th Circuit held that Trump’s claim that Los Angeles was in the grips of a rebellion last June “did not reflect a colorable assessment within a range of honest judgment.”
Using “the plain text of the statute,” and “dictionary definitions of the disputed term,” the majority found the president had not furnished evidence of a “a violent, armed, organized, open and avowed uprising against the government as a whole” — nor anything close to it.
Instead, Justice Department lawyers had relied on subsidiary definitions of “rebellion” that the 9th Circuit warned would allow the president to call up troops to quell almost any resistance, including peaceful protests.
“Resistance that is not violent, armed, organized, and against the government as a whole generally does not require a military response,” Sung wrote.
“Because Defendants have failed to identify a source of authority that would allow the military to legally execute the laws in California, they have not carried their burden to show that the President had the authority to federalize California’s National Guard,” Sung wrote.
Foes of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is widely viewed as a likely 2028 presidential candidate, are launching television and digital ads this weekend in early primary states that criticize the governor’s opposition to the proposed billionaire tax on California’s November ballot.
The ad, funded by backers of the wealth tax, castigates Newsom for opposing Proposition 40, the ballot measure that would impose a 5% tax on California billionaires’ assets to offset federal healthcare funding cuts approved by congressional Republicans and signed by President Trump last year.
“We’re all struggling with the high cost of healthcare. In California, Democrats are championing a one-time tax on billionaires that would save coverage for millions,” a narrator says in the 30-second ad. “So why [has] presidential hopeful Gavin Newsom betrayed his own supporters by trying to sabotage the billionaire tax? Maybe it’s because the same billionaires who oppose Prop. 40 also gave millions of dollars to Newsom. Gavin Newsom turned his back on working Californians. Will he do the same to you?”
The ad specifically calls out billionaires Stewart Resnick, who owns several businesses including Pom Wonderful, Fiji Water and Justin Wines; crypto executive Chris Larsen; former Google leader Eric Schmidt; and venture capitalist Michael Moritz, all of whom have backed Newsom’s political ambitions.
Newsom has argued that, although he supports wealth taxes, they ought to be enacted at the national level, rather than a state-by-state patchwork that could drive the rich to leave California, a state with a volatile budget heavily dependent on the state’s wealthiest residents.
The primary funders of the ad are the Service Employees International Union – United Healthcare Workers West, which crafted Proposition 40; Saikat Chakrabarti, a climate change warrior and political advisor who made his wealth in part as a founding engineer at Stripe; and Ross Boucher, an early engineer at Stripe.
The ad buy is six figures but could grow, according to its backers. Among the states where the ad is expected to air are South Carolina, Nevada, New Mexico, Virginia and New Hampshire.
The ad launch comes amid a contentious, expensive battle over the proposed wealth tax, which has divided Democrats and their allies. Although Newsom is among Democrats who oppose it, the ballot measure was endorsed by the state Democratic Party and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). Voters are closely divided about the measure.
WASHINGTON — First Lady Melania Trump has brokered an upcoming ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine in the war-ravaged Ukrainian city of Oleshky to allow for humanitarian aid and the evacuation of civilians, the White House announced on Friday.
The localized ceasefire is set to begin Thursday, with the American first lady saying in a news release that the situation there is “on the brink of disaster.”
The White House said Trump had initiated the discussions and that she and a representative worked directly with Russian and Ukrainian leadership to define the terms of the ceasefire.
Ukraine’s lead negotiator for the agreement thanked Trump for her involvement and said the deal would be “extremely challenging to implement.”
“Under our agreement: first a ceasefire will be put in place; second, humanitarian aid will be delivered to Oleshky; and third, civilians will be allowed to move freely out of Oleshky,” Dmytro Lubinets, Ukraine’s human rights ombudsman, said in a video message posted online. “The operation will be carried out gradually and is extremely challenging to implement. I will therefore keep Ukrainian society informed and share the results of the operation.”
Russia’s chief of the general staff, Gen. Valery Gerasimov, said Russian forces “will cease fire on the Kherson axis” starting at 4 a.m. TuesdayMoscow time “in connection with the humanitarian operation near Oleshky.” The Russian forces will also carry out “engineering reconnaissance” and ensure “safe movement of the humanitarian convoy” into the city, Gerasimov said.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also said Moscow was grateful to the first lady and that effort was discussed during the latest call between Russian President Vladimir Putin and President Trump, he said.
Peskov said “those who want to leave it would be able to do so.” He would not say whether those who evacuate will be taken to Russia or Ukraine-held territory. He also demurred when asked how long the evacuation will last, saying only it would likely take several days.
Saving children is first lady’s focus, president says
Melania Trump has made helping children in conflict one of her signature issues and hosted a U.N. Security Council meeting on the issue earlier this year. She has written Putin to work on efforts to reunite families with children who have been displaced by the war.
“What she wants to do is save children, and that’s her focus,” the president said of the first lady during a question-and-answer exchange with journalists in Washington.
Tensions between Washington and Kyiv are rising
The development comes as tensions have increased to new highs between the Trump administration and Ukraine’s government. Kyiv has faced restrictions on the satellite internet system that it relies on to knock down Russian attacks, with Trump and other top U.S. officials sending mixed messages about who was responsible for throttling the Elon Musk-made Starshield system.
Trump also has recently waived new Russian sanctions, reached an agreement with Russia to import diesel and pushed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to make a deal to end the war that began in February 2022. In renewed efforts to revive the peace process, Trump envoy Steve Witkoff traveled to Norway this week for talks with Zelensky before meeting with Putin in St. Petersburg, Russia.
Zelensky did not mention the ceasefire in Oleshky during a remote appearance at the Hudson Institute, a Washington think tank. He did note that American Patriot missile interceptors were still on hold and Starshield and Starlink speed limits were still in place.
He also spoke of the importance of the United States to renewed diplomatic efforts to end the war, including a possible joint meeting with Trump and Putin.
Dire situation in Oleshky
Food and medical supplies have been scarce for months in Oleshky, which sits on the Dnipro River that separates Ukrainian forces from the city’s Russian occupiers. There is no electricity, heat or running water. Roads leading from town are mined and dotted with burned-out cars. Drones buzz overhead.
Once a city of about 24,000 residents, Oleshky was captured by Moscow’s forces on the first day of their full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Its buildings were shelled and burned, and its infrastructure damaged. In June 2023, floodwaters inundated the city after the Kakhovka Dam collapsed from an explosion that an Associated Press investigation found was likely caused by the Russian military. Hundreds of residents were killed.
Those left in the city along Ukraine’s southeastern front face death from hunger or disease as another harsh winter looms. Ukraine has appealed repeatedly for a local ceasefire to organize evacuations. Russia, as the occupying power, is obligated by international law to ensure civilians under its control have what they need to survive.
Melania Trump details the mission
Melania Trump said in the White House news release that civilian leaders from Ukraine and Russia will visit Oleshky residents to determine the level of assistance they require.
“Residents who wish to evacuate will receive coordinated support and transportation to their preferred destination,” she said. “I anticipate some will want to go to Russia, and some to Ukraine.”
Melania Trump also said “an impartial American media organization” will accompany and document Russian and Ukrainian teams on the ground throughout the process.
“This will play a significant role in ensuring that the wishes of each family are faithfully respected,” she said.
The statement did not identify the media organization.
Finley writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Seung Min Kim and Konstantin Toropin in Washington; Volodymyr Yurchuk in Kyiv, Ukraine, and Dasha Litvinova in Tallinn, Estonia, contributed to this report.
LONG BEACH, Wash. — Tourist dollars are drying up in this small town at the edge of the Pacific Ocean. Foot traffic is down. Visitors have less to spend on souvenirs.
And beachgoers now bring packed lunches instead of stopping at Captain Bob’s Chowder Sisters, said Melissa Huddleston, waiting for customers at her sister-in-law’s shop on Sunday.
Huddleston, 60, is depressed about the state of the country, and while she’s planning to vote in the Nov. 3 midterms, she hasn’t decided who she’ll vote for. This swing district, Washington’s 3rd, is home to a tight congressional race that will help determine the balance of power in the U.S. House.
Huddleston doesn’t think anyone in Congress can really do what she wants: Bring decorum back to the national discourse and bring the economy back to life. She isn’t a particular fan of Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, the independent-leaning Democratic incumbent, nor is she persuaded by state Sen. John Braun, the Trump-endorsed Republican challenger.
“I don’t know which one is better,” Huddleston said, shaking her head. “I really don’t.”
Melissa Huddleston waits for customers at Captain Bob’s Chowder Sisters in Long Beach, Wash.
(Justine McDaniel/Los Angeles Times)
As the battle to persuade midterm voters intensifies in the election’s final stretch, its fever pitch is evident in places like this largely rural stretch of southwest Washington — a rare three-time Trump-voting district with a Democratic incumbent.
Republican-aligned groups are pouring money into flipping the district red, considering it one of the GOP’s best chances to gain a House seat in an increasingly unfavorable environment, while Democrats see retaining the district as urgent to their effort to secure control of the chamber.
The contest offers a glimpse into a purple region a time when both parties are testing strategies for winning voter loyalty — not just in the midterms but looking ahead to 2028. And the dynamic in the candidates’ race to capture swing voters reflects the national debate gripping both parties about how moderate to be.
As Democrats debate whether progressives or centrists should chart the party’s path, Gluesenkamp Perez has modeled an independent streak that has helped her win two elections but disappointed some in her own party. And as Republicans grapple with low public support for Trump, Braun has packaged his conservatism as balanced while assuring supporters that he’s rowing in the same direction as the president and party leaders.
Interviews with more than 30 voters across the district revealed a mix of support for the two candidates, largely based on partisan politics, views about Trump and concern with which party controls the House.
“This is a very pivotal time, and this area has a history of being more of a swing [district],” said Mark Maxwell, 46, of Vancouver, Washington, who planned to vote blue. “It’s a chance for our voice to be heard.”
A sign for Washington State Sen. John Braun, R-Centralia, is displayed among other campaign signs near I-5, Saturday, Oct. 10, 2026, in Ridgefield, Wash.
(Lindsey Wasson/Associated Press)
The number of congressional battlegrounds nationwide has shrunk with gerrymandering and political polarization, making the district one of about two dozen races that will decide the House majority. The West’s other highly competitive contests include three in California — those of Republican Rep. David Valadao and Democratic Rep. Adam Gray in the Central Valley and the open seat of retiring Republican Rep. Darrell Issa in the San Diego area.
In southwest Washington, polling has indicated the congressional race may be essentially tied. A late September poll commissioned by Oregon Public Broadcasting had Braun up by one point. A July Emerson College poll showed the same. Earlier this month, election forecaster Cook Political Report moved the race from a toss-up rating to lean-Democrat.
‘Stubborn loyalty’
Across the district last week, left-leaning voters said they were backing Gluesenkamp Perez — some precisely because of her maverick streak.
“She’s voted against the Democrats and I know she’s voted against the Republicans, which is what one would hope,” said Helios Ovando, 69, of Battle Ground, Wash., who decided this year to volunteer for Gluesenkamp Perez’s campaign for the first time. “She’s more about the local scene.”
Ovando has been turned off by what he sees as Republicans’ adherence to the party line; Gluesenkamp Perez’s willingness to “buck the system” gives him more confidence in her integrity, he said.
July 2026 photo of Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA)at a House Appropriations Committee hearing on Capitol Hill.
(Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Gluesenkamp Perez, 38, who ran an auto shop with her husband before being elected to Congress, frames her mission as one built around the practical needs of her district. She argues that Democrats should break the Republican hold on rural districts and talks about reestablishing voters’ confidence that the Democratic Party is “listening to and reflective of working people.”
“When you have people come to Congress with a very stubborn loyalty to their communities, you get better federal policy,” Gluesenkamp Perez said in an interview.
“That’s the value of breaking up the monopolization of politics in rural America,” she added. “It gets you to a better place from a policy lens.”
She points to funding wins and work to mitigate pressures on public schools and housing costs in Congress. On Saturday evening, she talked to a crowd at a brewery about restoring shop class to junior high schools and creating measures that facilitate repairing rather than replacing electronics and appliances.
Gluesenkamp Perez’s independence has also earned her critics. She twice helped House Republicans advance their legislative agenda in September, angering Democratic leaders, and voted to fund the Department of Homeland Security in January. In each case, she said the packages contained secondary measures that aligned with her constituents’ values.
