POLITICS

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — It figures that a billionaire would win big in Las Vegas.

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker reported a gambling windfall of $1.4 million on his federal tax return this week.

The two-term Democrat, often mentioned as a 2028 presidential candidate, told reporters in Chicago on Thursday that he drew charmed hands in blackjack during a vacation with first lady MK Pritzker and friends in Sin City.

“I was incredibly lucky,” he said. “You have to be to end up ahead, frankly, going to a casino anywhere.”

Pritzker, an heir to the Hyatt hotel chain, has a net worth of $3.9 billion, tied for No. 382 on the Forbes 400 list of the nation’s richest people. A campaign spokesperson said via email that Pritzker planned to donate the money to charity but did not respond when asked why he hadn’t already done so.

Pritzker, who intends to seek a third term in 2026, was under consideration as a vice presidential running mate to Kamala Harris last year. He has deflected questions about any ambition beyond the Illinois governor’s mansion. But he has used his personal wealth to fund other Democrats and related efforts, including a campaign to protect access to abortion.

His profile has gotten an additional bump this fall as he condemns President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement in Chicago and the president’s attempt to deploy National Guard troops there.

The Pritzkers reported income of $10.66 million in 2024, mostly from dividends and capital gains. They paid $1.6 million in taxes on taxable income of $5.87 million.

Pritzker is an avid card player whose charitable Chicago Poker Challenge has raised millions of dollars for the Holocaust Museum and Education Center. The Vegas windfall was a “net number” given wins and losses on one trip, he said. He declined to say what his winning hand was.

“Anybody who’s played cards in a casino, you often play for too long and lose whatever it is you won,” Pritzker said. “I was fortunate enough to have to leave before that happened.”

O’Connor writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Sophia Tareen contributed to this report from Chicago.

WASHINGTON — President Trump on Thursday warned Hamas “we will have no choice but to go in and kill them” if internal bloodshed persists in Gaza.

The grim warning from Trump came after he previously downplayed the internal violence in the territory since a ceasefire and hostage deal between Israel and Hamas went into effect last week.

Trump said Tuesday that Hamas had taken out “a couple of gangs that were very bad” and had killed a number of gang members. “That didn’t bother me much, to be honest with you,” he said.

The president did not say how he would follow through on his threat posted on his Truth Social platform, and the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment seeking clarity.

But Trump also made clear he had limited patience for the killings that Hamas was carrying out against rival factions inside the devastated territory.

“They will disarm, and if they don’t do so, we will disarm them, and it’ll happen quickly and perhaps violently,” Trump said.

The Hamas-run police maintained a high degree of public security after the militants seized power in Gaza 18 years ago while also cracking down on dissent. They largely melted away in recent months as Israeli forces seized large areas of Gaza and targeted Hamas security forces with airstrikes.

Powerful local families and armed gangs, including some anti-Hamas factions backed by Israel, stepped into the void. Many are accused of hijacking humanitarian aid and selling it for profit, contributing to Gaza’s starvation crisis.

The ceasefire plan introduced by Trump had called for all hostages — living and dead — to be handed over by a deadline that expired Monday. But under the deal, if that didn’t happen, Hamas was to share information about deceased hostages and try to hand them over as soon as possible.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Wednesday that Israel “will not compromise” and demanded that Hamas fulfill the requirements laid out in the ceasefire deal about the return of hostages’ bodies.

Hamas’ armed wing said in a statement Wednesday that the group honored the ceasefire’s terms and handed over the remains of the hostages it had access to.

The United States announced last week that it is sending about 200 troops to Israel to help support and monitor the ceasefire deal in Gaza as part of a team that includes partner nations and nongovernmental organizations. But U.S. officials have stressed that U.S. forces would not set foot in Gaza.

Israeli officials have also been angered by the pace of the return of the remains of dead hostages the militant group had been holding in captivity. Hamas had agreed to return 28 bodies as part of the ceasefire deal in addition to 20 living hostages, who were released earlier this week.

Hamas has assured the U.S. through intermediaries that it is working to return dead hostages, according to two senior U.S. advisors. The advisors, who were not authorized to comment publicly and briefed reporters on the condition of anonymity, said they do not believe Hamas has violated the deal.

Madhani writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats are poised for the 10th time Thursday to reject a stopgap spending bill that would reopen the government, insisting they won’t back away from demands that Congress take up healthcare benefits.

The repetition of votes on the funding bill has become a daily drumbeat in Congress, underscoring how intractable the situation has become. It has been at times the only item on the agenda for the Senate floor, while House Republicans have left Washington altogether. The standoff has lasted over two weeks, leaving hundreds of thousands of federal workers furloughed, even more without a guaranteed payday and Congress essentially paralyzed.

“Every day that goes by, there are more and more Americans who are getting smaller and smaller paychecks,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, adding that there have been thousands of flight delays across the country as well.

Thune, a South Dakota Republican, again and again has tried to pressure Democrats to break from their strategy of voting against the stopgap funding bill. It hasn’t worked. And while some bipartisan talks have been ongoing about potential compromises on healthcare, they haven’t produced any meaningful progress toward reopening the government. Thune has also offered to hold a later vote on extending subsidies for health plans offered under Affordable Care Act marketplaces, but said he would not “guarantee a result or an outcome.”

Democrats say they won’t budge until they get a guarantee on extending the tax credits for the health plans. They warn that millions of Americans who buy their own health insurance — such as small business owners, farmers and contractors — will see large increases when premium prices go out in the coming weeks. Looking ahead to a Nov. 1 deadline in most states, they think voters will demand that Republicans enter into serious negotiations.

“The ACA crisis is looming over everyone’s head, and yet Republicans seem ready to let people’s premiums spike,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer in a floor speech.

Still, Thune was also trying a different tack Thursday with a vote to proceed to appropriations bills — a move that could grease the Senate’s gears into some action or just deepen the divide between the two parties.

A deadline for subsidies on health plans

Democrats have rallied around their priorities on healthcare as they hold out against voting for a Republican bill that would reopen the government. Yet they also warn that the time to strike a deal to prevent large increases for many health plans is drawing short.

When they controlled Congress during the pandemic, Democrats boosted subsidies for Affordable Care Act health plans. It pushed enrollment under President Obama’s signature healthcare law to new levels and drove the rate of uninsured people to a historic low. Nearly 24 million people currently get their health insurance from subsidized marketplaces, according to healthcare research nonprofit KFF.

Democrats — and some Republicans — are worried that many of those people will forgo insurance if the price rises dramatically. While the tax credits don’t expire until next year, health insurers will soon send out notices of the price increases. In most states, they go out Nov. 1.

Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said she has heard from “families who are absolutely panicking about their premiums that are doubling.”

“They are small business owners who are having to think about abandoning the job they love to get employer-sponsored healthcare elsewhere or just forgoing coverage altogether,” she added.

Murray also said that if many people decide to leave their health plan, it could have an effect across medical insurance because the pool of people under health plans will shrink. That could result in higher prices across the board, she said.

Some Republicans have acknowledged that the expiration of the tax credits could be a problem and floated potential compromises to address it, but there is hardly a consensus among the GOP.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) this week called the COVID-era subsidies a “boondoggle,” adding that “when you subsidize the healthcare system and you pay insurance companies more, the prices increase.”

President Trump has said he would “like to see a deal done for great healthcare,” but has not meaningfully weighed in on the debate. And Thune has insisted that Democrats first vote to reopen the government before entering any negotiations on healthcare.

If Congress were to engage in negotiations on significant changes to healthcare, it would likely take weeks, if not longer, to work out a compromise.

Votes on appropriations bills

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans are setting up a vote Thursday to proceed to a bill to fund the Defense Department and several other areas of government. This would turn the Senate to Thune’s priority of working through spending bills and potentially pave the way to paying salaries for troops, though the House would eventually need to come back to Washington to vote for a final bill negotiated between the two chambers.

It could also put a crack in Democrats’ resolve. Thune said Thursday, “If they want to stop the defense bill, I don’t think it’s very good optics for them.”

It wasn’t clear whether Democrats would give the support needed to advance the bills. They discussed the idea at their luncheon Wednesday and emerged saying they wanted to review the Republican proposal and make sure it included appropriations that are priorities for them.

While the votes will not bring the Senate any closer to an immediate fix for the government shutdown, it could at least turn their attention to issues where there is some bipartisan agreement.

Still, there was a growing sense on Capitol Hill that an end to the stasis is nowhere in sight.

“So many of you have asked all of us, how will it end?” said House Speaker Johnson. “We have no idea.”

Groves and Jalonick write for the Associated Press.

CHICAGO — Federal immigration officers in the Chicago area will be required to wear body cameras, a judge said Thursday after seeing tear gas and other aggressive steps used against protesters.

U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis said she was a “little startled” after seeing TV images of clashes between agents and the public during President Donald Trump’s administration’s immigration crackdown.

“I live in Chicago if folks haven’t noticed,” she said. “And I’m not blind, right?”

Community efforts to oppose U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement have ramped up in the nation’s third-largest city, where neighborhood groups have assembled to monitor ICE activity and film incidents involving agents. More than 1,000 immigrants have been arrested since September.

Separately, the Trump administration has tried to deploy National Guard troops, but the strategy was halted last week by a different judge.