At a “No Kings” protest last weekend in Vancouver, the district’s urban center, several Democratic voters said they weren’t happy with Gluesenkamp Perez but still planned to back her.
Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., speaks during an interview at a canvass launch at Recreation Park Penny Playground, Saturday, Oct. 10, 2026, in Chehalis, Wash.
(Lindsey Wasson/Associated Press)
“I will vote for her even though I don’t like her policies,” said Carol Rochat, 71, of Vancouver. “We need all the Democrats we can get, at least to get the majority, and then we’ll still work on her to try to be a little bit more progressive.”
‘Win their trust’
Gluesenkamp Perez ran against a hard-right candidate in her first two races, but this time she’s facing a less-polarizing and better-funded opponent in Braun, 59, a business owner and former Navy captain who has represented a slice of the district in the state Legislature for 13 years.
He made his pitch to a group of supporters at Long Beach’s historic train depot, framing his mission as balancing out the state’s Democratic voices in Congress and helping government “get out of the way” of its citizens.
“That’s sort of the American dream,” he said. “Government doesn’t create success for each of us, but we can set the framework for each of us to go out and find whatever success means for us.”
Braun talks about reforming tax and energy policy, funding infrastructure improvements and backing the military. He argues for balancing the federal budget, envisioning doing detailed, line-level work to find cuts that will reduce the national debt.
“He’s in line with my thinking,” said Liz Glenn, 63, of Raymond, Wash., listing Christian values, support for law enforcement and “protecting children” as some of her top concerns. A retired bookkeeper who is concerned about immigration and wants to see the House seat turn red, Glenn said she viewed maintaining a Republican majority as critical.
“It’s the only way to protect our country’s growth,” she said, adding, “Without the Republicans fighting against the perversions of the world, there’s so much non-American value being brought in.”
May 2023 photo of Washington state Sen. John Braun speaking in Olympia, Wash.
(Karen Ducey/Associated Press)
Braun told supporters that Trump’s endorsement had helped bring in financial support for his campaign. But, like other Republicans across the country, he has tried to appear independent on issues such as the war in Iran, which Braun has said the United States needs a plan to end.
“This district is a very independent district. I think it gives an opportunity to go make your case directly with the voters and win their trust … regardless of what the national picture is,” Braun said in an interview.
Pattie Gray, 66, who chairs the county Republican Party and watched Braun stump at the train depot, said Braun’s legislative and military experience made her view him as a “natural fit” for the seat.
“We need somebody who’s representing us the way we want to be represented,” Gray said. “He sees what this state needs.”
Gray, who is running for a Pacific County commissioner seat, has been door-knocking for Braun and other local Republican candidates. She’s optimistic about the chances to flip the seat, though it’s not “a shoo-in,” she said.
“We have to work really hard,” Gray said of turning out voters. “We’ve only got a couple more weeks.”
Huddleston, at the chowder shop, didn’t cast a ballot in 2024, unable to stomach supporting either party. She is motivated to vote this time because she wants to back a local Republican sheriff, whose campaign sign hung on the shop door.
But she’s upset with Trump’s brand of political divisiveness and where it has taken the country. She would prefer a Democratic majority in Congress, she said, to see if they can help fix the economy.
That might, Huddleston mused, lead her to support Gluesenkamp Perez when she fills out her ballot. But if so, it won’t be with gusto.
“Our country is horrible now,” Huddleston said. “How can you be enthusiastic about an election?”
It didn’t take long for that narrative to start crumbling. A year after Trump’s reelection, Latinos in California helped pass Proposition 50, which allowed Democrats to redraw the state’s congressional map in their favor to counter a successful effort by Texas Republicans to do the same — coincidentally, the Texas gerrymander was at least partially motivated by said gains with Latino voters.
Latinos also helped Democrats pick up governorships in Virginia and New Jersey in 2025 — with two-thirds of their votes going for Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherrill, respectively.
Whatever gains Republicans made with Latino voters appear to have vanished. Recent polls show the demographic to be experiencing buyers’ remorse, citing the increased cost of living, the Trump administration’s heavy-handed immigration enforcement tactics, involvement in wars abroad and a stagnating economy as reasons for the disillusionment.
President Trump’s approval rating among Latinos dipped to 27% in an early October NBC News survey. That same poll found that Democrats have a 24-point lead on whom Latino voters want to see in control of Congress.
But don’t expect this whiplash back to the left to be permanent.
“Latinos are completely moving away from both parties and that’s what’s created this dramatic swing of 25 points towards Trump in four years and then massive swings back.”
So how will the Latino vote shake out in two weeks? Below are five races we are keeping tabs on.
L.A. mayoral race
You don’t need to go outside the city limits to find proof that Latino voters aren’t political ideologues.
Bass once again won the Latino vote during the 2026 primaries, carrying 35 Latino-majority neighborhoods in the June 2 election — compared with seven for her current challenger, Councilmember Nithya Raman.
Notably, 34% of Latinos remain undecided heading into the Nov. 3 election.
“Latinos are about a third of the voters in L.A.,” Fernando Guerra, a professor of political science and Chicana/o studies at Loyola Marymount University, told The Times this month. “While they show preferences, they are not deeply committed to either candidate, so they are the quintessential swing voters who decide late.”
Will the embattled incumbent keep her job, or will Los Angeles become the next big city to elect a mayor backed by the Democratic Socialists of America? Latino Angelenos will decide.
California 22nd district
Will Democrats’ Proposition 50 redistricting gambit pay off? Voters of this newly reconfigured Central Valley district populated by blue-collar and agrarian Latinos will decide.
Republican David Valadao is the incumbent and is being challenged by activist and educator Randy Villegas. In 2024, voters in the district backed failed Republican Senate candidate Steve Garvey.
Political forecasts have Villegas — a progressive populist — with a narrow lead over the incumbent.
Part of his appeal, Madrid said, was his messaging.
“[His message is] the establishment’s not working and that institutions aren’t working,” Madrid said. “It’s a much more populist message. I don’t believe this is ideological one bit.”
Colorado 8th district
It doesn’t get more battleground than this congressional district located in the Denver suburbs. It is the center of Latino voting power in Colorado — Latinos account for 40% of the total electorate. .
The incumbent is Republican Gabe Evans and Trump carried the purple district by less than two percentage points.
Evans currently has a slight lead over Democratic candidate Manny Rutinel, an attorney and economist. Rutinel’s messaging has focused on the rising cost of living and the Republicans’ immigration policies.
It could get him elected. A local survey found that 56% of Latino voters in Colorado approve of Democrats in Congress, while 39% said they do not approve.
Florida 27th district
Will disassociating from Trump help this Republican incumbent keep her job?
Journalist-turned-Congress member María Elvira Salazar, a Cuban American, made headlines in September after releasing a political ad calling out the president’s immigration enforcement, alleging that Trump, who carried the majority Latino district by 15 points in 2024, had betrayed her constituents.
Elvira Salazar currently holds a narrow lead over her Democratic rival Elliott Rodriguez, who is also Cuban American.
“She’s trying to show distance and trying to show an independent streak,” Madrid said of the three-term incumbent. “She’s trying to say, ‘I’m not that.’ And you can’t do that on the economy as a Republican, because that changes all the time. What you can do as a Latino in a Latino district … is say your policies have gone too far.”
Texas
Okay, I’ll admit that I’m cheating with this one. But there’s just so much going on in Texas that it deserves its own section. The Lone Star State is ground zero for this supposed great political de-alignment.
In 2025, at the behest of Trump, Texas Republicans undertook an unprecedented mid-decade congressional redistricting in hopes of gerrymandering a map that would give the party an advantage in the 2026 midterm elections. They factored in the historic gains with Latino voters.
“They drew those districts based on what they thought were the 2024 numbers,” said Matt Barreto, a professor of political science and Chicana/o & Central American studies at UCLA. “And now those 2024 numbers are evaporating.”
The plan appears to be backfiring spectacularly, at least in south Texas.
Trump won Texas’ 15th congressional district in 2020 and 2024, and in 2022 the majority Latino electorate voted for Republican Monica De La Cruz. But polls now show that Democratic candidate and singer-turned-politician Bobby Pulido has a seven-point lead. Pulido, who bills himself as a moderate, has focused his messaging on affordability and the rising cost of living.
A similar situation is taking place in the Latino-dense 34th and 35th districts, where Republicans Eric Flores and Carlos De La Cruz, respectively, are hoping to take advantage of the redrawn Republican-friendly boundaries to flip those seats red. Both face uphill battles as polls show them neck-and-neck with their Democratic opponents.
“You now have these two districts, Texas 9th and 35th, that are 51% Latino, but now Latinos are telling us they have lost confidence in the Republican Party,” Barreto said. “What we’re seeing is very strong evidence that Latinos are shifting back even more so against Trump and Republicans because they did not deliver on any of their promises from 2024.”
In the statewide Senate and gubernatorial races, Democrats are feeling hopeful. Democratic challenger James Talarico currently has a slight lead on his Republican opponent Ken Paxton. Among Latinos, that lead was clocked at a whopping 30 points in an October Fox News survey.
But what has been Talarico’s key to connecting with Latino voters?
“He’s turning away from race and ethnic-based politics to class consciousness,” Madrid said. “[He’s acknowledged] that Latinos have had their futures taken away from them.”
The seminary student and educator has also been critical of his own party — calling it out for ineptitude, leaving voters behind — and arguing that anti-establishment messaging is enticing to Latinos who have been spurned by both major parties.
If Texas gets its first Democratic senator since 1993, it’ll be thanks to the Latino vote.
Texas Latinos’ faith in the ruling party is so low that even the state’s governor, Republican powerhouse Greg Abbott, finds himself in a tight race with Democratic challenger Gina Hinojosa. Roughly 56% of Latinos were in favor of Hinojosa over the incumbent, an October poll found.
“Latinos are the only voters voting rationally in a broken system,” Madrid said. “We’re shifting by 25 points. If you don’t pay attention to our priority issues, we’ll vote you out, that’s how the system was designed.”
Latinos appear to be swinging back to the left, but Democrats shouldn’t take those gains for granted, Madrid said.
“The Democratic Party has done nothing to win these voters back. They’re just not Republicans,” Madrid said. “And for the moment, that’s good enough.”
(Jackie Rivera / For The Times; Martina Ibáñez-Baldor / Los Angeles Times)
Join De Los for a Día de Muertos event at Hollywood Forever
Dia de los Muertos at Hollywood Forever
(Diana Ramirez / De Los)
This Saturday, join De Los at Hollywood Forever Cemetery to celebrate Día de Muertos. We’ll have an altar set up from noon to 8 p.m. where visitors can write ofrendas that will be displayed throughout the event.
There will also be a photo booth run by Las Fotos Project on site from 2 to 6 p.m.
This is an all-ages event and will feature performances by música Mexicana act DannyLux, soul singer Trish Toledo, psychedelic cumbia group Tropa Magica and indie rock band Los Shadows.
Registration and event information can be found here.
HAVANA — The Caribbean island of Nevis has received a financial boost in honor of one of its most famous sons, Alexander Hamilton, who went on to become a founding father of the United States and America’s first treasury secretary.
The U.S. government this month awarded $245,000 to restore the home where some believe Hamilton once lived as the U.S. celebrates its 250th anniversary.
Hamilton was born on Nevis in the mid-18th century and spent his childhood living at his adopted father’s home in Charlestown.
The 17th-century Georgian stone building is now Hamilton House, a museum that houses documents from the famous forefather’s early years and features exhibits honoring other Caribbean personalities. But it has demanded constant repairs: time and salty air have damaged the woodwork.
Nevis Premier Mark Brantley told the Associated Press on Wednesday that he’s grateful for the funds.
“We have tried valiantly as locals to preserve these very important historical monuments,” he said.
Despite Hamilton having lived only the early part of his childhood in Nevis, the premier believes his legacy is inspiring.
“Hamilton is significant because I think it’s a demonstration of what a small island like Nevis, a little dot in the ocean, can contribute to the founding of the greatest nation in the world, the United States,” Brantley said.
The two-story, Georgian stone building that was originally built around 1680 was destroyed by an earthquake in 1840 and was last restored in 1983.
Brantley said the restoration work is important to both the U.S. and Nevis: “Hamilton remains, I think, an iconic figure for us and a figure that we can look at his legacy and inspire our own people to achieve and to know that greatness is available for all of us.”
Federal immigration agents violently detained a 20-year-old U.S. citizen and Santa Maria, Calif., High School student with disabilities on Wednesday morning, according to school and city officials.
The student, who has limited verbal communication, was walking to school when agents tackled him, questioned him about his citizenship and restrained him in their vehicle. He was eventually returned to the area where he was picked up and walked to school, where officials called for an ambulance to take him to the hospital, said Santa Maria City Council member Gloria Soto.
The student underwent surgery for injuries to his wrist, she said, and was left with bruises and lacerations.
Soto said a school resource officer obtained security footage from a nearby grocery store and confirmed that the people who had detained the student are agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In an emailed statement, an unidentified ICE spokesperson wrote that agents were conducting a targeted enforcement operation in Santa Maria “when they encountered an individual they believed matched the description of the criminal illegal alien target.”
“When the individual resisted officers, refused lawful commands, and assumed a fighting stance with clenched fists, they relied on their training to safely control the situation until they could confirm his identity, whereupon he was released,” the spokesperson wrote.
The spokesperson added that claims that the student suffered broken bones are false because “he never requested medical assistance.”
Soto said it appears the student was racially profiled.
“Our community is living in terror right now and this needs to stop,” she said, referencing a recent uptick in immigration arrests across central California. “I’m a mother, and the thought of my child not being safe walking to school is frightening.”
The Santa Maria Police Department declined to comment and referred questions to ICE.
Alma Hernandez, board president of Santa Maria Joint Union High School District, said she was horrified by ICE’s actions.
“Our district remains committed to protecting our students and families,” she said.
WASHINGTON — Two former FBI intelligence officials who specialized in foreign election interference were charged on Friday with making false statements to Congress about their roles in investigating Hunter Biden’s laptop in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election.
Nikki Floris and Bradley Benavides surrendered Friday and made their first appearance in federal court in Washington, where their lawyers pressed for a speedy hearing at which they could contest the allegations against them.
The Department of Justice says Floris and Benavides lied to Congress in 2023 about the involvement of a specialized foreign-influence task force in investigations into Biden as well as their knowledge of the laptop.
Floris’ attorneys called her “a patriot” and said she has “served our nation as a dedicated FBI intelligence officer for nearly 20 years.”
“Yet today, the DOJ has accused her falsely of a crime on the say-so of politicians, not on the facts,” her attorneys said in a statement. “It’s no coincidence the government is filing these nonsense charges now, years later, on the eve of an election.”
The case was filed 10 days before the Nov. 3 elections and marks the latest in a series of splashy and politically charged investigative actions the Department of Justice has undertaken in the run-up to the midterm contests.
The prosecution, a rare Department of Justice criminal case against a former employee, revisits a tangled and peculiar saga that roiled the final weeks of the 2020 race. It also comes amid a broader, backward-looking effort by FBI Director Kash Patel, who before taking over the nation’s premier law enforcement agency was a harsh critic of it, to scrutinize high-profile episodes from the bureau’s recent past that for years have animated President Trump’s conservative base.
“Lying to Congress by senior FBI officials strikes at the heart of our system. No one is above the law,” Patel said in a statement posted on X.
The revelation of the laptop’s existence in October 2020 injected a thorny storyline in the race between Trump, the Republican incumbent, and Hunter Biden’s father, Joe Biden, Trump’s Democratic challenger, who went on to win the race.
The laptop’s contents were publicized by the New York Post, which said it had obtained from Trump ally Rudy Giuliani a hard drive of a computer dropped off by Hunter Biden at a Wilmington, Delaware, repair shop. The laptop contained emails that appeared to show discussions of the younger Biden’s foreign business dealings.
The peculiar circumstances of the laptop’s discovery raised concerns among Democrats and former intelligence officials about the possibility of Russian disinformation, particularly when the Trump administration’s own intelligence community was assessing that Russia was attempting to interfere on Trump’s behalf in the election and as Giuliani had traveled abroad looking for dirt on the Bidens.
Hunter Biden was subsequently charged with, and convicted of, gun and tax offenses during his father’s administration. President Biden pardoned him in his final weeks in office.
The Justice Department historically looks to avoid public and overt investigative acts in the direct lead-up to an election that involve candidates or that risk influencing an outcome. But officials in the last two weeks have made a series of bold moves in cases with political undertones, including a search of Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar’s house in an immigration fraud investigation and a corruption indictment unsealed Thursday against powerful Democratic Virginia state Sen. L. Louise Lucas.
Floris and Benavides, two experienced intelligence officials, led the FBI’s since-disbanded Foreign Intelligence Task Force, or FITF, when the laptop was discovered. They are accused by the Justice Department of making false statements in Congress in 2023 by saying that the FITF was not involved in investigations related to Hunter Biden when contemporaneous messages proved otherwise, according to a criminal complaint filed against them.
The case brings renewed attention to the work of the task force, which was established in the first Trump administration to police influence campaigns staged by Russia and other nations aimed at sowing discord, undermining democracy and spreading disinformation. The task force became a magnet of congressional Republican criticism during the Biden investigation and was disbanded in February 2025 by then-Attorney General Pam Bondi in one of her first acts on the job.
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has filed a lawsuit to block certification of the Senate race in Alaska if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses the contest while another candidate with the same name is on the ballot, kicking off what many have feared could become a lengthy battle between the U.S. government and states over certifying an election where the president’s party is struggling.
Many in both parties believe the fight could come down to Alaska, where Sullivan faces Democrat Mary Peltola. Also on the Alaska ballot is a Daniel J. Sullivan from the tiny fishing community of Petersburg. He has said he decided to run on his own, but Republicans have contended he’s a Democratic plant to siphon votes away from their candidate.
On Thursday, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit in federal court in Alaska demanding that the state be blocked from certifying a Peltola win if the other Sullivan remains on the ballot. “The United States accordingly brings this lawsuit to protect the integrity of the 2026 Senate election in Alaska,” the lawsuit alleges, contending that federal law requires states to protect the integrity of federal elections.
The Alaska Supreme Court rejected previous Republican efforts to remove the other Sullivan from the ballot, and the state’s Republican officials made the decisions about how to list him on the ballot. The other Sullivan will appear without a party designation next to his name, while the senator will be listed as the Republican incumbent. Alaska’s ranked choice voting system also will allow voters to select both of the men if confused.
The Trump Department of Justice has increasingly been used to bolster the president’s political operation, targeting his enemies and filing lawsuits against Democratic-controlled states in the run up to the election. Democrats and many voting rights advocates have long feared the Trump administration will try to block certification of elections the president’s party loses much as Trump unsuccessfully tried to do when he lost the 2020 presidential election.
Earlier Thursday, U.S. Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche told reporters that was unlikely outside of extreme circumstances. “It is not DOJ’s intention to and it’s never our intention to improperly interfere with elections or the state certification process,” the attorney general told reporters in Virginia.
Derek Muller, a law professor at Notre Dame University, said the lawsuit will likely only kick in if Republicans narrowly lose the Alaska Senate race and that it does not seem to have legal merit. “The statute simply doesn’t let the Department of Justice enjoin certification,” he said.
The federal government has stopped sharing evidence with Minnesota authorities who are investigating the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal officers, state officials said in recent court filings.
Minnesota officials sued President Trump’s administration in March for access to materials they said they needed to independently investigate the shootings during Trump’s immigration crackdown in Minneapolis earlier this year. The Trump administration has suggested that state prosecutors don’t have jurisdiction to investigate federal officers, while Minnesota officials have said they don’t trust the federal government to investigate itself.
The state is still seeking the cell phones of the officers involved in both shootings and recordings of key interviews.
State prosecutors announced in July that the federal government had begun turning over evidence in the cases, including police body camera video and hard drives containing statements. Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty said at the time that the state expected to receive “all the evidence.”
But Minnesota investigators said in October court filings that the transfer of evidence stopped soon after the July announcement. Moriarty said the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Minnesota told her on Sept. 10 that evidence sharing would be on pause indefinitely “in light of challenges with D.C.,” according to the documents.
State prosecutors have again asked a judge to order federal agencies to hand over the evidence, arguing they “have identified no legal authority or rational basis justifying their obstruction of state criminal investigations.”
In a reply filed Tuesday, attorneys for the Justice Department argued it’s within their discretion to decline to share information with state authorities. They cited the department’s rules for responding to record requests, known as the Touhy regulations, which apply only when formal legal proceedings are underway. The attorneys said there was no active court case when Minnesota made its requests.
Drew Evans, superintendent of the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, said in a legal declaration that federal authorities still have Good’s clothing, the cell phone of the officer who killed her and interview recordings that state authorities have never been able to view.
An Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer fatally shot Good, a 37-year-old mother of three, while she was leaving a Minneapolis protest on Jan. 7. Bystander video shows Good in the driver’s seat of an SUV, repeatedly honking the horn, when masked immigration officers order her to step out of the vehicle. She starts to pull forward, and an officer standing in front of the car fires at her windshield. The officer, now standing about an arm’s length from the open window on the driver’s side, fires twice more, according to an analysis of the videos by The Associated Press and others.
Federal officials at the time said the officer acted in self-defense.
Good’s death and that of Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care nurse who was killed weeks later by a federal officer in Minneapolis, ignited nationwide protests against the Republican president’s immigration enforcement efforts.
No criminal charges have been filed in connection with the fatal shootings.
Evans said the federal government also has not shared a recorded statement from an officer who shot Pretti, the firearms used by the officers, their phones, projectiles and casings, and a gun taken from Pretti before he was shot.
WASHINGTON — President Trump has alleged that elections, public benefit programs and federal grants to nonprofits are rife with fraud. Now, he is increasingly focusing on fraud in his effort to detain and deport more immigrants.
Recent, high-profile flash points include 28 lawful permanent residents accused this week of illegally voting in California and the federal investigation into Somali-born Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).
The broader crusade takes many forms, including allegations of fraud in immigration applications, illegal voting by noncitizens and misuse of federal benefits by immigrants who don’t qualify.
“This administration has purposefully mischaracterized immigrants and asylum seekers as fraudsters,” said Royce Murray, a former senior official at the Department of Homeland Security under the Biden administration. That, she said, “serves a narrative that immigrants are not to be trusted and are here to take something rather than contribute, with an end goal of trying to make Americans less welcoming and more comfortable with a mass deportation agenda.”
On Tuesday, Trump and Vice President JD Vance announced a $25-million program under the Justice Department to encourage the public to report suspected fraud in the U.S. government.
This administration has purposefully mischaracterized immigrants and asylum seekers as fraudsters
— Royce Murray, former Department of Homeland Security official
The White House said the first check, for $10,000, will go to right-wing influencer Nick Shirley, who posted a video last year alleging that Somali residents in Minnesota were running fake child-care centers to collect federal subsidies. Dozens of people were convicted in connection with a sprawling, $250-million children’s food assistance scheme that predated this administration, though more charges have been announced in recent months.
Also Tuesday, administration officials launched another nationwide anti-fraud crackdown, this time targeting immigrants who they allege have illegally collected SNAP benefits. Homeland Security highlighted the arrests of five people, calling them “the opening salvo in a sustained, large-scale ICE operation.”
“From day one of my administration, we’ve waged an unprecedented war on corruption and fraud, and will not let our country be looted and plundered by thieves and pirates and foreign fraudsters and basically scum,” Trump said during a news conference announcing the Fraud Whistleblower Incentive Program.
The focus on fraud has noticeably accelerated in the weeks leading up to the election.
In California, some of the green card holders arrested this week over voter fraud said they didn’t remember registering to vote. The daughter of one defendant, Omar Muñoz, 72, of Belize, said she wondered whether her father had been confused with his U.S.-born son of the same name, who is a registered voter.
California officials pounced on the small number of people alleged to have cast illegal ballots. Illegal voting by immigrants “is so rare that the Trump admin is parading around town about .0001% of California voters,” Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office wrote on X.
In the last seven weeks alone, the State Department said, 112 noncitizens across 20 states have been charged with illegal voting and registration offenses. Overall, since Trump returned to the White House, 155 people have been charged with voting fraud-related offenses.
Mullin and Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche said earlier this month that Homeland Security agents had secured 10 convictions and detained 100 others for civil immigration violations since August.