Ellis last week said agents in the area must wear badges, and she banned them from using certain riot control techniques against peaceful protesters and journalists.

“I’m having concerns about my order being followed,” the judge said.

“I am adding that all agents who are operating in Operation Midway Blitz are to wear body-worn cameras, and they are to be on,” Ellis said, referring to the government’s name for the crackdown.

U.S. Justice Department attorney Sean Skedzielewski laid blame with “one-sided and selectively edited media reports.” He also said it wouldn’t be possible to immediately distribute cameras.

“I understand that. I would not be expecting agents to wear body-worn cameras they do not have,” Ellis said, adding that the details could be worked out later.

She said the field director of the enforcement effort must appear in court Monday.

In 2024, Immigration and Customs Enforcement began deploying about 1,600 body cameras to agents assigned to Enforcement and Removal Operations.

At the time, officials said they would be provided to agents in Baltimore, Philadelphia, Washington, Buffalo, New York and Detroit. Other Homeland Security Department agencies require some agents to wear cameras. U.S. Customs and Border Protection has released body-camera video when force has been used by its agents or officers.

Fernando writes for the Associated Press.

CNN is taking another shot at launching a direct-to-consumer streaming service that will make much of the channel’s news programming available without a pay TV subscription.

The unit of Warner Bros. Discovery announced Thursday it will launch an All Access subscription tier for CNN.com available for $6.99 a month starting Oct. 28. The service will provide what the company describes as “a selection” of live programming on CNN and CNN International.

The service will also have exclusive on-demand programming and a library of titles from CNN Films and CNN Original Series.

The All Access subscription will be be offered at $69.99 annually, but will carry an introductory price of $41.99 for the first year for customers signing up by Jan. 5.

The announcement comes two years after Mark Thompson took over as chief executive of the network with a mandate to guide the channel into a digital post-cable future.

CNN launched a direct-to-consumer service in 2022 called CNN+, made up of original programming featuring its current talent line-up and new additions including Audie Cornish, Chris Wallace and Kasie Hunt. But the service was shut down nine days after launch following WBD’s takeover of the network, as new management was focused on reducing debt.

CNN has seen profits decline significantly over the last five years as cord-cutting has driven down revenues received from cable and satellite companies carrying the channel.

The cable channel also saw a significant decline in ratings after WBD took over ownership of the network and executives pushed for the network to appeal more to conservative viewers.

Thompson has made few changes to the CNN program line-up as his team has focused on its digital properties. Thompson and Alex MacCallum, executive vice president of digital products and services, were both at the New York Times when the company transformed into a successful digital subscription-based news business.

In a statement, MacCallum said the All Access launch is “an essential step in CNN’s evolution as we work to give audiences the complete CNN experience in a format that reflects how audiences engage with the news today.”

CNN introduced a paywall on its website last year, giving users unfettered access to articles and video on the site for $3.99 a month. Response to the preliminary phase was encouraging, according to people inside the network who were not authorized to comment publicly.

Cable subscribers will also get the new streaming service for free.

Fox News is currently the only major cable news channel available without a pay TV subscription. The channel is offered on Fox One, the recently launched streaming service that also offers local Fox broadcast affiliates for $19.99 a month.

WASHINGTON — President Trump is scheduled to speak with Russia’s Vladimir Putin Thursday as he considers Ukraine’s push for long-range missiles, according to a White House official who was not authorized to comment on the private call and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The call comes ahead of Trump’s meeting on Friday at the White House with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The Ukrainian leader has been pressing Trump to sell Kyiv Tomahawk missiles which would allow Ukrainian forces to strike deeper into Russian territory.

Zelensky has argued such strikes would help compel Putin to take Trump’s calls for direct negotiations between the Russia and Ukraine to end the war more seriously.

With a fragile Israel-Hamas ceasefire and hostage deal holding, Trump has said he’s now turning his attention to bringing Russia’s war on Ukraine to an end and is weighing providing Kyiv long-range weaponry as he looks to prod Moscow to the negotiating table.

Ending the wars in Ukraine and Gaza was central to Trump’s 2024 reelection pitch, in which he persistently pilloried President Joe Biden for his handling of the conflicts. Yet, like his predecessor, Trump also has been stymied by Putin as he’s unsuccessfully pressed the Russian leader to hold direct talks with Zelensky to end the war that is nearing its fourth year.

But fresh off the Gaza ceasefire, Trump is showing new confidence that he can finally make headway on ending the Russian invasion. He’s also signaling that he’s ready to step up pressure on Putin if he doesn’t come to the table soon.

“Interestingly we made progress today, because of what’s happened in the Middle East,” Trump said of the Russia-Ukraine war on Wednesday evening as he welcomed supporters of his White House ballroom project to a glitzy dinner.

Earlier this week in Jerusalem, in a speech to the Knesset, Trump predicted the truce in Gaza would lay the groundwork for the U.S. to help Israel and many of its Middle East neighbors normalize relations. But Trump also made clear his top foreign policy priority now is ending the largest armed conflict in Europe since World War II.

“First we have to get Russia done,” Trump said, turning to his special envoy Steve Witkoff, who has also served as his administration’s chief interlocutor with Putin. “We gotta get that one done. If you don’t mind, Steve, let’s focus on Russia first. All right?”

Trump weighs Tomahawks for Ukraine

Trump is set to host Zelensky for talks Friday, their fourth face-to-face meeting this year.

Ahead of the meeting, Trump has said he’s weighing selling Kyiv long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles, which would allow Ukraine to strike deep into Russian territory — if Putin doesn’t settle the war soon. Zelensky, who has long sought the weapons system, said it would help Ukraine put the sort of pressure on Russia needed to get Putin to engage in peace talks.

Putin has made clear that providing Ukraine with Tomahawks would cross a red line and further damage relations between Moscow and Washington.

But Trump has been undeterred.

“He’d like to have Tomahawks,” Trump said of Zelensky on Tuesday. “We have a lot of Tomahawks.”

Agreeing to sell Ukraine Tomahawks would be a splashy move, said Mark Montgomery, an analyst at the conservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington. But it could take years to supply and train Kyiv on the Tomahawk system.

Montgomery said Ukraine could be better served in the near term with a surge of Extended Range Attack Munition (ERAM) missiles and Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS. The U.S. already approved the sale of up to 3,350 ERAMs to Kyiv earlier this year.

The Tomahawk, with a range of about 995 miles (1,600 kilometers), would allow Ukraine to strike far deeper in Russian territory than either the ERAM (about 285 miles, or 460 km) or ATACMS (about 186 miles, or 300 kilometers).

“To provide Tomahawks is as much a political decision as it is a military decision,” Montgomery said. “The ERAM is shorter range, but this can help them put pressure on Russia operationally, on their logistics, the command and control, and its force disbursement within several hundred kilometers of the front line. It can be very effective.”

Signs of White House interest in new Russia sanctions

Zelensky is expected to reiterate his plea to Trump to hit Russia’s economy with further sanctions, something the Republican, to date, has appeared reluctant to do.

Congress has weighed legislation that would lead to tougher sanctions on Moscow, but Trump has largely focused his attention on pressuring NATO members and other allies to cut off their purchases of Russian oil, the engine fueling Moscow’s war machine. To that end, Trump said Wednesday that India, which became one of Russia’s biggest crude buyers after the Ukraine invasion, had agreed to stop buying oil from Moscow.

Waiting for Trump’s blessing is legislation in the Senate that would impose steep tariffs on countries that purchase Russia’s oil, gas, uranium and other exports in an attempt to cripple Moscow economically.

Though the president hasn’t formally endorsed it — and Republican leaders do not plan to move forward without his support — the White House has shown, behind the scenes, more interest in the bill in recent weeks.

Administration officials have gone through the legislation in depth, offering line edits and requesting technical changes, according to two officials with knowledge of the discussions between the White House and the Senate. That has been interpreted on Capitol Hill as a sign that Trump is getting more serious about the legislation, sponsored by close ally Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., along with Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.

A White House official said the administration is working with lawmakers to make sure that “introduced bills advance the president’s foreign policy objectives and authorities.” The official, who was granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations, said any sanctions package needs to give the president “complete flexibility.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Wednesday the administration is waiting for greater buy-in from Europe, which he noted faces a bigger threat from Russian aggression than the U.S. does.

“So all I hear from the Europeans is that Putin is coming to Warsaw,” Bessent said. “There are very few things in life I’m sure about. I’m sure he’s not coming to Boston. So, we will respond … if our European partners will join us.”

Madhani and Kim write for the Associated Press. AP writers Fatima Hussein, Chris Megerian and Didi Tang contributed to this report.

There are few laws President Trump name-checks more frequently than the Insurrection Act.

A 200-year-old constellation of statutes, the act grants emergency powers to thrust active-duty soldiers into civilian police duty, something otherwise barred by federal law.

Trump and his team have threatened to invoke it almost daily for weeks — most recently on Monday, after a reporter pressed the president about his escalating efforts to dispatch federalized troops to Democrat-led cities.

“Insurrection Act — yeah, I mean, I could do that,” Trump said. “Many presidents have.”

Roughly a third of U.S. presidents have called on the statutes at some point — but history also shows the law has been used only in moments of extraordinary crisis and political upheaval.