During the Biden administration, voter fraud charges were brought in just 13 cases, Blanche added.
Studies and audits of state voter rolls have repeatedly found that voting by noncitizens is rare and hasn’t swayed any elections.
Ballot machines at the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder in Norwalk this week. Early voting has started for the 2026 midterm election.
(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)
Last week, with mail-in voting already underway, the Justice Department sued California, asking a federal court to bar the state from counting the ballots of 20,000 voters who were flagged by federal officials as “likely noncitizens.” Los Angeles County officials reviewed a sample of 200 of those voter registrations and found that nearly 40% indicated they were born in the U.S.
That number of flagged ballots — 20,000 — is a substantial reduction from the 190,000 noncitizens the administration alleged were on state voter rolls earlier this year, though federal authorities this week said they had found a “separate batch of 17,000 voting records potentially tied to noncitizens.”
California leaders pointed to other states, such as Nevada, where similar accusations have proved meritless.
Murray, the former Homeland Security official, said she believes the administration is “trying to sow the seeds of doubt that the midterm outcomes will be trustworthy, so that if the Republican Party loses as badly as they’re predicted to, they can characterize it as due to fraud.”
Murray said the Trump administration has largely misconstrued what it means to commit fraud.
“Fraud is a very specific thing — it’s essentially lying,” she said. “Because you don’t get asylum does not mean you committed fraud, it just means you were ineligible.”
In September, a Homeland Security whistleblower told Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) that hundreds of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services employees had been tasked with quickly reviewing the voter information of thousands of people in search of suspected noncitizen voters, and were given a quota of investigating 40 subjects per day.
On Wednesday, a federal judge restricted Homeland Security agents from carrying out sweeping field operations aimed at rooting out voter fraud in nine states, including California.
It is against federal law for immigrants who are not naturalized citizens to vote or register to do so. Penalties can include fines, jail time and even deportation, though authorities rarely pursued that option.
Eric Balliet, a former special agent with Homeland Security Investigations, the criminal investigative arm of ICE, said he takes no issue with investigating fraud, but the timing of this operation and significant resources dedicated show it is “highly politically charged.”
Balliet worked for various administrations, including Trump’s first, before retiring in 2024. Homeland Security Investigations agents typically focused on transnational criminal investigations such as drug smuggling and human trafficking.
Instead of initiating investigations based on tips or specific information, agents are now taking aggregated data and using algorithms to produce suspect lists, Balliet said. That’s not how law enforcement should operate, he said, calling it a massive privacy overreach against millions of law-abiding citizens.
“It’s the epitome of Big Brother,” he said.
Beyond the allegations of voter fraud, the Trump administration has also increasingly targeted immigrants on suspicion of lying to obtain a visa, green card or citizenship.
Omar’s family fled civil war in Somalia and immigrated to the U.S. in 1995 when she was 12. After agents searched her residence this month looking for evidence that her immigration paperwork contained falsehoods, she called the allegations baseless.
Last month, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Muillin suggested the outcome of the investigation could be deportation. Years ago, the agency declined to move forward with a probe based on similar allegations against Omar, according to the Washington Post.
The congresswoman is not alone.
Emiliano Andrade-Covarrubias, 56, who died of unknown causes last week at an ICE facility in Texas, was arrested because the agency alleged he had fraudulently obtained his green card. ICE sought to deport him, saying he had failed to disclose a 2004 arrest for theft, but his daughter told the Texas Tribune that he did bring up his criminal record during the application process for his permanent residency.
Immigration lawyers say their clients are facing more intense scrutiny and that some have battled false accusations of fraud after applying for a green card or citizenship.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services spokesperson Zach Kahler blamed the Biden administration for lax vetting that allowed bad actors to exploit immigration programs.
“These abuses are not harmless,” he wrote in a statement. “Meritless claims clog the system, drain limited resources, and delay relief for legitimate victims of crime. USCIS is taking aggressive action to identify, expose, and eliminate fraud.”
Erin O’Neil, an attorney based in Connecticut, said some of her clients are now in deportation proceedings triggered by allegations of fraud over minor inconsistencies that have no bearing on the case. In one case that resulted in a denial based on fraud, she said, the allegation was simply that her client failed to disclose a two-week work assignment in another state.
“In the past, the worst that would happen is your citizenship application would be denied,” O’Neil said. “Now we have seen through several of my clients that, not only is the citizenship application denied, but they are placed into removal proceedings.”
The U.S. government seems to be coming for California (again). Big surprise.
But scratch the surface of the recent Department of Justice voter fraud blitz and the ugly truth peeks through — this is an attack on immigrants of color, no different than accusing the Haitians of Ohio of eating cats and dogs or the aggressive escalation of detaining and deporting Black and brown people with no criminal record.
Just a few days ago, the White House posted on social media that “If you import the third world, you become the third world.” Not be be outdone, the fine Americans at the Department of Homeland Security responded with what seems to be a problematic mission statement that may wind up in court documents: “Reject the third world. Export the third world.” So far in President Trump’s second term, only 20% of the nearly 1 million people deported had a criminal record, according to the Migration Policy Institute.
Speaking of court documents, wow, do we have a lot to go through. Turns out not a lot of judges are into voter suppression.
There’s the U.S. Justice Department case claiming California is somehow stopping the feds from enforcing federal voting laws, despite those 28 cases. There’s a ruling in a different case that prevents the Department of Homeland Security from going door-to-door in California and other places checking on immigration status and voter registration — a terrifying overreach of power meant to intimidate legal voters.
And there’s the ongoing lawsuit from the UCLA Voting Rights Project and the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights in a Washington courtroom — a case that could take the lead in protecting the midterms.
Here’s what you need to know about all three, and what comes next.
Stop the knocks
Starting around August, Homeland Security began knocking on the doors of residents in California and eight other states in what it dubbed a “surge” in investigations on voter fraud.
These in-person checks were based on lists of folks the government thought might not be legally allowed to cast a ballot — and focused on naturalized citizens, according to court documents. They were also, according to the court, unreliable and included “instances where DHS simply did not have data to determine that the individual did not engage in voter fraud,” the California judge in the case wrote, meaning it was a giant fishing expedition.
In addition, Homeland Security was apparently investigating nonprofits and other organizations that help get out the vote, including interrogating the staff and covertly infiltrating their operations, according to court documents.
That’s McCarthyism-level scary. The California Nurses Assn. and its parent union, National Nurses United, filed a lawsuit to stop the Homeland Security surge, arguing in part that one of their core missions is political organizing and turning out voters, and that the operation directly harmed them by scaring their members away from that work.
They also have a lot of members who are naturalized citizens. Four union members told the court that they didn’t want to participate in the union’s election work because they were afraid of being targeted by the government, citizens or not.
The court found that fear “objectively reasonable” and ordered Homeland Security to stop the door-knocking until after the election. The judge then stayed that order until Friday to give the government time to appeal. So far, the government hasn’t filed that objection.
“So many people in the United States are suffering under Trump’s corrupt and cruel policies on behalf of the billionaire class that he knows cannot hold onto power in these upcoming elections without illegally suppressing our vote through outright harassment, intimidation, and even detention,” said Puneet Maharaj, executive director of the two nurses groups.
Emergency relief
At the same time, the Department of Justice this week filed a suit against California seeking an emergency order to force the state to segregate 20,000 ballots of folks it claims may not be citizens — an unprecedented ask in furtherance of the long-running conspiracy theory that immigrants who lack legal status are in a scheme with Democrats to vote en masse.
State Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta has asked the court to throw out the case, in part because the federal government can’t prove it’s actually being harmed in any way by state law. The feds have already filed charges in those 28 cases claiming voter fraud, so it’s hard to argue that state law is preventing them from going after illegal voters.
But the feds are arguing that the state is aiding and abetting illegal voting by not segregating those ballots, even though there is no proof they are in the hands of noncitizens. A review by the Los Angeles County registrar’s office found that about 40% of those on the list were born in the United States.
Attorneys general from other states filed a friend of the court brief siding with California, arguing that the Justice Department is basically trying to create a new law where “the executive branch can invent new election requirements, unmoored from any constitutional or statutory authority, and demand that States enforce them in the middle of an election.”
The court will rule on that next week.
Beyond Nov. 3
Our final case takes us to Washington, where the UCLA Voting Rights Project and the Coalition for Human Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA, are asking for their own temporary restraining order — this one stopping the government from carrying out its ballot segregation scheme and from using its flawed, janky methods for supposedly identifying noncitizen voters.
I’ve written about this lawsuit before, and how the Voting Rights Project beat back Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco’s attempt to snatch ballots. The court will probably make a ruling in that one next week as well.
But election day is less than two weeks away, and many have already voted. So what does it all mean?
It means we’re in for a rough ride. The Trump administration is not dumb. Midterms might not go the way Republicans would like, potentially even giving control of both the House and Senate to Democrats. Some experts and legislators are concerned that all these ballot drama is posturing for that midterm loss — creating a reason to potentially question results or even refuse to seat newly elected Democrats when the time comes.
And almost certainly, no matter what voters decide, Trump will spin it back to that white nationalism — the idea that “true” Americans are being replaced through fraud, violence and vote stealing, a trio of conspiracies glued together by the sticky, tricky manipulations of a man who will do anything for power.
SoFi Stadium is going strong. The deal that built it is in a smoldering heap.
A decade ago, Rams owner Stan Kroenke and Inglewood Mayor James T. Butts Jr. happily dug ceremonial shovels into the dirt at Hollywood Park, celebrating the impending construction of the world’s most expensive stadium.
Electronic billboards are seen along Century Boulevard in Inglewood on Tuesday, Oct. 20.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
Now they’re on opposite sides of a court fight that has spilled onto the Nov. 3 ballot and threatens further development on the nearly 300-acre site.
The feud started over billboards. Last year, Inglewood signed a deal with WOW Media to put electronic advertising all around the city — 60 digital signs carrying 108 screens. Some are bus-shelter-sized kiosks, while others are street displays up to 22 feet tall and positioned on sidewalks and medians.
Those present problems for SoFi Stadium, Intuit Dome and the Forum because they have their own advertising deals and sponsors who paid for exclusivity. Those venues collectively sued Inglewood and WOW Media to block the deal, raising this scenario in a court filing: “Will Pepsi want to sponsor the Super Bowl, knowing Coca-Cola could pay WOW to put up full-motion billboards next to the stadium?”
Skip Miller, lead attorney for the city, said the kiosks are “quite nice and blend in with the surrounding areas,” and that they are connected to a network that provides critical traffic and safety information to thousands of drivers and pedestrians.
Electronic billboards are seen on along Century Boulevard on Tuesday, Oct. 20, 2026 in Inglewood, CA.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
A judge sided with Inglewood, and an appeal is under way.
In the meantime, those opposed to the billboards are taking it to the voters. On the ballot is Measure BB — as in “Billboard Blight” — which would restrict billboard advertising on public property. Miller said the city will challenge it in court if it passes, calling it free-speech discrimination.
The signs generate as much as $7.4 million a year, according to Inglewood budget records.
A consultant hired by the Yes on BB campaign estimated the city’s digital kiosk deal with WOW Media would generate $280,000 to $1.1 million a year, roughly 0.1% to 0.5% of Inglewood’s $238-million general fund.
John Shallman, a Los Angeles-based political strategist managing the “Yes on BB” campaign, also pointed to the unusual length of the billboard deal, which is 20 years plus two 10-year options.
Rams owner Stan Kroenke, right, talks to team president Kevin Demoff before a game against the New York Giant at SoFi Stadium on Sept. 21.
(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)
“It’s biblical in length,” Shallman said. “You go back 40 years. We didn’t even have the Internet. We didn’t have cellphones.”
The billboards are part of the fight, but there’s a lot more. Back when the development agreement was signed in 2015, the deal was that Hollywood Park — interchangeable here with Kroenke’s companies — would pay up front for all the improvements around SoFi Stadium and eventually be reimbursed by the city. That means all the road upgrades, water lines, streetlights and the like. Same for event-day police and emergency services.
Over the years, that ran up a significant bill. Kroenke’s companies now want $448 million from the city. Inglewood, which last year wired Kroenke $20 million, is demanding that money back.
So how could that chasm be so wide? A turning point came last month when Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge David K. Reinart ruled the 2015 development agreement “void from the beginning and unenforceable.”