The Insurrection Act was Abraham Lincoln’s sword against secessionists and Dwight D. Eisenhower’s shield around the Little Rock Nine, the young Black students who were the first to desegregate schools in Arkansas.

Ulysses S. Grant invoked it more than half a dozen times to thwart statehouse coups, stem race massacres and smother the Ku Klux Klan in its South Carolina cradle.

But it has just as often been wielded to crush labor strikes and strangle protest movements. The last time it was invoked, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was in elementary school and most U.S. soldiers had not yet been born.

Now, many fear Trump could call on the law to quell opposition to his agenda.

“The Democrats were fools not to amend the Insurrection Act in 2021,” said Kevin Carroll, former senior counsel in the Department of Homeland Security during Trump’s first term. “It gives the president almost untrammeled power.”

It also precludes most judicial review.

“It can’t even be challenged,” Trump boasted Monday. “I don’t have to go there yet, because I’m winning on appeal.”

If that winning streak cools, as legal experts say it soon could, some fear the Insurrection Act would be the administration’s next move.

“The Insurrection Act is very broadly worded, but there is a history of even the executive branch interpreting it narrowly,” said John C. Dehn, an associate professor at Loyola University Chicago School of Law.

The president first floated using the Insurrection Act against protesters in the summer of 2020. But members of his Cabinet and military advisors blocked the move, as they did efforts to use the National Guard for immigration enforcement and the military to patrol the border.

“They have this real fixation on using the military domestically,” Carroll said. “It’s sinister.”

In his second term, Trump has instead relied on an obscure subsection of the U.S. code to surge federalized soldiers into blue cities, claiming it confers many of the same powers as the Insurrection Act.

Federal judges disagreed. Challenges to deployments in Los Angeles, Portland, Ore., and Chicago have since clogged the appellate courts, with three West Coast cases before the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and one pending in the 7th Circuit, which has jurisdiction over Illinois.

The result is a growing knot of litigation that experts say will fall to the Supreme Court to unwind.

As of Wednesday, troops in Oregon and Illinois are activated but can’t be deployed. The Oregon case is further complicated by precedent from California, where federalized soldiers have patrolled the streets since June with the 9th Circuit’s blessing. That ruling is set to be reheard by the circuit on Oct. 22 and could be reversed.

Meanwhile, what California soldiers are legally allowed to do while they’re federalized is also under review, meaning even if Trump retains the authority to call up troops, he might not be able to use them.

Scholars are split over how the Supreme Court might rule on any of those issues.

“At this point, no court … has expressed any sympathy to these arguments, because they’re so weak,” said Harold Hongju Koh, a professor at Yale Law School.

Koh listed the high court’s most conservative members, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr., as unlikely to push back against the president’s authority to invoke the Insurrection Act, but said even some of Trump’s appointees — Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — might be skeptical, along with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.

“I don’t think Thomas and Alito are going to stand up to Trump, but I’m not sure that Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett and Roberts can read this statute to give him [those] powers.”

The Insurrection Act sidesteps those fights almost entirely.

It “would change not only the legal state of play, but fundamentally change the facts we have on the ground, because what the military would be authorized to do would be so much broader,” said Christopher Mirasola, an assistant professor at the University of Houston Law Center.

Congress created the Insurrection Act as a fail-safe in response to armed mobs attacking their neighbors and organized militias seeking to overthrow elected officials. But experts caution that the military is not trained to keep law and order, and that the country has a strong tradition against domestic deployments dating to the Revolutionary War.

“The uniformed military leadership in general does not like getting involved in the domestic law enforcement issue at all,” Carroll said. “The only similarities between police and military is that they have uniforms and guns.”

Today, the commander in chief can invoke the law in response to a call for help from state leaders, as George H.W. Bush did to quell the 1992 Rodney King uprising in L.A.

The statute can also be used to make an end-run around elected officials who refuse to enforce the law, or mobs who make it impossible — something Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy Jr. did in defense of school integration.

Still, modern presidents have generally shied from using the Insurrection Act even in circumstances with strong legal justification. George W. Bush weighed invoking the law after Hurricane Katrina created chaos in New Orleans but ultimately declined over fears it would intensify the already bitter power struggle between the state and federal government.

“There are any number of Justice Department internal opinions where attorneys general like Robert Kennedy or Nicholas Katzenbach said, ‘We cannot invoke the Insurrection Act because the courts are open,’” Koh said.

Despite its extraordinary power, Koh and other experts said the law has guardrails that may make it more difficult for the president to invoke it in the face of naked bicyclists or protesters in inflatable frog suits, whom federal forces have faced down recently in Portland.

“There are still statutory requirements that have to be met,” said Dehn, the Loyola professor. “The problem the Trump administration would have in invoking [the law] is that very practically, they are able to arrest people who break the law and prosecute people who break the law.”

That may be why Trump and his administration have yet to invoke the act.

“It reminds me of the run-up to Jan. 6,” Carroll said. “It’s a similar feeling that people have, a sense that an illegal or immoral and unwise order is about to be given.”

He and others say an invocation of the Insurrection Act would shift widespread concern about military policing of American streets into existential territory.

“If there’s a bad faith invocation of the Insurrection Act to send federal troops to go beat up anti-ICE protesters, there should be a general strike in the United States,” Carroll said. “It’s a real break-the-glass moment.”

At that point, the best defense may come from the military.

“If a really unwise and immoral order comes out … 17-year generals need to say no,” Carroll said. “They have to have the guts to put their stars on the table.”

SACRAMENTO — Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday announced a plan to offer $11 insulin pens through the state’s pharmaceutical venture.

Beginning Jan. 1, consumers can purchase a five-pack of pens for a suggested price of $55, according to the governor’s office. The packs will be available to California pharmacies for $45.

California is the first state in the nation to sell its own brand of generic prescription drugs as Newsom and other state leaders seek ways to drive down rising healthcare costs.

Insulin users without health insurance today can pay $400 for a small vial.

Newsom, in a statement Thursday, said that Californians shouldn’t “ration insulin or go into debt to stay alive.”

“California didn’t wait for the pharmaceutical industry to do the right thing — we took matters into our own hands,” Newsom said.

Officials hope the drug will lower costs across the board, not just for the consumers ultimately picking up the drug. Major drug companies have also cut prices on insulin, but critics contend those cost savings are passed on to other consumers.

Earlier this week, Newsom signed legislation, Senate Bill 40, capping insulin co-pays at $35 for the first time in California.

“This law ensures no family will be forced to choose between buying insulin and putting food on the table in California again,” the bill’s author, Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), said in a statement.

Newsom, who vowed to be the “healthcare governor” during his campaign, in 2020 unveiled a proposal for California to make its own line of generic drugs.

Three years later, he announced a $50-million contract with the nonprofit generic drugmaker Civica to produce insulin under the state’s own label.

Earlier this year, the state began selling Naloxone, a medication that blocks the effects of opioids, at below market prices.

A divided Los Angeles school board has voted to shut down a popular charter school to make more space for its own program on the same Echo Park campus, pushing the boundaries of state law and school district authority over charters.

The 4-3 vote late Tuesday denied a renewal authorization for Gabriella Charter School, which means the 400-student school specializing in dance instruction, can’t operate beyond the end of the current school year.

Although county education officials could act independently to renew the charter, the L.A. school board decision still means Gabriella would be essentially evicted from the campus and the dance studios built for its use.

Board member Rocio Rivas, whose district includes the school, said the move was necessary to protect the interests of the district-operated school and the nation’s second-largest school system.

“This multiuse agreement has not worked,” Rivas said. “It meets the needs of Gabriella, but it’s not meeting the needs of the district. So as far as I’m concerned, this multiuse agreement should be nullified.”

A spokesperson for Gabriella said Wednesday morning that the school was considering its legal options.

The California Charter Schools Assn. spoke strongly in defense of Gabriella.

“This decision is a backhanded strategy to push Gabriella out of its longtime home on an LAUSD campus — a site the District itself invited Gabriella to share with a district-run school back in 2009,” said Keith Dell’Aquila, who leads advocacy work for the association in the L.A. area. “For 16 years, Gabriella has served countless students at that location with excellence and stability.”

The case highlights the resolve of school board members, aligned with the teachers union, to target a non-union charter school to further the aspirations of a district-operated campus.

Third-grade teacher Karla Balani helps with instruction at Gabriella Charter School.

(Karla Gachet/For The Times)

Why charter schools draw political controversy

Charters are privately operated public schools that compete for students. Charter supporters view their educational offerings as a way to spark innovation and provide needed public school competition — and simply to offer parents more choices.

Some supporters have also wanted a foothold to weaken the influence of teacher unions and build a bridge to more controversial school-choice strategies, including using public-school funds to pay for private school tuition.

Most charters are non-union and have typically been opposed by teacher unions.

Charters have enjoyed a degree of bipartisan support and were long able to shape California laws in their favor, but their political clout in the state has somewhat declined.

L.A. Unified oversees 235 charters, more than any school system in the country, and many of these started when school boards had little authority to reject them. About 1 in 5 L.A. public school students attend charters.

Gabriella has shared a campus with the district-operated Logan Academy for Global Ecology, which includes a dual-language program in Spanish and English. Both schools offer transitional kindergarten through eighth grade.

For the Logan community the charter has long been an unwanted detraction from their efforts. And they saw the renewal process as a chance to act because the board majority has become more strongly anti-charter.

Staff at Logan said Tuesday that they need more space to offer a full middle-school program on a campus that served only elementary grades for most of its 137-year history. The middle grades were added to help sustain the school.

Logan also has become a designated community school, which offers a wider range of support services for students and families, typically including health care, tutoring and counseling. And these services, too, require space.

“The fact that Logan Academy is a community school, is now a span school — circumstances for them have changed, and that is what we need to take into consideration,” Rivas said.

Third-graders practice dance in jazz class.

(Karla Gachet/For The Times)

State protections for charters

California law gives charter schools the right to use public-school facilities that are “reasonably equivalent” to those available to other public-school students.

The L.A. school board majority tested the limits of these state rules when it voted 4-3 in 2024 to give preferences to district-operated schools and ban outright the sharing of hundreds of campuses.

In a June 27 ruling, a judge concluded that the policy unlawfully “prioritizes District schools over charter schools and is too vague … To the maximum extent practicable, the needs of the charter school must be given the same consideration as those of the district-run schools.”

Under that ruling and others, courts have found that charters, such as Gabriella, are entitled to space for similar resources that the district would claim it for.

State law also sets up a process through which charter schools can request and share campuses. The process restarts every year and has resulted in annual uncertainty both for charters and others sharing the campuses.

School districts also have the option of reaching other sorts of agreements with charters. That is what happened at Logan, where the school district agreed to a multiyear lease. That lease has coincided with the full term of the charter renewal.

For Gabriella, the arrangement avoided the instability of having to move from place to place each year — especially because most elementary schools are not outfitted with dance studios.

Logan was specially modified to accommodate Gabriella’s unique program. A benefit to the district was that Gabriella became a feeder program to the district’s new arts-focused high school downtown.

Ending the multiyear lease for Logan was a high priority for Rivas.

“If this — the charter … is not renewed, then that pretty much severs their multiyear agreement,” Rivas said.

Students practice their dance at Gabriella Charter School.

(Karla Gachet/For The Times)

Impact of declining enrollment

Enrollment at Logan Academy has been trending downward, much like in the school system as a whole. Last year’s enrollment totaled 91 students in kindergarten through second grade. Three years earlier that comparable figure was 139 students.

In 2014, the school had 486 students. Last year the number was 362.

The charter school’s enrollment also is down — from a peak of 468 in the 2020-21 school year to 396 last year.

Official figures are not yet available for this year, but enrollment across the school system appears to be lower, per preliminary estimates.

Rivas said Tuesday that Gabriella had been an uncooperative tenant that flouted financially responsibilities and had, therefore, forfeited any inside track to renewal.

At the Tuesday meeting, it was brought up that the charter did not participate in a recent fire drill. It’s leaders have pledged to do so in the future.

More serious is a long-simmering dispute over whether the charter has paid an appropriate amount for use of the campus. As the charter renewal date approached, the charter leaders yielded and made an $800,000 payment to the school system. That issue has yet to be resolved.

One disputed issue is that the school district raised the usage fee retroactively — to cover a period of time that already had ended,

Board staff recommended a five-year renewal, saying the school had met the legally required academic performance standard. A charter school also can be denied renewal if it is fiscally unsound, but district staff concluded that, too, was not grounds for denial.

Board member Nick Melvoin, who voted to renew the charter, wanted to know the legal basis for rejecting it.

The answer from staff was that the decision could be based on the board’s citing of past financial disagreements that have not been entirely settled.

Melvoin strongly disagreed with the outcome.

“Co-locations are tough, and I have a lot of empathy and understanding for Logan,” Melvoin said. “I think that it’s really incumbent upon us, the adults who are the stewards of the children in this situation, to come to creative solutions on behalf of kids.”

“You have two K-8 schools that are pulling almost the same number of kids from that community,” he added, “and I think we owe it to them to try to work something out.”

Opposing the renewal were Rivas, Board President Scott Schmerelson, Karla Griego and Sherlett Hendy Newbill. Favoring renewal were Melvoin, Kelly Gonez and Tanya Ortiz Franklin.

At last month’s meeting of the California Wildfire and Forest Resilience Task Force in Redlands, Director Patrick Wright remembered the group’s early days: “Candidly, when I started this job, we got an earful from Southern California.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom created the task force in 2021 and at the time, Southern California’s wildfire experts told Wright that he and other state leaders “didn’t understand Southern California was different. Its vegetation is different. Its fire risk is different.”

It’s true — the coastal chaparral native to much of Southern California is entirely different from the mixed-conifer forests of the Sierra.

More than a century of humans attempting to suppress nearly every fire meant the low-intensity burns that northern forests relied on every 5 to 20 years to promote regeneration no longer came through to clear the understory. As trees and shrubs grew in, they fueled high-intensity fires that decimated both the forest and communities.

Meanwhile in Southern California, as humans settled into the wildlands, they lit more fires. Discarded cigarettes, sparking cars, poorly managed campfires, utility equipment and arsonists lit up hundreds or thousands of acres. Here, the native chaparral is adapted to fire coming every 30 to 130 years. The more frequent fires didn’t allow them to grow, make seeds and reproduce. Instead, what’s grown in places where chaparral used to be are flammable invasive grasses.

But when I first moved to Southern California and started covering the wildfires devastating our communities, I had only heard the northern version of the story.

The fire problem in Northern California is more widely understood. “Smokey the Bear, only you can prevent forest fires — everybody kind of knows, intuitively, what a forest fire is,” said Michael O’Connell, president and chief executive of the Irvine Ranch Conservancy — and one of the people who (respectfully) gave Wright an earful.

Meanwhile, ember-driven fires in Southern California are “like someone lobbing grenades from five miles away,” he said.

Experts in both NorCal and SoCal agree on how we ought to protect ourselves once a ferocious fire breaks out: Across the board, we need to harden our homes, create defensible space and ensure we’re ready to evacuate. But how to prevent devastating fires differs.

The forest thinning and careful reintroduction of intentional “good” fire in the Sierra don’t exactly translate to the Santa Monica Mountains, for example.

The problem here in the south is more vexing: How do we reduce the number of fires we spark?

One way is with groups like Orange County Fire Watch and Arson Watch in Topanga and Malibu, which go out on days when the wind is high and try to spot fires before they start. A new effort, celebrated by the task force, to reduce ignitions along SoCal roadways by clearing flammable vegetation is also underway.

But, while NorCal has a plethora of studies affirming the effectiveness of forest thinning and burning, there is little research yet on SoCal’s proposed solutions.

“We really do, now, understand what the problem is that we’re trying to deal with,” O’Connell said. “How do you get that done? That’s more complicated.”

And the vast majority of state funding is still geared toward northern fuel management solutions — not keeping fires from sparking. (The task force also still measures progress in acres treated, a largely meaningless metric for Southern California’s chaparral.)

Yet, O’Connell is hopeful. At the task force’s first meeting in SoCal — where Wright got an earful — leaders didn’t yet have a grasp of SoCal’s wildfire problem. Now, they’re letting SoCal’s land managers and researchers lead the way.

“If it weren’t for the task force, I think we would be in big trouble, frankly,” O’Connell said. The task force leaders “have not only understood [the problem] but have accepted it and run with that.”

Here’s the latest on wildfires

Federal firefighters are in their third week without pay, as the U.S government shutdown drags on. According to the U.S. Forest Service — the largest federal firefighting force in the country — fire response personnel will continue to work through the shutdown, although prevention work, including prescribed burns and forest thinning, will be limited.

In California, Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill that would increase the salaries of Cal Fire firefighters to more closely match those of local fire departments. Meanwhile, efforts championed by the state to build a series of fuel breaks in the Santa Monica Mountains are underway. Some ecologists worry about the damage the fast-moving project could do to the environment; others say the state is not moving fast enough.

Last week, federal prosecutors announced the arrest of a suspect they believed intentionally started the Palisades fire on Jan. 1. The announcement has led to calls for both the Los Angeles Fire Department, responsible for putting out the Jan. 1 fire, and California State Parks, whose land the fire started on, to be held accountable.

And the latest on climate

A turning point and a tipping point: Global energy production turned a corner in the first half of the year, with renewables such as solar and wind generating more electricity than coal for the first time. And, the Earth is reaching its first climate change tipping point: Warm water coral reefs can no longer survive, according to a report published by 160 scientists.

With the 2025 state legislative session wrapped up, some important climate bills are now law. One law extends California’s cap-and-trade program — which limits how much greenhouse gas polluters can emit and enables them to trade emission allowances at auction — from 2030 to 2045. Newsom also signed a bill to make oil drilling in Kern County easier while making offshore drilling more difficult and another to push local governments to increase electrification efforts.

Newsom vetoed a bill that would have required data centers to report how much water they use. He was “reluctant to impose rigid reporting requirements” on the centers, he wrote in a message explaining his veto, noting that “California is well positioned to support the development of this critically important digital infrastructure.”

This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our Boiling Point podcast here.

For more wildfire news, follow @nohaggerty on X and @nohaggerty.bsky.social on Bluesky.

It felt like the kind of thing that must happen in Hollywood all the time: a hundred bucks to be a movie extra.