To understand why the judge ruled that way, it’s important to go back a decade and examine how the agreement was constructed.
One of the appealing aspects of building an NFL stadium in Inglewood was the speed with which a development agreement could be assembled and approved. Los Angeles went 20 years without an NFL franchise, during which all sorts of stadium ideas were proposed and eventually died. One of the stumbling blocks for those was the environmental-review process, which could take months or even years.
But at that time in California, there was an opportunity for Inglewood to fast-track the process. Instead of negotiating a new development agreement — there was one from 2009, when Hollywood Park was still a racetrack — supporters of the NFL stadium could bring it to the Inglewood City Council as a voter initiative.
People cross Century Boulevard near an electronic billboard in Inglewood.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
The council then had the choice to either adopt the initiative word for word, or send it to voters. No new environmental review required. Sure enough, in February 2015, the council approved the initiative, 5-0.
Now Kroenke had an approved stadium plan and not just fancy renderings to bring to fellow NFL owners, who 11 months later gave the thumbs up to a state-of-the-art venue at Hollywood Park. There was a competing stadium plan in Carson backed by the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders that was taking the same fast-track approach with its city.
Regardless, the Hollywood Park plan won and the stadium was ultimately constructed, a $5-billion marvel that in February will play host to its second Super Bowl. It has also played host to the World Cup, major concerts by Taylor Swift and Beyoncé, and will be the swimming venue for the 2028 Summer Olympic Games. The Chargers moved to Los Angeles as tenants in the stadium.
“Inglewood loves SoFi Stadium,” said Miller, the city’s attorney. “Nothing is ever going to happen to SoFi Stadium. … As far as the rest of Hollywood Park, the developer has to follow the law, just like any other developer. This developer, who’s a very powerful, very wealthy person, has to follow the law just like anybody else.”
That’s not something you would have heard in 2015 when Kroenke and the city were pulling in the same direction. Something happened in 2018 that changed the landscape in California, and gave Inglewood an argument for why it shouldn’t be required to reimburse the developer for nearly half a billion dollars in public improvements.
It was a court decision involving Moreno Valley, a city about 75 miles east of Inglewood that planned to build a major development through the same approval process that was used in Inglewood. But environmental groups challenged that in court and won. A judge determined that type of development agreement requires negotiations and public hearings, not just a voter initiative. The agreement was voided.
SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, home of the Los Angeles Rams, hosts events throughout the year.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
Meanwhile, everything was moving forward in Inglewood. SoFi Stadium was constructed. The big events rolled in. Promises made, promises kept.
All the while, there was the outstanding issue of the city paying back Hollywood Park for all those improvements, but that arrangement was configured to ensure Inglewood could do so without going into the red. The deal said the city could keep the first $25 million in tax revenue from the stadium every year, then use the revenue generated beyond that to reimburse Kroenke’s companies.
In May 2025, Inglewood made a payment of $20 million.
Two months later, pointing to the Moreno Valley decision, the city deemed the development agreement invalid and demanded its money back.
Hollywood Park found that especially galling because four times over the past decade the city signed assurances to Kroenke’s lenders that the money would be paid back — and three of those times were after the Moreno Valley decision.
In the view of Hollywood Park, Inglewood welcomed the jobs, tax revenue, increased property values and heightened prestige for a decade, then walked away from the deal when the bills came due.
“Now that it’s time for the city to essentially uphold its end of the bargain, now that it’s received all the benefits, it’s saying, ‘Well, actually, we consider this agreement void. Thank you for the stadium, thank you for everything else, but we’re not going to uphold our end of the deal,’” said John Quinn, outside counsel for Hollywood Park in the matter.
An electronic billboard on Century Boulevard in Inglewood.
(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)
Hollywood Park’s argument is that it followed the rules in 2015 in getting the development agreement unanimously approved by the City Council, and the results — a bustling stadium district and development around it — speak for themselves.
The city’s side said it connected the dots on the Moreno Valley case only after the lawsuit was filed against Inglewood and WOW Media last year.
And the city is backing a ballot initiative of its own, Measure AT, which would eliminate a $15-million cap on the 10% admission tax on ticket sales the stadium pays. Venues with fewer than 20,000 seats, including Intuit Dome, would for the first time be charged a 2.5% admission tax on ticket sales.
The ballot measure could generate an additional $47 million to $50 million annually, a city of Inglewood impact report states. Olympic events at both venues in 2028 could be especially lucrative for the city.
Hollywood Park sees that as punishment for challenging the billboard deal.
Also on the ballot, the contentious Inglewood mayor’s race. Butts is running for a fifth term, and his main challenger is Gloria Gray, an Inglewood City Council member.
Meanwhile, Hollywood Park’s legal losses are stacking up. The judge last month rejected the argument that because Inglewood is a charter city, one that operates under its own constitution, it should abide by the original development agreement.
The city is billing the fight as a billionaire versus the people. Those representing Kroenke’s interests say Inglewood should honor its commitment and provide the reimbursements it long promised.
An attorney representing Hollywood Park says changing the rules midstream could have a chilling effect on future developments in California.
“It’s going to seriously discourage new development throughout the state, and we’re not just talking about stadiums,” said Quinn, chairman and founding partner of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP. “We’re talking about all kinds of planning and zoning decisions — including affordable housing projects.
“This just creates a really damaging cloud of legal uncertainty over all development in California.”
Growing up without “two nickels to rub together,” John McKinney never thought he’d be a lawyer.
At the beginning of 2026, sitting in his office as one of the highest-ranking prosecutors in Los Angeles County, McKinney had no designs on trying to become L.A.’s city attorney.
But if he can beat progressive darling Marissa Roy next month and finish off an upstart campaign that barely had a pulse six months ago, McKinney would complete a lifelong underdog story that saw him go from working as a house painter and substitute teacher to pay for college to serving as the top lawyer for the second-largest city in America.
A highly regarded trial lawyer, McKinney, 58, claims an undefeated record in homicide trials and has won convictions in some of the region’s most infamous crimes, including the murder of beloved L.A. hip-hop star Nipsey Hussle. He reached his longtime perch in the district attorney’s office’s major crimes unit after a lifetime of struggle. Both of McKinney’s parents died before he was 5, and he was raised by his oldest sister in a cramped household with half a dozen other children in Passaic, N.J.
John McKinney speaks at a news conference at the Los Angeles Police Protective League in May.
(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)
McKinney beams with pride while discussing his hardscrabble East Coast upbringing — whether praising his sister’s hustle for working “six days a week,” or refusing to turn in his Yankees hat in a Dodger blue city. In interviews, he’ll sneak in a verbal jab at Roy, then finish the insult with a wry smirk. McKinney notes he’s been a prosecutor almost as long as his 34-year-old opponent has been alive.
“She’s never tried a case,” McKinney said. “When you’re running for city attorney overseeing trial lawyers and having to make high-impact decisions on whether to settle a case for $20 million or not, you should at least know what it’s like to go through a jury trial.”
Roy was part of the team that secured a $17-billion settlement from Meta in a landmark case this year, and has tried many cases decided by judges, rather than jury panels. She’s pushed back on McKinney’s barbs, noting he has no experience handling civil cases, a core component of the job.
McKinney has focused his campaign on lessening the city’s homelessness crisis by leveraging people into treatment, tackling quality-of-life crimes, and reducing the city’s out-of-control legal costs.
But he faces an uphill battle. Roy, a deputy state attorney general, has been campaigning for more than a year and raised more than twice as much money as McKinney. With the backing of both the county’s Democratic Party and the local Democratic Socialists of America chapter, Roy won June’s primary easily, outpacing McKinney by 15 percentage points. Both finished far ahead of City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto.
Marissa Roy, a deputy attorney general with the California Department of Justice, is running against John McKinney to become L.A.’s next city attorney.
(Gary Coronado/For The Times)
Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman leads a strong coalition of law enforcement support for McKinney, who has also been endorsed by four former city attorneys, two prior district attorneys and several City Council members, including Traci Park.
McKinney has emphasized the word “Democrat” in his ads, a nod to Roy’s attempts to cast him as the preferred choice of Republicans who won’t stand up to the Trump administration if elected. Although McKinney rubbed elbows with Republicans during efforts to recall then-Dist. Atty. George Gascón and employed fundraisers who worked with Trump, he says he “despises” the president and was disgusted by immigration raids in the city last year.
McKinney thinks Roy’s emphasis on fighting Trump speaks to a misunderstanding of the job. Across the country, it has been state attorneys general, not city attorneys, who have spearhead litigation against the White House, said McKinney, who dismissed the partisan attacks as a “misleading smear campaign.”
“Her lack of management experience and jury trial experience has not gone unnoticed by voters and her platform of wanting to turn the city attorney’s office into the country’s largest public interest law firm is out of alignment with the issues important to voters: public safety, homelessness and protecting taxpayer dollars,” he said.
Long before he was concerned about winning an elected office, McKinney was simply worried about survival.
The youngest of seven children, McKinney lost his mother to cancer when he was only 2. His father passed away unexpectedly three years later. His oldest sister, Ora, was recently divorced with three kids of her own but took in McKinney and his sister. He remained especially close to Ora — whom he described as his “mother, father and best friend” — until she passed away last year.
With his caretaker working nearly round the clock, McKinney said, he easily could have run in the streets with friends caught up in the crack cocaine boom of the 1980s. But McKinney said his sister’s determination inspired him to choose a better path.
“My sister made me believe there was really no limit to what I could do in life if I worked hard enough for it,” he said.
McKinney isn’t seeking sympathy, but believes sharing his backstory shows he’s “lived a life that mirrors a lot of the adversity Angelenos face every day.”
For much of his career in L.A., McKinney was seen as one of the district attorney’s office’s premier trial lawyers. He said he had no interest in management or politics until Gascón was elected in 2020. McKinney was one of several prosecutors to publicly criticize and sue Gascón. His involvement in the failed bid to recall Gascón put him in a political spotlight for the first time. He frequently spoke at recall events — which sometimes overlapped with rallies against Gov. Gavin Newsom and promoted conservative causes — and later joined the crowded field vying to replace Gascón in 2024.
Colleagues said McKinney has a history of being able to reach across ideological and cultural aisles. Bobby Grace, a veteran prosecutor who has worked with McKinney for decades, said he had a knack for getting people to take risks to take the stand in important cases.
“I think that’s where he made his reputation as a good trial lawyer,” Grace said. “To be successful, particularly in gangs, you’ve got to be able to convince witnesses who don’t want to come forward, and I think that was really his strength.”
Although he failed to gain traction in the race to unseat Gascón, finishing far behind Hochman, he caught the future district attorney’s eye and the two became allies. When Hochman took office, he put McKinney in charge of specialized prosecutions, giving him oversight of a wide range of cases, including cop killings, juvenile crimes, gang homicides and child abuse.
McKinney said he wasn’t even thinking about getting into the city attorney race until the middle of January, when a number of people approached him about entering.
City attorney candidate John McKinney, left, walks through Skid Row in downtown Los Angeles on July 1.
(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)
By March, McKinney was scrambling to get a campaign together, and Hochman was quick to lend the fundraisers and managers who helped him oust Gascón.
He soon ascended from nonfactor to legitimate contender. Frustrated with ballooning legal costs and her handling of a department data breach, the city’s powerful police union abandoned Feldstein Soto and backed McKinney. Independent expenditures — political interest groups that can spend unlimited amounts in campaigns if they don’t coordinate with candidates — doled out $3 million to support McKinney.
In total, records show those groups have spent nearly $5 million on McKinney. More than half of that money has come from a venture capitalist who has publicly praised Elon Musk and a political action committee run by Airbnb, the rental giant currently facing a lawsuit from the city for price gouging during the wildfires.
McKinney insists campaign support won’t influence his decision-making in office. He has vowed to sue Airbnb if it engages in price gouging, and he knows the Los Angeles Police Department is a major factor in the city’s rising litigation costs. Given his law enforcement background, he argues he’s better positioned to influence police than Roy.
“I think because they know I’m not coming at them from a vindictive point of view, trying to underfund them or undermine them, that my criticism will be taken for what it’s worth, which is to make them stronger, to make them more trusted and more effective,” he said.