Austin Beagle, 31, and Nevada Barker, 30, said they were trying to sign up for food stamps this spring when someone offered them a background role outside a county social services office in Long Beach. They thought the gig seemed intriguing, albeit a bit unusual.

The offer came not from a casting director, but a man hawking free cellphones. The filming location was, oddly enough, a law firm in downtown Los Angeles.

Like many DTLA clients, Austin Beagle and Nevada Barker signed a retainer agreement that entitles the firm to 45% of their payout.

(Joe Garcia / For The Times)

Maybe this was how actors were recruited here, they figured. The couple had recently moved from the remote ranching town of Stinnett in the Texas panhandle, and the recruiter seemed to appreciate their Southern drawl. They hopped on a bus, excited to make $200 between them.

“They said we’d be extras,” said Beagle, who was unemployed at the time. “But when we got to the office, that’s not what it was at all.”

The couple said they arrived at the lobby of Downtown LA Law Group. A Times investigation published earlier this month found seven plaintiffs represented by the firm who claimed they received cash from recruiters to sue the county over sex abuse, which could violate state law. Two said they had never been abused and were told to manufacture their claims.

Downtown LA Law Group has denied any involvement with the recruiters who allegedly paid plaintiffs. The firm said in a statement it would never “encourage or tolerate anyone lying about being abused” and has been conducting additional screening to remove “false or exaggerated claims” from its caseload.

Four days after The Times’ investigation was published, the firm asked for a lawsuit on behalf of Carlshawn Stovall, one of the men who said he fabricated claims, to be dismissed with prejudice, meaning the case cannot be refiled.

The firm requested a second case spurred by Juan Fajardo, who said he made up a claim using the name of a family member, to be dismissed with prejudice on Sept. 9 after Fajardo says he told lawyers he wanted to drop the lawsuit.

Now, with Beagle and Barker, two more have come forward to allege they were told to invent the stories that led to their lawsuits.

Austin Beagle and Nevada Barker said they’d been in Southern California only a few months when they were flagged down outside a social services office where they were hoping to enroll in food stamps. The couple have since moved back to Stinnett, Texas.

(Joe Garcia / For The Times)

The couple said that when they arrived at DTLA’s offices in April, a man came down to the lobby with a clipboard and gave them a piece of paper to memorize before going upstairs. They assumed this was the role they’d be playing — with room to go off script.

“They told us to say that we were sexually abused and harassed by the guards in … Las P? I can’t think of the institution’s name,” said Beagle, who added he was told to say the incidents occurred around 2005.

“The worse it was the better,” he recalled being told.

On April 29, Downtown LA Law Group filed a lawsuit against the county on behalf of 63 plaintiffs, including Beagle and Barker, who claimed they were abused at Los Padrinos, L.A. County’s juvenile hall in Downey. The couple are now part of the $4-billion settlement.

Allegations of potential fraud and pay-to-sue tactics have rocked both L.A. County government and powerhouse law firms, which are scrambling to figure out how to salvage the largest sex abuse settlement in U.S. history.

Perhaps no group has been shaken more than sex abuse victims themselves, who fear allegations of false claims could derail what they hoped would be a life-changing settlement.

“I just couldn’t believe it,” said Jimmy Vigil, 45, who sued the county in December 2022 for alleged sexual abuse by a probation officer at a detention camp in Lancaster.

Vigil said he was repeatedly molested as a 14-year-old and forced to masturbate in front of other teens while the guard watched.

“It makes me feel disgusted,” said Vigil, now a mental health case manager in Ventura County. “You have absolutely no clue what I went through. You have no clue how hard I have strived in life to make it to where I am at today.”

Jimmy Vigil, now a mental health case worker in Ventura, said he was repeatedly molested as a teenager and forced to masturbate in front of other teens.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Barker and Beagle said that after memorizing the card with the basics of their story, they were taken upstairs to a room at DTLA’s office where about 20 people were waiting. Everyone seemed confused, they said.

They “were asking us ‘Hey, did y’all promise to get paid? And we said ‘Yeah, somebody told us that we’d get paid $100 if we come in,” Beagle said. “Everybody was just concerned about getting paid whatever they were promised.”

DTLA said in a statement it has “never directed, nor do we have any knowledge that anyone was ever paid, hired, or brought to the DTLA office, or was asked to memorize a script of any kind under the guise of filmmaking,”

“We are not filmmakers,” the firm said. “No one authorized on behalf of the firm has ever promised or implied movie extra work as a means of retaining clients.”

Beagle and Barker said they were called in together to a glass cubicle where a woman spent 15-20 minutes asking them questions about their story of abuse. Barker said she struggled to come up with details because “it was all made-up stuff.”

Beagle said he thought maybe the staffers in the law firm were also acting, pretending not to know this was “a fake thing.”

“Like, they were testing us all out to see if we knew how to act — just play the part,” Beagle said. “Like, this was a trial thing.”

The couple said they were befuddled at the interaction but figured they’d done enough to get their money; the receptionist told them to come back in a few hours to collect.

The firm said, in some circumstances, it provides “interest free loans to clients once they have retained our services.”

Beagle and Barker said they frittered away two hours at Pershing Square a few blocks away until around 4 p.m. It was only when they came back to the firm, they said, that it became clear there was no movie.

A man named Kevin paid them $100 each, and told them they were part of a massive settlement involving juvenile halls they’d never heard about until that afternoon. The man told them they could get $100 for each additional person they referred to go through the same process, Beagle said.

“We walked out thinking I don’t know how legit this is and we might even get f— in trouble for it,” Beagle said.

Like most sexual abuse lawsuits, the suit was filed using only plaintiffs’ initials. The Times reviewed paperwork that DTLA provided to Beagle and Barker, which they signed in order to become clients on April 21 and to opt into the L.A. County settlement on May 29.

Under the settlement, each plaintiff could be eligible for anywhere from $100,000 to $3 million. Retainer agreements for Beagle and Barker reviewed by The Times show DTLA would get 45% of their payout.

Beagle and Barker said they aren’t banking on getting any money from L.A. County. After all, they said, they grew up in Texas, more than a thousand miles away from the abuse-plagued facilities.

“We need it, but it’s not ours. It’s like finding a wallet,” Barker said. “Return it.”

A Times investigation published earlier this month found plaintiffs represented by Downtown LA Law Group who claimed they received cash from recruiters to sue L.A. County over sex abuse. Four now say they were told to make up the claims.

(Carlin Stiehl / Los Angeles Times)

Among some survivors, there is a palpable fear that the fraud allegations will steamroll the settlement, overshadowing the fact that many county-run facilities were home to unchecked abuse and torpedoing their chance of receiving a life-changing sum.

The Times interviewed eight victims for this article represented by Slater Slater Schulman, ACTS LAW Firm, McNicholas & McNicholas, and Becker Law Group. Many said they were aghast at learning the worst years of their life may have become fodder for quick cash.

“It felt like a kick in the gut,” said Trinidad Pena, 52. “For somebody just to lie about it was just sickening.”

On Sept. 18, Pena said, she was eating a pancake breakfast at a homeless services center in Long Beach when she learned she had something in common with a woman sitting on the picnic bench next to her.

Both had filed lawsuits against L.A. County alleging sexual abuse at county-run facilities. Both of them were part of the county’s $4-billion settlement. But she was the only one, she believed, who had actually been abused.

The woman told her she’d been paid $20 to sue by a woman who hung around on the sidewalk outside the community center clutching a clipboard, she said.

The Times could not reach the recruiters allegedly responsible for paying plaintiffs for comment.

Trinidad Pena, who sued in 2022 over sex abuse, said she was jarred to find herself at breakfast with a woman who told her she’d been paid to sue the county.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Pena sued L.A. County in December 2022 over an alleged rape when she was 12 by a staff member at MacLaren Children’s Center, a shuttered youth shelter now infamous for predatory staff. No amount of cash is going to erase the scars from that, she says. But it would help.

Last month, Pena traded in her New Orleans shotgun apartment for the streets of Southern California, where she was raised. The move was, she said, a Hail Mary attempt to get medical treatment through the state’s public benefits for a cyst sprouting behind her right eye that made her vision wobble and her head crackle with pain.

She is currently living on $1,206 a month in and out of her van with a failing shunt in her head, which doctors implanted to treat her cyst. She eats mostly the nonperishable Trader Joe’s snacks she brought from Louisiana.

A six- or seven-figure settlement could help save her life, Pena said.

“I’m going to have myself a hell of a Charlie Sheen party and take a nosedive off a balcony at the Chateau Marmont if I do not get some sort of relief,” said Pena, who says she grew up in foster care near the legendary West Hollywood hotel.

Part of what has made the false claims so infuriating, victims say, is that L.A. County youth detention facilities were indeed home to horrific abuse decades ago.

Kizzie Jones, 47, said she’s on antidepressants as a result of a female probation officer who allegedly molested her twice a week and groomed her with bags of chips and bottles of conditioner.

Robert Williams, 41, says he has no friends — a near-total isolation he said traces back to repeated sexual assaults in the shower he suffered as a teen.

Mario Paz, 39, said a guard molested him under the guise of soothing his genitals with milk after he was pepper sprayed while naked. The abuse, he says, has left him traumatized to the point that he is unable to change his children’s Pampers.

All three of them filed lawsuits against the county alleging sexual abuse by county probation officers.

Mario Paz, 39, said his time at Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall left him traumatized and damaged the relationship he has with his own children.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

“For someone to capitalize on something that they never endured or never experienced, I think it’s a travesty,” said Cornelious Thompson, a 51-year-old community health worker, who sued the county in December 2022.

When he was around 13 at Los Padrinos, Thompson says he was put on psychiatric medication that knocked him out. He woke up in his unit sore with his pants hanging by his knees, bleeding. It took him years to tell anyone.

He said he recently lost his job with a contractor for the county’s health department due to budget cuts. The county had to slash spending, in part, to pay for the $4-billion settlement.

It was “bittersweet,” he says, losing his job because the county was finally paying for what he said he endured as a teenager.

Only now, a new fear has crept in as two more people say they made up claims: Will he still be believed?

Termination notices went out to 150 NBC News Group employees Wednesday as the financial health of the traditional television business continues to erode.

The cuts have been anticipated for months as NBC is seeing declines in TV ratings and ad revenue that are not being fully offset by a growing digital business.

Audience migration to streaming platforms has put pressure on legacy outlets across the media industry, leading to layoffs and cost-cutting.

A representative for the NBC News Group, which produces “Today,” “NBC Nightly News with Tom Llamas” and “Dateline,” declined to comment on the layoffs.

The cuts are also attributed to the spinoff of cable networks MSNBC and CNBC, according to a person briefed on the plans who was not authorized to comment. As of last week, NBC News no longer shares resources with the two outlets, which will become part of a new company called Versant. Some NBC News veterans have decided to join MSNBC, which will be renamed MS NOW.

Versant is the new stand-alone home for most of Comcast’s cable networks, including USA Network, the Golf Channel, CNBC and MSNBC. Comcast is spinning off the channels because it believes the mature outlets face a bleak future due to pay TV cord-cutting and are an albatross weighing down its stock price.

Some of the job losses are expected to be mitigated by a reallocation of resources aimed at bolstering the division’s digital operations. The employees affected by the cuts have been encouraged to apply for 140 jobs currently open across the NBC News Group.

The cuts amount to 2% of the NBC News Group, which also includes local TV stations owned by NBC and Telemundo.

A recent memo from NBC News Group Chair Cesar Conde said the division is launching a subscription streaming service later this year, although details have not been made public. The company already has NBC News Now, a free ad-supported streaming channel.

More cuts across the TV news business are expected through the end of the year. A significant reduction in staffing is expected at CBS News following the merger of parent Paramount with Skydance Media.

ABC News was hit hard by a 6% staff reduction across the ABC TV network enacted in March by parent Walt Disney Co. Those cuts followed a layoff of 40 news staffers in October 2024.

The public release of a Young Republican group chat that included racist language, jokes about rape and flippant commentary on gas chambers prompted bipartisan calls for those involved to be removed from or resign their positions.

The Young Republican National Federation, the GOP’s political organization for Republicans between 18 and 40, called for those involved to step down from the organization. The group described the exchanges, first reported by Politico, as “unbecoming of any Republican.”

Republican Vice President JD Vance, however, has weighed in several times to speak out against what he characterized as “pearl clutching” over the leaked messages.

Politico obtained months of exchanges from a Telegram conversation between leaders and members of the Young Republican National Federation and some of its affiliates in New York, Kansas, Arizona and Vermont.

Here’s a rundown of reaction to the inflammatory group chat, in which the operatives and officials involved openly worried that their comments might be leaked, even as they continued their conversation:

Vance

After Politico’s initial report Tuesday, Vance posted on X a screen grab from 2022 text messages in which Jay Jones, the Democratic candidate in Virginia’s attorney general race, suggested that a prominent Republican get “two bullets to the head.”

“This is far worse than anything said in a college group chat, and the guy who said it could become the AG of Virginia,” Vance wrote Tuesday. “I refuse to join the pearl clutching when powerful people call for political violence.”

Jones has taken “full responsibility” for his comments and offered a public apology to Todd Gilbert, who then was speaker of Virginia’s House of Delegates.

Vance reiterated his initial sentiment Wednesday on “ The Charlie Kirk Show ” podcast, saying when asked about the reporting that a “person seriously wishing for political violence and political assassination is 1,000 times worse than what a bunch of young people, a bunch of kids say in a group chat, however offensive it might be.”

Vance, 41, said he grew up in a different era where “most of what I, the stupid things that I did as a teenager and as a young adult, they’re not on the internet.”

The father of three said he would caution his own children, “especially my boys, don’t put things on the internet, like, be careful with what you post. If you put something in a group chat, assume that some scumbag is going to leak it in an effort to try to cause you harm or cause your family harm.”

“I really don’t want to us to grow up in a country where a kid telling a stupid joke, telling a very offensive, stupid joke is cause to ruin their lives,” Vance said.

Republicans

Other Republicans demanded more immediate intervention. Republican legislative leaders in Vermont, along with Gov. Phil Scott — also a Republican — called for the resignation of state Sen. Sam Douglass, revealed to be a participant in the chat. A joint statement from the GOP lawmakers termed the comments “unacceptable and deeply disturbing.”

Saying she was “absolutely appalled to learn about the alleged comments made by leaders of the New York State Young Republicans,” Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York called for those involved to step down from their positions. Danedri Herbert, chair of the Kansas GOP, said the remarks “do not reflect the beliefs of Republicans and certainly not of Kansas Republicans at large.”

In a statement posted to X on Tuesday, the Young Republican National Federation said it was “appalled” by the reported messages and calling for those involved to resign from their positions within the organization. Young Republican leaders said the behavior was “disgraceful, unbecoming of any Republican, and stands in direct opposition to the values our movement represents.”

Democrats

Democrats have been more uniform in their condemnation. On Wednesday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote to House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer asking for an investigation into the “vile and offensive text messages,” which he called “the definition of conduct that can create a hostile and discriminatory environment that violates civil rights laws.”

Speaking on the Senate floor, Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer of New York on Tuesday described the chat as “revolting,” calling for Republicans including President Trump and Vance to “condemn these comments swiftly and unequivocally.”

Asked about the reporting, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul called the exchanges “vile” and called for consequences for those involved.

“Kick them out of the party. Take away their official roles. Stop using them as campaign advisers,” Hochul said. “There needs to be consequences. This bulls—- has to stop.”

Kinnard writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.

OKLAHOMA CITY — Oklahoma’s new public schools superintendent announced Wednesday he is rescinding a mandate from his predecessor that forced schools to incorporate the Bible into lesson plans for students.

Superintendent Lindel Fields said in a statement he has “no plans to distribute Bibles or a Biblical character education curriculum in classrooms.” The directive last year from former Superintendent Ryan Walters drew immediate condemnation from civil rights groups and prompted a lawsuit from a group of parents, teachers and religious leaders that is pending before the Oklahoma Supreme Court. It was to have applied to students in grades 5 through 12.

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt appointed Fields to the superintendent’s post after Walters resigned last month to take a job in the private sector.

Jacki Phelps, an attorney for the Oklahoma State Department of Education, said she intends to notify the court of the agency’s plan to rescind the mandate and seek a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

Many schools districts across the state had decided not to comply with the Bible mandate.

A spokeswoman for the state education department, Tara Thompson, said Fields believes the decision on whether the Bible should be incorporated into classroom instruction is one best left up to individual districts and that spending money on Bibles is not the best use of taxpayer resources.

Walters in March had announced plans to team up with country music singer Lee Greenwood seeking donations to get Bibles into classrooms after a legislative panel rejected his $3 million request to fund the effort. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit challenging the Bible mandate did not immediately comment.

Walters, a far-right Republican, made fighting “woke ideology”, banning certain books from school libraries and getting rid of “radical leftists” who he claims were indoctrinating children in classrooms a focal point of his administration. Since his election in 2020, he imposed a number of mandates on public schools and worked to develop new social studies standards for K-12 public school students that included teaching about conspiracy theories related to the 2020 presidential election. Those standards have been put on hold while a lawsuit challenging them moves forward.

Thompson said the agency plans to review all of Walters’ mandates, including a requirement that applicants from teacher jobs coming from California and New York take an ideology exam, to determine if those may also be rescinded.

“We need to review all of those mandates and provide clarity to schools moving forward,” she said.

Murphy writes for the Associated Press.

SACRAMENTO  — Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office is weighing whether to close parts of Interstate 5 beginning Friday amid concerns over what it says is a White House-directed plan to use live ordnance during a military anniversary celebration off Camp Pendleton’s coast in San Diego County — where Navy ships are expected to fire over the freeway onto the base.

Newsom’s office has received, but not confirmed, reports that live ordnance will be fired from offshore vessels during the event commemorating the Marine Corps’ 250th anniversary. The event is titled “Sea to Shore — A Review of Amphibious Strength” and will feature Vice President JD Vance.

Newsom’s office said it has received little information about the event or safety plans. The military show of force coincides with No Kings rallies and marches across the state on Saturday that are expected to draw large crowds, demonstrations challenging Trump and what critics say is government overreach.

“Donald Trump and JD Vance think that shutting down the I-5 to shoot out missiles from ships is how you respect the military,” Newsom posted on the social media site X Wednesday.