Whereas Hochman often compared L.A. to crime-plagued “Gotham City,” McKinney acknowledges the city’s more recent struggles are not with violence, but with quality-of-life crimes: unchecked homeless encampments, street racing, animal abuse on Skid Row.
Walking around Skid Row this summer, McKinney spoke with several people who approached from tents and other jerry-rigged structures. He listened closely as they explained their struggles and pleaded for help in a part of the city few residents ever set foot in. He describes his approach to the city’s homeless crisis as one of “compassionate accountability.”
“Every person who is living on the street has had some tragic circumstance in their life,” he said that day.
McKinney acknowledged he can’t do anything about a lack of housing as city attorney, but he can better manage the way L.A. throws resources at the problem. That includes more sophisticated audits of community-based organizations that have contracts with the city to aid unhoused people, he said.
Ultimately, he does not want to punish people who are suffering, but thinks the city attorney’s office can use its power of prosecution to pressure homeless defendants suffering from addiction or mental health issues into treatment. The mission is a personal one for McKinney, who grew up with a schizophrenic nephew whose slow decline he watched for years.
“When I talk about compassionate accountability, it’s not just a campaign slogan for me,” he said. “It’s real. These are real people.”
Assemblyman Burt Margolin (D-Los Angeles) was so concerned about reelection in his heavily Democratic 45th District that he scheduled his wedding and honeymoon in Hawaii in the midst of the campaign.
Margolin was married Sept. 27 to Dr. Laurie M. Post, a Beverly Hills clinical psychologist and daughter of motion picture director Ted Post. The couple is honeymooning in Hawaii, according to Margolin.
The 35-year-old assemblyman, elected in 1982 and reelected in 1984 with more than 60% of the vote both times, said that his marriage and honeymoon a month before the election does not mean that he is overconfident.
‘Do What Is Necessary’
“The key point is that I am not taking anything for granted,” he said in an interview. “I will be back in time to do what is necessary to win reelection. If my opponents mount a campaign, I will be in a position to respond.”
Less than a month before the Nov. 4 election, Margolin could probably just as well spend the rest of the month in the islands.
Jana Olson, the Republican candidate for Margolin’s job, is not optimistic about her chances of defeating him. “The race probably is not winnable, based on the way the district is laid out,” said Olson, a 28-year-old Toluca Lake businesswoman, adding that she expects to raise only $5,000 for the campaign.
By contrast, Margolin has amassed $55,000, none of which is as yet earmarked specifically for his reelection.
Olson’s pessimism is based on, among other factors, the registration figures. Of the 151,846 voters registered as of Sept. 23, 88,630 (58.4%) are Democrats, compared to 45,509 (30%) Republicans.
Long a Democratic stronghold, the 45th Assembly District extends from Hancock Park on the south to Burbank on the north, and includes the Fairfax and Pico-Robertson areas and portions of West Hollywood, Hollywood, the Hollywood Hills, Los Feliz, Universal City, Studio City, Toluca Lake and North Hollywood.
The district has served as the launching pad for and seemingly private reserve of the so-called Berman-Waxman organization, a Democratic political alliance named after U.S. Reps. Howard L. Berman (D-Panorama City) and Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles).
In 1968 Waxman was the first member of the organization to win the 45th District seat. He was followed by Herschel Rosenthal, now a state senator, who was succeeded by Margolin.
Margolin was an aide to both Waxman and Berman before winning his first election in 1982. He is a member of the organization and Waxman’s father works as an aide in Margolin’s office, which is just down the hall from Waxman’s district office in the Miracle Mile.
A Progressive Liberal
A self-described progressive Democrat, Margolin said it is not easy for someone of his political background (generally liberal on issues, including opposition to the death penalty) to score victories against the conservative Administration headed by Gov. George Deukmejian.
“Obviously, it is more difficult to get what you want,” he said, “but it is not impossible. I have managed to get results, although they are more modest because of the governor.”
Medi-Cal Improvement
He mentioned a bill, enacted into law, that established perinatal care for low-income women under Medi-Cal. “That is the only significant increase in Medi-Cal to get by the governor,” he said.
He also authored the so-called “bottle bill” that eventually became law and established deposits for beverage bottles and cans to encourage people to return them for recycling rather than discarding them as litter.
Olson said that she “leans to conservatism” and would bring a sense of fairness, sound business practices and help to the “truly needy” if she is elected.
“I oppose rent controls because they create an artificial market whereby rents are forcibly increased,” she said. “I favor free-market principles, whereas my opponent is very liberal on all the issues.”
Like Olson, the other two candidates in the race are not optimistic about their chances. Both Sylvia F. Kushner, the Peace and Freedom Party candidate, and Donald P. Meyer, the Libertarian Party candidate, said in interviews that they do not expect to win.
Kushner, 75, a human rights organizer, said she entered the race to support programs for low-income people and senior citizens and to register her opposition to the country’s foreign policy.
“We need a state jobs program, improved health care programs and state-supported housing for low-income people,” she said. “I have also been in the peace movement for many years.”
Meyer, 36, a courier with a bachelor’s degree in psychology from the University of Minnesota, said he would like to see government reduced to the smallest possible size.
“I am opposed to most taxes,” he said. “Government should exist to prevent people from taking your money, rather than assuming the role of taxer.”
RICHMOND, Va. — Virginia state Sen. L. Louise Lucas, one of the state’s most powerful Democrats, was charged Thursday with leading what authorities alleged was a wide-ranging criminal enterprise that acquired and distributed large quantities of marijuana and laundered the proceeds.
Lucas, who has been in elected office for decades, used her political power to insulate the operation from scrutiny, according to an indictment charging her and six other defendants, including several of her relatives. She “put her own financial interests before the people she was elected to serve,” said U.S. Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche, who spoke at a news conference with FBI Director Kash Patel.
Lucas surrendered, the Justice Department said. She made a brief appearance in federal court on Thursday afternoon, where she was released on her own recognizance, according to court records. She left the court without addressing media gathered outside and went straight into a waiting vehicle.
The charges, including drug trafficking and money laundering, came after the FBI searched Lucas’ hometown office and a cannabis shop in which she has a stake in May. At the time of the search, Lucas — who has been a vocal critic of Republican President Trump’s administration — characterized it as an attempt to intimidate her.
“This is the circus we always expected it to be,” said Brian Woolfolk, chief counsel for the L. Louise Lucas Legal Defense Fund.
Lucas says she won’t be bullied by the federal government
A statement attributed to Lucas posted on her social media account did not directly address the substance of the charges but said Thursday’s actions amounted to the federal government wielding its “full weight” against a great-grandmother.
“I will not be intimidated. I will not be bullied. And I will not back down,” Lucas said in the statement.
The brash 82-year-old lawmaker has spent decades ascending the ranks of Virginia politics and has served since 1992 in the state Senate, where she’s the president pro tempore, overseeing the chamber in the lieutenant governor’s absence. More significantly, she leads the powerful Senate finance committee, through which all legislation with any budget impact must flow. She’s used the position to kill legislation she opposes.
Justice Department denies politics played a role
The indictment comes as Trump’s Justice Department has faced intense scrutiny over investigations and prosecutions against foes of the president that critics have called politically motivated.
Blanche rejected any suggestion politics played a role in Lucas’ case, noting the investigation began well before the second Trump administration started in January 2025.
“We don’t do political paybacks,” Blanche told reporters.
A person familiar with the May search told the Associated Press at the time that the probe was opened during Democratic President Biden’s administration. The person spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a continuing criminal investigation.
FBI alleges a ‘criminal marijuana enterprise’
Patel said in a statement that “Lucas and a close-knit group of family members and associates orchestrated a multi-year scheme to enrich their own criminal marijuana enterprise, ‘the Lucas Enterprise’ — using Lucas’ position as Chairwoman of the Senate Finance and Appropriations Committee to insulate the enterprise from criminal scrutiny and influencing legislation to financially benefit themselves.”
The indictment describes Lucas as the “leader of the enterprise” who “approved and directed criminal activities,” including arranging for the acquisition and distribution of marijuana and supervising the laundering of the proceeds.
The indictment alleges Lucas worked this year with another of the defendants to use her political position to obtain a recreational marijuana license for him, with the understanding that the proceeds from sales under the license would be shared with her to support the “enterprise.”
Since 2021, marijuana has been legal to possess in Virginia, and many shops across the state have sold cannabis-derived products. But full recreational sales are not yet underway; legislation enacted earlier this year will allow them beginning in July 2027.
Law enforcement made multiple controlled purchases of marijuana from Lucas’ shop, which purported to sell hemp products, in 2024 and 2025, the indictment said.
In addition to drug and money laundering charges, Lucas faces a charge of racketeering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit honest services fraud and maintaining a drug-involved premises. An arraignment is scheduled for next month.
Among the other defendants who face a mix of those and other charges are two daughters of Lucas and a grandson. It was unclear if they had obtained legal representation. They were also scheduled to make an initial court appearance Thursday afternoon.
Virginia officials react
A forceful advocate of legalizing marijuana, Lucas partnered in opening the shop, The Cannabis Outlet, in 2021. She has publicly spoken about her ownership stake as recently as June, though her most recent financial disclosure forms do not list the business by name.
At the time of the search — when marijuana was recovered at The Cannabis Outlet, according to the indictment — many Democrats spoke up to defend Lucas.
On Thursday, Scott Surovell, the Democratic leader of the state Senate, said in a statement that the indictment contained “serious allegations” but emphasized that “Senator Lucas has the right to defend herself, and she has my full support as she does so.” Atty. Gen. Jay Jones, a Democrat who is close with Lucas, said the allegations against her must be tested in a “full and fair” legal process.
House Speaker Don Scott, Lt. Gov. Ghazala Hashmi, and Gov. Abigail Spanberger, all Democrats, echoed those sentiments, with Spanberger adding that the timing of the indictment so close to the midterm election would “further erode” Americans’ trust in the Justice Department. Lucas herself is not on the ballot this year.
Ryan McDougle, the Senate Republican leader, said he would not comment while the court proceedings play out.
The senator draws comparisons to Trump
Lucas, who represents a district that includes her hometown of coastal Portsmouth, operates with a sometimes-profane, unapologetic style that’s drawn comparisons to Trump.
She amassed a six-figure following on X and national attention, using the social media platform to advocate forcefully for her priorities and to bash her critics, including former GOP Gov. Glenn Youngkin. She’s also occasionally blasted members of her own party, including Spanberger, with whom she’s had disagreements.
Earlier this year, Lucas helped lead Democrats’ ultimately unsuccessful plan to gerrymander the blue-leaning state’s congressional districts into a map intended to elect 10 Democrats and only one Republican. Along the way, she posted quips about four GOP members the intended map sought to oust, joking that they soon would be working at McDonald’s. She and other Democrats defended the maps as a reasonable response to Trump-backed efforts to boost the GOP’s midterm advantage in other states.
Lucas has been in politics for decades
Lucas has notched several historic firsts in her career. According to a biography from the state library, in 1971 she became the Norfolk Naval Shipyard’s first female shipfitter, a physically demanding job that involves working on metal assemblies for vessels.
She launched her political career in 1984, when, the biography said, she became the first Black woman elected to the Portsmouth City Council.
In the state Senate, Lucas has been a staunch advocate for abortion rights and increased public school funding and a leading voice on issues of racial justice and civil rights.
In 2019, after Democrats flipped control of the chamber, her peers elected her to serve as president pro tempore. And in 2024, she was tapped to lead the chamber’s budget committee, gaining enormous sway over any legislation tied to the state budget.
Richer and Rankin write for the Associated Press. Richer reported from Washington and Rankin reported from Richmond, Va. AP journalists Eric Tucker in Washington and Steve Helber in Norfolk, Va., contributed to this report.
MIAMI — A federal judge on Thursday ordered President Trump to sit for a deposition in his $10-billion defamation lawsuit against the BBC by Dec. 11.
The order from U.S. Magistrate Judge Enjoliqué Lett came as the BBC’s lawyers complained that Trump had delayed his appearance. Attorney Charles Tobin said that with two months left in the discovery period, “we still haven’t been able to depose the plaintiff.”
He noted there was an agreed-upon date of Oct. 16, but that the Republican president canceled it for a “matter of national importance.” Tobin said Trump was in fact campaigning in Georgia that day.
“He was participating in party politics and prioritized that over sitting for the deposition,” Tobin said.