A military media advisory said the celebration will include a live amphibious assault demonstration. The Times could not confirm whether live ordnance will be fired over the freeway. The White House and Marine Corps did not respond to questions from The Times.

“California always honors our Marines — but this isn’t the right way to go about it,” said a Newsom spokesperson. “The White House should focus on paying their military, lowering grocery prices and honoring these soldiers for their service instead of pompous displays of power. The lack of coordination and communication from the federal government on this event — and the overall impact to our society and economy — is evident of the larger disarray that is the Trump Administration.”

Freeway closures are being considered for a section of I-5 between Orange County to San Diego County from Friday to Saturday, which would cut off a major traffic artery that moves upward of 80,000 travelers a day. A closure with little notice would likely result in massive gridlock from Dana Point in the north to well past Del Mar in the south.

Vance, the first Marine veteran to serve as vice president, is expected to attend the event Saturday along with 15,000 Marines, Sailors, veterans and their families, according to event’s media release. Along with Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is expected to deliver remarks.

Camp Pendleton advised nearby residents that there will be live-fire training with high explosive munitions through Sunday, which will result in some roads on base being closed.

The Trump administration previously had plans for a major celebration next month for the 250th anniversary of the Navy and Marines, which would have included an air and sea show — with the Blue Angels and parading warships — attended by President Trump, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune. Plans to host that show in San Diego have been called off, the paper reported.

Camp Pendleton is a 125,000-acre base in northwestern San Diego County that has been critical in preparing soldiers for amphibious missions since World War II thanks to its miles of beach and coastal hills. The U.S. Department of Defense is considering making a portion of the base available for development or lease.

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge blocked the Trump administration Wednesday from firing thousands of government workers based on the ongoing federal shutdown, granting a request from employee unions in California.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston issued the temporary restraining order after concluding that the unions “will demonstrate ultimately that what’s being done here is both illegal and is in excess of authority and is arbitrary and capricious.”

Illston slammed the Trump administration for failing to provide her with clear information about what cuts are actually occurring, for repeatedly changing its description and estimates of job cuts in filings before the court, and for failing — including during Wednesday’s hearing in San Francisco — to articulate an argument for why such cuts are not in violation of federal law.

“The evidence suggests that the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, and the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, have taken advantage of the lapse in government spending and government functioning to assume that all bets are off, that the laws don’t apply to them anymore,” Illston said — which she said was not the case.

She said the government justified providing inaccurate figures for the number of jobs being eliminated under its “reduction in force” orders by calling it a “fluid situation” — which she did not find convincing.

“What it is is a situation where things are being done before they are being thought through. It’s very much ready, fire, aim on most of these programs,” she said. “And it has a human cost, which is really why we’re here today. It’s a human cost that cannot be tolerated.”

Illston also ran through a string of recent comments made by President Trump and other members of his administration about the firings and their intentionally targeting programs and agencies supported by Democrats, saying, “By all appearances, they’re politically motivated.”

The Trump administration has acknowledged dismissing about 4,000 workers under the orders, while Trump and other officials have signaled that more would come Friday.

Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought said Wednesday on “The Charlie Kirk Show” that the number of jobs cut could “probably end up being north of 10,000,” as the administration wants to be “very aggressive where we can be in shuttering the bureaucracy, not just the funding,” and the shutdown provided that opportunity.

Attorneys for the unions, led by the American Federation of Government Employees, said that the figures were unreliable and that they feared additional reduction in force orders resulting in more layoffs, as promised by administration officials, if the court did not step in and block such actions.

Illston, an appointee of President Clinton, did just that.

She barred the Trump administration and its various agencies “from taking any action to issue any reduction in force notices to federal employees in any program, project or activity” involving union members “during or because of the federal shutdown.”

She also barred the administration from “taking any further action to administer or implement” existing reduction notices involving union members.

Illston demanded that the administration provide within two days a full accounting of all existing or “imminent” reduction in force orders that would be blocked by her order, as well as the specific number of federal jobs affected.

Elizabeth Hedges, an attorney for the Trump administration, had argued during the hearing that the order should not be granted for several procedural reasons — including that the alleged harm to federal employees from loss of employment or benefits was not “irreparable” and could be addressed through other avenues, including civil litigation.

Additionally, she argued that federal employment claims should be adjudicated administratively, not in district court; and that the reduction in force orders included 60-day notice periods, meaning the layoffs were not immediate and therefore the challenge to them was not yet “ripe” legally.

However, Hedges would not discuss the case on its actual merits — which is to say, whether the cuts were actually legal or not, which did not seem to sit well with Illston.

“You don’t have a position on whether it’s OK that they do what they’re doing?” Illston asked.

“I am not prepared to discuss that today, your honor,” Hedges said.

“Well — but it’s happening. This hatchet is falling on the heads of employees all across the nation, and you’re not even prepared to address whether that’s legal, even though that’s what this motion challenges?” Illston said.

“That’s right,” Hedges said — stressing again that there were “threshold” arguments for why the case shouldn’t even be allowed to continue to the merits stage.

Danielle Leonard, an attorney for the unions, suggested the government’s positions were indefensible and directly in conflict with public statements by the administration — including remarks by Trump on Tuesday that more cuts are coming Friday.

“How do we know this? Because OMB and the president relentlessly are telling us, and other members of the administration,” Leonard said.

Leonard said the harm from the administration’s actions is obvious and laid out in the union’s filings — showing how employees have at times been left in the dark as to their employment status because they don’t have access to work communication channels during the shutdown, or how others have been called in to “work without pay to fire their fellow employees” — only to then be fired themselves.

“There are multiple types of harm that are caused exactly right now — emotional trauma. That’s not my word, your honor, that is the word of OMB Director Vought. Let’s cause ‘trauma’ to the federal workforce,” Leonard said. “And that’s exactly what they are doing. Trauma. The emotional distress of being told you are being fired after an already exceptionally difficult year for federal employees.”

Skye Perryman, president and chief executive of Democracy Forward, which is co-counsel for the unions, praised Illston’s decision in a statement after the hearing.

“The statements today by the court make clear that the President’s targeting of federal workers — a move straight out of Project 2025’s playbook — is unlawful,” Perryman said. “Our civil servants do the work of the people, and playing games with their livelihoods is cruel and unlawful and a threat to everyone in our nation.”

Illston asked the two parties to confer on the best date, probably later this month, for a fuller hearing on whether she should issue a more lasting preliminary injunction in the case.

“It would be wonderful to know what the government’s position is on the merits of this case — and my breath is bated until we find that,” Illston said.

After the hearing, during a White House news conference, Trump said his administration was paying federal employees whom “we want paid” while Vought uses the shutdown to dismiss employees perceived as supporting Democratic initiatives.

“Russell Vought is really terminating tremendous numbers of Democrat projects — not only jobs,” Trump said.

CHICAGO — Cook County’s top judge signed an order barring ICE from arresting people at court. Cook County includes Chicago, which has seen a federal immigration crackdown in recent months.

Detaining residents outside courthouses has been a common tactic for federal agents, who have been stationed outside county courthouses for weeks, making arrests and drawing crowds of protesters.

The order, which was signed Tuesday night and took effect Wednesday, bars the civil arrest of any “party, witness, or potential witness” while going to court proceedings. It includes arrests inside courthouses and in parking lots, surrounding sidewalks and entryways.

“The fair administration of justice requires that courts remain open and accessible, and that litigants and witnesses may appear without fear of civil arrest,” the order states.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security defended the practice of making arrests at courthouses, calling it “common sense.”

“We aren’t some medieval kingdom; there are no legal sanctuaries where you can hide and avoid the consequences for breaking the law,” DHS said in a Wednesday statement. “Nothing in the constitution prohibits arresting a lawbreaker where you find them.”

Immigration advocates decry immigration enforcement outside courthouses

Local immigration and legal advocates, including the county’s public defender’s office, have called for an order like this, saying clients were avoiding court out of fear of being detained. The office has confirmed at least a dozen immigration arrests at or near county courthouses since the end of July, when representatives said they’ve seen U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s presence outside courthouses increase.

“I have had numerous conversations with clients who are presented with a difficult decision of either missing court and receiving an arrest warrant or coming to court and risk being arrested by ICE,” Cruz Rodriguez, an assistant public defender with the office’s immigration division, said at a news conference earlier this month.

Domestic violence advocacy organizations also signed on to a petition earlier this month calling for Cook County Circuit Chief Judge Timothy Evans to issue the order. This comes after advocates said a woman was was arrested by ICE last month while entering the domestic violence courthouse.

Alexa Van Brunt, director of MacArthur Justice Center’s Illinois office, which filed the petition, said she was “gratified” by Evans’ order.

“This is a necessary and overdue action to ensure that the people of Cook County can access the courts without fear,” she said in a Wednesday statement to the Associated Press.

Evans said justice “depends on every individual’s ability to appear in court without fear or obstruction.”

“Our courthouses remain places where all people — regardless of their background or circumstance — should be able to safely and confidently participate in the judicial process,” Evans said in a statement.

ICE tactics outside courthouses seen across country

The tactic of detaining people at courthouses in the Chicago area is part of a larger jump in courthouse immigration arrests across the country. The flurry of immigration enforcement operations at courthouses has been condemned by judicial officials and legal organizations, and has drawn lawsuits from some states and the adoption of bills seeking to block the practice.