Lett said Trump must sit for a deposition by Dec. 11, or face sanctions up to dismissal of his lawsuit — unless the discovery period was extended past Dec. 18.
The BBC asked the judge last week to compel Trump to appear. The British broadcaster says Trump is trying to delay his appearance until January 2027. The judge has threatened sanctions if Trump fails to comply with the court’s schedule.
Trump, who has often avoided depositions, filed his lawsuit against the BBC last December, seeking $10 billion in damages. He accused the publicly funded broadcaster of defamation as well as deceptive and unfair trade practices related to a documentary, “Trump: A Second Chance.”
The BBC acknowledged that filmmakers spliced together quotes from different sections of the speech Trump delivered to his supporters on Jan. 6, 2021, before the storming of the U.S. Capitol, to make it seem he was directly urging violence. The broadcaster apologized over the editing, and the head of the BBC and its top news executive both resigned. The BBC has denied Trump’s claims that it defamed him.
Trump’s lawyers say Jack Smith ‘lacks personal knowledge’ of issues in the case
To bolster its defense, the broadcaster subpoenaed former special counsel Jack Smith earlier this month. Trump’s lawyers argued, in a joint filing asking for a hearing on the matter, that there was no good reason for Smith, who is not a party to the case, to appear.
“Smith lacks any personal knowledge regarding the issues in this matter,” they argued in the filing. “He was not present when President Trump’s January 6, 2021, speech … was made, nor did he participate in its preparation. Smith does not have any personal knowledge regarding President Trump’s state of mind at the time the Speech was given.”
Trump’s side also argued that “Smith’s testimony would be duplicative,” because he published a lengthy report on the events of Jan. 6 and also testified for many hours. “The entirety of his testimony is publicly available,” it argued.
The BBC countered, in the same filing, that there were few more knowledgeable sources about the events of Jan. 6 than Smith, who studied and investigated them for years.
“It is difficult to imagine a more authoritative source on these issues than Mr. Smith, who spent years gathering evidence on those topics with the force of the Justice Department and the power of the grand jury behind him,” the BBC’s lawyers argued.
“No one forced Plaintiff to file this lawsuit and to dispute that his speech on January 6 incited the violence that followed at the Capitol. But as long as he chooses to maintain the case, he cannot commit the fundamental injustice of preventing the BBC from obtaining the evidence it needs to robustly defend itself on every element of his claim…”
When will Trump sit for a deposition?
In a filing Oct. 13, the BBC’s lawyers said they first requested dates for a deposition in July, and followed up repeatedly, with both sides eventually agreeing on Oct. 16.
After weeks of silence, they wrote, “Plaintiff’s counsel responded on September 28, 2026, indicating that ‘the President is no longer available for his deposition on October 16 due to other matters of national importance’ and that counsel would ‘endeavor to provide you with a replacement date by the end of this week.’ He did not.”
They said they were then told that Trump “has no availability whatsoever for a deposition” before discovery is set to close on Dec. 18, and that Trump would instead make himself available the second or third week of January.
Tobin wrote in the filing, “Those delays have flouted the cooperative spirit of discovery and precluded the BBC from obtaining the evidence necessary to robustly litigate its defense.”
Fischer and Noveck write for the Associated Press. Noveck reported from New York.
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s administration is on track to deport about 660,000 people over the past year, a new report released Thursday shows, as arrests ramp up across the country fueled by billions of dollars meant to supercharge his immigration agenda.
The report by the Migration Policy Institute shows deportations increased from 620,000 during the first year of Trump’s second administration. The numbers fall short of previous highs in the early 2000s and fail to meet the Trump administration’s promise, made when it received the billions from Congress, that the money would allow for 1 million deportations annually.
The report, based on publicly available data obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests, comes after the Trump administration in January 2025 stopped publicly releasing similar figures compiled by the Department of Homeland Security.
Trump, a Republican, returned to power last year promising to stanch crossings at the southern border and crack down on immigration. His administration has pushed through restrictions on both legal and illegal immigration and launched high-profile arrest operations in its bid to force migrants out.
More people being deported, but not at all-time highs
The analysis found that the Department of Homeland Security carried out 980,000 deportations during the first 18 months of the second Trump administration.
During the last fiscal year — when the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement mechanisms were shifting into high gear — an estimated 660,000 people were deported.
According to MPI’s analysis, that’s a 26% increase from the yearly average from 2021 to 2024 during the administration of President Biden, a Democrat, but well below the 1.86 million deportations recorded in 2000, under President Clinton, another Democrat.
Despite the surging arrests, the report details some of the challenges to the Trump administration reaching its deportation targets.
Historically, many immigrants living in the U.S. without authorization were from Mexico and didn’t often seek asylum. But in recent years, migrants have come to the U.S. from a wide range of countries, which can make it more complicated to deport them. And immigration courts, which ultimately decide whether someone can be removed from the country, face more significant case backlogs.
Voluntary departures are increasing as are interior arrests
The report said voluntary departures — when people give up their cases in immigration court and agree to leave the country — were at an “all-time high,” with 170,000 choosing to do so since Trump returned to office in January 2025. People who choose voluntary departure could one day return to the U.S. But some immigrant advocates and lawyers say that people give up their court fight and agree to leave simply to get out of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, detention.
The Trump administration was also increasingly deporting people it arrested in the country’s interior, the report said, reflecting how it was stepping up enforcement against migrants who have been in the country for a long time. In 2025, about 28% of the people deported were arrested inside the country, but by July of this year that had risen to 39%.
Migrants arrested at the southern border still make up a large number of deportations, the report said — 69% of all deportations between Jan. 20, 2025, and July 31, 2026, were of people initially intercepted at the border.
People in the country longer may have more opportunities to contest their removal while the government typically has greater authority to fast-track deportations for people arrested at the border.
The analysis said most people deported have never been convicted of a crime, despite the Trump administration claiming to be targeting the “worst of the worst.” Previous data has showed the same.
In response to the MPI report, White House spokesperson Lauren Bis said: “President Trump has delivered the largest reduction in illegal immigration in modern history.”
Trump administration no longer regularly releases immigration data
Homeland Security stopped releasing similar data when Trump took office, making it difficult to track one of his key campaign promises. Figures the Trump administration has released are inconsistent and unverifiable.
The administration says it is transparent. On Tuesday, it released some of its own figures as part of a document boasting of its achievements on immigration, including that 1.2 million migrants have been deported or removed during Trump’s second term. The discrepancy could not immediately be reconciled.
In the absence of regular data, analysts and activists interested in immigration trends have relied on information obtained through lawsuits or limited and sporadic information released by federal agencies to track deportation data.
A sweeping campaign by federal immigration agents to identify voter fraud by noncitizens through door knocks, street stops and other field interviews in California and eight other states must be reined in ahead of the Nov. 3 election, after a federal judge in Northern California ruled it has intimidated U.S. citizens and interfered with the work of voting rights groups.
Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguin said in a ruling Wednesday that limiting the Department of Homeland Security’s surging operations in those states — which she wrote “sweep in U.S. citizens for investigation” — does not prevent the Trump administration from “exercising their authority to investigate voter fraud by lawful means.”
A Homeland Security spokesperson said the agency is “laser focused on identifying, prosecuting, and removing aliens who vote,” and has “no plans to question or investigate people we believe to be U.S. citizens.”
The ruling was the latest to come out of an unprecedented legal war playing out between the Trump administration and California in recent days, in which an array of election cases are working their way through the federal courts at breakneck speed.
There is, for example, the lawsuit the U.S. Justice Department filed against California and state and local elections officials last week, demanding that they set aside any ballots from a list of 20,000 individuals identified by immigration officials as “likely noncitizens.”
There are also two cases out of Washington, D.C., in which a coalition of Democratic leaders, immigrant rights groups, voting rights experts and naturalized citizens in California are challenging the Trump administration’s use of Homeland Security data to target voters.
White House, Homeland Security and Justice Department officials have all defended the administration’s efforts as necessary to ensure that noncitizens are not illegally diluting the votes of U.S. citizens. First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, the lead federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, has claimed to have “overwhelming evidence” that tens of thousands of noncitizens are doing so in California.
‘That is not normal’
Democratic leaders and prominent elections experts, meanwhile, have cast the administration’s claims as baseless and intentionally exaggerated to stoke uncertainty about election security and ultimately challenge midterm results the president doesn’t like, and the Justice Department’s legal arguments as fundamentally flawed and wildly out of line with long-established department policy to stay out of elections in the lead up to voting.
“That is not normal. We have literally never experienced that in American history. Not once,” said David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research and a former Justice Department elections attorney. “The fact that the administration appears poised for the first time to act as an adversary to the states and counties who have [the] undisputed constitutional authority to run elections? That is unusual.”
At the same time, Becker and other experts stressed that those efforts to date have failed, and state and local elections have largely proceeded in recent weeks without incident, with millions of Americans having already cast their ballots.
“California voters need to know that they’re in good hands, that we have leaders at the state and local levels who are protecting our ballots and are ensuring that these attempts by the federal government to root out supposed noncitizen voting are not going to prevent Californians from casting our ballots,” said Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation. “Part of the strategy here is to distract people and scare people and raise fears, and the important thing is to continue to stay focused on … making a plan to vote.”
Status of cases
Federal courts have already rejected multiple Trump executive orders seeking to enforce nationwide voter ID and citizenship requirements. The Supreme Court blocked an administration plan for the U.S. Postal Service to vet mail ballots. The Justice Department has compiled a stunning record of losses in its 30 lawsuits demanding state voter rolls — with 26 of those cases, including the one in California, so far dismissed.
And election experts said they expect the Trump administration to rack up more losses in coming days — including in the Justice Department’s case challenging California officials’ refusal to segregate the ballots of some 20,000 voters based on the administration’s unsubstantiated claims they are noncitizens.
U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, shown in 2023, is overseeing a lawsuit in which the Department of Justice says 20,000 California ballots may have been sent to “likely noncitizens.”
(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)
That case was taken up — and scheduled for a Tuesday hearing — by Judge David O. Carter, an appointee of President Clinton who in January rejected the administration’s demand for California’s voter rolls, calling it a clear federal overreach that would have a “chilling effect” on voters and threaten American democracy.
California has called for the case to be dismissed outright, on the grounds that the administration has zero authority to make such demands, and that the demands are unlawful. The Trump administration has asked Carter to immediately rule in the matter.
“Every minute of [ballot] processing that occurs without segregating the ballots of suspected non-eligible voters causes untraceable disenfranchisement and dilution of the votes of United States citizens,” wrote Julie Hamill, an assistant U.S. attorney in Essayli’s office.
In D.C. federal court, Judge James E. Boasberg set an Oct. 30 hearing in a case in which UCLA Voting Rights Project attorneys, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA, and a California voter named Pedro Trujillo are challenging the administration’s use of unproven federal databases to allege California voters aren’t citizens.
Carl Bergquist, an attorney for CHIRLA, said he looked forward to bringing a host of recent Trump administration actions to the court’s attention — including the administration’s lawsuit against California, the charging this week of 28 legal permanent residents in California with election-related crimes, and Trump’s threats to arrest California elections officials who don’t comply with his administration’s demands.
“The events of the last few days, from threats to state and local officials, increased general immigration operations, the random knocking on doors by federal agents and the recent arrests are causing a chill in the community,” Bergquist said. “People, including naturalized citizens, are making their plans to vote and the Federal Government is doing its utmost to quash their attempts to exercise this fundamental right that they have lawfully acquired.”
The argument that naturalized citizens are being intimidated also features prominently in a second lawsuit filed in D.C. federal court Tuesday, in which top Democrats in Congress joined Nevada party officials and a California immigrant named Erick Jose Jimenez to challenge the Trump administration’s unprecedented voter fraud probes.
That lawsuit, also assigned to Boasberg, says Jimenez, a naturalized citizen since 2006, fears being “unlawfully targeted for voting and disenfranchised (or worse).”
Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School professor who studies elections and was a senior policy advisor on democracy and voting rights in the Biden White House, said there is “so much noise” around the election right now, in part because the administration has been making wild legal arguments about its authority over elections.
But he said “none of the federal government’s attempts to assert power that they do not have are working,” and voting “for 99.999% of the public” will remain “wonderfully normal.”
COLUMBUS, Ohio — President Trump said Thursday that Vivek Ramaswamy, the Republican nominee for Ohio governor, should keep running a controversial ad featuring the estranged mother of Democratic opponent Amy Acton, posting on social media that it was “hitting pay dirt.”
Trump also denounced Ohio Republican Gov. Mike DeWine, who criticized the ad as “deeply, deeply troubling” earlier in the day. Acton previously served in DeWine’s administration as a health official. Her mother lost custody of Acton and her brother after her husband — the children’s stepfather — was indicted on a charge of raping Acton.
“He strongly suggested that Vivek should, ‘take down the Ad,’ ” Trump wrote. “He probably wants a Dumocrat to win, and certainly doesn’t want someone who will do a much better job than he is capable of doing. I suggested, on the other hand, that Vivek should keep it up, and let everyone listen to the mother of a defective, dishonest, and incapable Candidate, explain how the daughter is a DISASTER who, uncontrollably, lies, cheats, and steals!”
At a gathering with reporters at the Ohio Statehouse, DeWine recalled the painful experiences of rape victims he dealt with as a county prosecutor and state attorney general.
“It’s wrong to run this ad,” he said. “And, even at this late time — my wife, Fran, saw the ad just run this morning on TV — I would just urge the Ramaswamy campaign to take this down.”
The term-limited DeWine’s remarks place him at odds with Ramaswamy, whom he has endorsed. The biotech entrepreneur and former presidential candidate plans to spend $4 million to broadcast it online and on television.
DeWine stops short of pulling his endorsement
But the governor stopped short of pulling his backing of the Republican for now. DeWine recalled a previous line of attack by the Acton campaign had mentioned Ramaswamy’s mother and said that also was wrong — “family members have always historically been off limits” — though he noted it was never used in a multimillion-dollar ad campaign.
That critique from the summer cited an investigative report into Geetha Ramaswamy’s role at a pharmaceutical company run by her son, whom Acton and Democrats described as “hiring his own mother to manipulate clinical trial data.”
The Ramaswamy campaign called those claims “slanderous” and said he’s being held to a different standard than Acton and other Democrats who have attacked Republicans’ families.
“Governor DeWine is correct that the first and only candidate to attack the mother of her opponent in this race was Amy Acton,” spokesperson Connie Luck said in a statement, adding, “We refuse to accept the media’s double standards.”
Ohio Republicans divided over the ad
By chiming in, DeWine has entered the fray of a growing rift among Ohio Republicans over the advertisement — as both the governor’s race and a race for U.S. Senate appear far tighter than expected in a state Trump won handily three times. The video features Acton’s birth mother, Donna Arthur, calling her “a liar” and insinuating she has mental health issues.
Acton, Ohio’s COVID-19-era health director, has made no secret of facing homelessness and abuse as a child. Arthur lost custody of her children after their stepfather, Arthur’s husband, was indicted on a charge of rape involving Acton. Acton’s campaign on Tuesday posted a video of her brother, who supported her backstory about living in a tent and being abused.
Republican Vice President JD Vance, an Ohio native son, expressed disgust during an Ohio campaign swing Wednesday with Republicans “whining” about the ad as low and in poor taste. But Republican U.S. Sen. Jon Husted, DeWine’s former lieutenant governor — running in a tight retention race against Democrat Sherrod Brown — has said he would not have run the ad, as has Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose, who is running for state auditor.
Another influential Ohio Republican, former U.S. Rep. Jim Renacci, posted a lengthy essay on X overnight, suggesting that “the floor may have just fallen out from under the Republican campaign for Ohio Governor” and urging every Republican to distance themselves from it.
Amid the turmoil, Ohio Republican Party Chairman Alex Triantafilou posted what sounded like a warning, or a threat.
“The final days of a tough campaign are always the best time to find out who is really with you and who just posts and pretends,” he wrote. “Yes—we are keeping score.” The quote was followed by a winking-eye emoji.
Ad has faced bipartisan rebukes, support in conservative media
The ad is also dividing Republicans nationally.
Nikki Haley, who sparred with Ramaswamy during the 2024 Republican presidential primary over the personal nature of his attacks, called him “a bad guy” in a social media post Tuesday. “It’s a shame he continues to get away with it,” she wrote.
At the same time, Media Matters for America, a left-leaning media watchdog group, has reported that many within the national conservative media are promoting and praising the ad. Ramaswamy’s campaign manager, Jonathan Ewing, characterized it as “a campaign-ending moment for Amy Acton.”
Wayne Allyn Root, of Gateway Pundit, called it “absolutely hilarious” and Daily Wire host Michael Knowles described it as “brilliant.”
Police and court records show Cledith Arthur was arrested and charged with the rape of Acton in July 1978, when she was 12, after her biological father lodged a formal complaint against him. The abuse allegedly happened from December 1976 to April 1978. Cledith Arthur failed to show for a court appearance and became a fugitive.
Donna Arthur remained married to him until his death in 2004.
The mayor of the small Central Valley farm town of Kerman pulled up to a bakery, her cellphone camera recording, and confronted federal immigration agents conducting an early-morning operation in which multiple people were detained.
“You’re not welcome in my city,” Maria Pacheco told the masked agents, identifying herself as the mayor. “You’ve taken enough people yesterday. We don’t want you here. You need to leave.”
As the men wearing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement vests drove away, she shouted: “How can you make a living kidnapping people? How can you sleep at night doing what you’re doing? … You are a sorry piece of sh—!”
Pacheco, who is running for a seat on the Fresno County Board of Supervisors, posted video of the Oct. 8 confrontation in Kerman — a mostly Latino city of 17,000 west of Fresno — on social media, labeling it: “Mayor Maria Pacheco Stands Up to ICE.”
The footage went viral. TikTok commentators praised her bravery. Comedian and actor George Lopez posted about it on Facebook — writing, “We need more politicians like Maria Pacheco!” — and she shared her campaign fundraising link in the comments.
A few days later, Pacheco allegedly drove through Fresno, closely following a vehicle driven by a man she assumed was an ICE agent.
Except, he wasn’t one.
Eric Bridges, a Fresno hairdresser, has accused Pacheco of closely trailing him in an orange Nissan Altima for more than 20 minutes on Oct. 14 and taking photos of his vehicles as she followed him to his sister’s house.
“I’m looking for ICE, and you look like ICE,” Pacheco told him, according to a signed statement submitted to the Fresno County District Attorney’s Office this week in which Bridges wrote that he wanted “to press charges to the fullest extent of the law.”
Bridges’ attorney, Roger Bonakdar, told The Times that Pacheco used his client “as a political trampoline so she could create social media clickbait” to benefit her political campaign.
“There are real concerns as to whether or not she is acting as some sort of vigilante law enforcement person, that she’s wrongfully abusing her position as an elected official,” Bonakdar said.
Bonakdar added that he filed complaints about the incident with the Fresno Police Department and county prosecutor.
Taylor Long, a spokesperson for the district attorney’s office, said in an email that the information provided by Bonakdar had been referred to its Public Integrity Unit, which investigates public officials for potential crimes related to their office, but that “the receipt and review of information” does not mean a crime had occurred or that charges were warranted.
No charges had been filed by the district attorney’s office in connection with the incident as of Wednesday, Long wrote.
In an email to The Times, Pacheco wrote: “Regarding recent allegations, my only comment is this: If he wants to go to court, we will go to court.”
“Meanwhile, the Kerman Food Bank and other local organizations are experiencing food shortages as families face fear and uncertainty caused by recent immigration enforcement actions,” Pacheco wrote. “Parents are afraid to go to work or leave home, even to buy groceries, leaving more families struggling to put food on the table. … That is where our attention belongs, and where my time, energy and heart will remain.”
The encounter comes at a tense time in the Central Valley, where a surge this month in federal immigration operations and detentions has rattled agricultural communities, causing workers to stop showing up to farm fields and construction sites and families to keep their children home from school.
The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to requests for information about the Oct. 8 operation outside La Princesa Real Bakery in Kerman, where Pacheco filmed her interaction with agents. Pacheco told the Fresno Bee that four of the bakery’s customers had been detained and that one was eventually released because he had lawful immigration status.
In his signed statement, Bridges wrote that he was driving near Kearney Park just west of Fresno on the afternoon of Oct. 14 when he noticed an orange car “pull behind me quickly and follow me into the park.” Bridges said he stopped his vehicle and was on the phone with his sister, telling her that he was being followed and that the driver was taking photos of him.
As he sat in the parking lot, he wrote, the car circled him for five minutes, and he could overhear the driver on the phone through her vehicle’s speaker system.
He then drove to his sister’s neighborhood, where the car tailed him into a cul-de-sac and stopped beside his white Mercedes sport utility vehicle — an encounter recorded by a home security camera.
When the female driver rolled down her car window, Bridges wrote, she asked who he was and he did the same. According to Bridges’ statement, the driver told him he was “in [her] ‘hood driving an unmarked car.”
Bridges wrote that he had a California Department of Motor Vehicles print-out affixed to the back of his vehicle and asked if she was a police officer or DMV employee.
She replied, “Don’t worry about who I am; I’m someone important” then accused him of being an ICE agent, Bridges wrote. Outraged, he began filming her.
In the home security footage, Bridges can be heard from a distance saying, “I didn’t know you owned the neighborhood,” and shouting in apparent surprise: “I look like I’m ICE?” after the woman speaks to him.
A close-up video that Bridges recorded shows a woman in sunglasses smiling as she drives away, with him saying, “Don’t you ever in your … life follow me, you weird-ass b—.”
Bridges wrote that she flipped him off as she left and that he learned she was the mayor of Kerman after reviewing the video footage.
Bonakdar, his attorney, said Bridges is a grandfather and hair stylist who has never worked for ICE or the Department of Homeland Security. When the driver of the orange vehicle saw him, Bonakdar said, Bridges was not wearing a face covering, as immigration agents often do, or a badge or tactical vest.
Pacheco “claims to be an advocate for minority groups, or to somehow have an interest in helping those people,” Bonakdar said. “I mean, she just victimized somebody who is a member of two minority groups. [Bridges] is a thin-framed, middle-aged Black gay man.”
Bonakdar said Bridges had received threats from people accusing him of being an undercover ICE agent and that some had told him he was not welcome in certain places.
On Oct. 15, the day after the alleged encounter with Bridges, Pacheco wrote a Facebook post about a street corner near agricultural fields just west of Fresno city limits: “I have spotted ICE on Shaw and Dickenson. White SUV. No plates. Driver is masked and hooded.”
Two days later, she took to Facebook again, writing: “I never imagined we’d live in a time when communities would fear masked men in unmarked vehicles. It’s exhausting living on constant high alert, watching for out-of-state or missing license plates, never knowing who’s next.”
Bianna Golodryga, a longtime international anchor and senior global affairs analyst for CNN, is leaving the network.
Golodryga, the co-anchor of the CNN International program “One World with Zain Asher,” announced her departure Thursday in a post on X. She will make her final appearance on the network Friday, according to a CNN representative.
“After nine wonderful years at CNN, I’ve decided to leave for an opportunity that I couldn’t pass up,” Golodryga said. “I’m grateful for the experiences, friendships and support from fabulous colleagues during my CNN years. Exciting news to share very soon!”
Golodryga’s exit comes three days after Christiane Amanpour, the network’s best-known international journalist, stated her intention to leave CNN next June.
In the short term, CNN and Skydance’s CBS News are operating independently under their current leadership. But consolidation is expected at some point with international bureaus being an expected early target. There is also anxiety among the CNN rank and file over how involved CBS Editor in chief Bari Weiss will be in the combined operations.
Weiss has been a polarizing figure at CBS since Paramount acquired her contrarian digital news site the Free Press last year and gave her oversight of the network’s storied news division. She has made major changes at “CBS Evening News” and the top-rated newsmagazine “60 Minutes,” where several correspondents were fired after accusing her of pushing them to add right-wing talking points to their stories.
Golodryga, 48, arrived at CNN as a contributor in 2017 and joined the network full time two years later. She previously served as co-host of “CBS This Morning,” and was an anchor for Yahoo! Finance. She also worked for ABC News as a correspondent and co-anchor of the weekend edition of “Good Morning America.”
Golodryga, who immigrated to the U.S. as a refugee from the Soviet Union in 1980, is the co-author of a young adult novel, “Don’t Feed the Lion,” which dealt with antisemitism.