In June, President Donald Trump’s administration sued the state of New York over a 2020 law barring federal immigration agents from making arrests at state, city and other municipal courthouses.

Statehouse Democrats vow to adopt resolutions condemning federal immigration crackdown

Opening the second day of the six-day fall legislative session in Springfield, Ill., House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch decried the federal government’s immigration squeeze and vowed that his majority Democrats would use floor time Wednesday to adopt resolutions condemning the action.

“We won’t sit back and let our democracy be taken from us,” Welch said at the Capitol, surrounded by two dozen of his caucus members

Questioned about the practical impact of resolutions, Welch said there also are discussions about legislation to restrict federal agents’ patrol statewide. He lambasted reports of ICE arrests in medical facilities and applauded Evans’ ruling prohibiting warrantless arrests near courthouses.

“If we can do something similar statewide, I’d love to get that done,” Welch said. “These should be safe spaces.”

Republicans questioned their opponents’ sincerity. Debating a resolution condemning political violence, GOP Rep. Adam Niemerg noted incendiary language from Gov. JB Pritzker — in the spring he called for “street fighters” to oppose the administration — although the governor has not espoused violence. Rep. Nicole La Ha, who said she has received death threats, accused Democrats of trying to stifle opposition.

“This is not a stand against violence,” La Ha said. “It is a tasteless tactic to punish dissent and difference of opinion.”

Illinois governor denounces tear gas use on protesters

Meanwhile, Pritzker suggested federal agents may have violated a ruling by a federal judge last week that said they could not use tear gas, pepper spray and other weapons on journalists and peaceful protesters after a coalition of news outlets and protesters sued over the actions of federal agents during protests outside a Chicago-area ICE facility. Pritzker said he expected the attorneys involved to “go back to court to make sure that is enforced against ICE”

“ICE is causing this mayhem,” he said. “They’re the ones throwing tear gas when people are peacefully protesting.”

The comments also come after Pritzker denounced Border Patrol agents for using tear gas on protesters who gathered Tuesday after a high-speed chase on a residential street on Chicago’s South Side.

A few protesters also gathered Wednesday afternoon outside an ICE facility in the west Chicago suburb of Broadview, where a fence that has been at the center of a recent lawsuit had come down.

A judge ordered ICE to remove the fence after the village of Broadview sued federal authorities for “illegally” erecting an 8-foot-tall fence outside the facility, blocking public streets and creating problems for local emergency services trying to access the area. On Monday, state legislators and Black mayors of nearby suburbs gathered outside the facility to demand the fence be removed and announce an executive order limiting protests in the area to designated zones. Trump has long targeted Black mayors in large Democratic cities, many of whom have voiced solidarity with one another in recent months amid federal interventions in their areas.

Community efforts to oppose ICE have also ramped up in the nation’s third-largest city, where neighborhood groups have assembled to monitor ICE activity and film any incidents involving federal agents in their areas.

On Tuesday, hundreds of people attended “Whistlemania” events across the city and made thousands of “whistle kits” with whistles, “Know Your Rights” flyers and instructions on how to use them to alert neighbors of when immigration enforcement agents are nearby.

An increasing number of GoFundMe pages have also been launched to pay for legal costs for community members detained by ICE, most recently a landscaper and father of three children detained earlier this month.

Fernando writes for the Associated Press. AP writer John O’Connor in Springfield contributed.

California gubernational candidate Betty Yee said that transgender female athletes should be able to compete in women’s sports and that she is open to having athletes of all gender identities compete in the same category in certain events at the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics.

Her comments come as California legislation becomes a central focus in the national debate on the participation of transgender athletes in sports and elucidate her stance on one of the few issues currently dividing the state’s Democrats.

During a recent appearance on “Piers Morgan Uncensored,” Yee said, “I think transgender athletes are women athletes and they should be able to compete.”

Yee, who served as California state controller from 2015 to 2023, told Morgan that transgender female athletes have gone through a physical transition and should be able to participate in women’s sports. However, she added that “there is still some discussion about whether they should compete in the same field” and that more research is needed on the physiology of transgender athletes.

Her view differs from that of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who called transgender athletes’ participation in women’s sports “deeply unfair” and warned that it was hurting Democrats at the polls during a March episode of his podcast featuring conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Newsom’s comments garnered backlash from some party members, who accused the governor of abandoning a vulnerable minority group for political gain.

When Morgan asked Yee if there should be a gender-neutral 2028 L.A. Olympics where everyone competes in the same category, she said, “I think it’s a conversation worth having.”

“If the physicality of the sexes bear true to that [gender neutrality], including with transgender people, yes, it [the Olympics] should be gender neutral,” she said. “I don’t think we know enough.”

Yee suggested that there are some sporting events where all athletes can compete on a level playing field. When asked to name one, she suggested short-distance track and field events such as the 100-meter sprint — a notion Morgan decried as “insane.”

The Olympic record time among male athletes for the 100-meter dash is 9.63 seconds, set by Usain Bolt in 2012, while the women’s Olympic record is 10.61 seconds, set by Elaine Thompson-Herah in 2021.

Yee said she was not a sports expert but emphasized her overall stance that all athletes, including transgender athletes, should have an equal opportunity to participate.

“I think there’s a lot of information we need to learn about what’s really happening with the ability of trans athletes to compete, but my statement is about being able to be sure that they can compete,” she said.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton appeared on Morgan’s show after Yee and called her comments jaw dropping.

“I think we may just have seen another California Democrat candidate torpedo their campaign for governor,” he said, referencing the criticism former Rep. Katie Porter has received over recordings of combative and rude comments to a journalist and a staff member.

Hilton said that as governor he would overturn AB 1266. This law took effect in 2014 and requires that California schools allow students to participate in sporting activities consistent with their gender identities, regardless of the gender listed on their record.

“This is obviously discrimination against girls,” said Hilton. “I’m confident that, as governor, I can actually overturn that law and bring some sanity back to this whole situation.”

In July, the Trump administration sued California for allowing transgender athletes to compete on school sports teams that match their gender identity, alleging that this violates a federal law that prohibits gender-based discrimination in schools by allowing biological males to compete against biological females.

This week, Newsom signed Assembly Bill 749, which creates a commission to examine whether a new state board or department is needed to improve access to youth sports regardless of race, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, income or geographic location.

The bill was decried by some Republican legislators as an attempt to create a body that will advocate for the participation of transgender athletes in women’s sports.

WASHINGTON — Dozens of reporters turned in access badges and exited the Pentagon on Wednesday rather than agree to government-imposed restrictions on their work, pushing journalists who cover the American military further from the seat of its power. The U.S. government has called the new rules “common sense.”

News outlets were nearly unanimous in rejecting new rules imposed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that would leave journalists vulnerable to expulsion if they sought to report on information — classified or otherwise — that had not been approved by Hegseth for release.

Many of the reporters waited to leave together at a 4 p.m. deadline set by the Defense Department to get out of the building. As the hour approached, boxes of documents lined a Pentagon corridor and reporters carried chairs, a copying machine, books and old photos to the parking lot from suddenly abandoned workspaces. Shortly after 4, about 40 to 50 journalists left together after handing in badges.

“It’s sad, but I’m also really proud of the press corps that we stuck together,” said Nancy Youssef, a reporter for the Atlantic who has had a desk at the Pentagon since 2007. She took a map of the Middle East out to her car.

It is unclear what practical effect the new rules will have, though news organizations vowed they’d continue robust coverage of the military no matter the vantage point.

Images of reporters effectively demonstrating against barriers to their work are unlikely to move supporters of President Trump, many of whom resent journalists and cheer his efforts to make their jobs harder. Trump has been involved in court fights against the New York Times, CBS News, ABC News, the Wall Street Journal and the Associated Press in the last year.

Trump supports the new rules

Speaking to reporters at the White House on Tuesday, Trump backed his Defense secretary’s new rules. “I think he finds the press to be very disruptive in terms of world peace,” Trump said. “The press is very dishonest.”

Even before issuing his new press policy, Hegseth, a former Fox News Channel host, has systematically choked off the flow of information. He has held only two formal press briefings, banned reporters from accessing many parts of the sprawling Pentagon without an escort and and launched investigations into leaks to the media.

He has called his new rules “common sense” and said the requirement that journalists sign a document outlining the rules means they acknowledge the new rules, not necessarily agree to them. Journalists see that as a distinction without a difference.

“What they’re really doing, they want to spoon-feed information to the journalist, and that would be their story. That’s not journalism,” said Jack Keane, a retired Army general and Fox News analyst, said on Hegseth’s former network.

When he served, Keane said he required new brigadier generals to take a class on the role of the media in a democracy so they wouldn’t be intimidated and also see reporters as a conduit to the American public. “There were times when stories were done that made me flinch a little bit,” he said. “But that’s usually because we had done something that wasn’t as good as we should have done it.”

Youssef said it made no sense to sign on to rules that said reporters should not solicit military officials for information. “To agree to not solicit information is to agree to not be a journalist,” she said. “Our whole goal is soliciting information.”

Reporting on U.S. military affairs will continue — from a greater distance

Several reporters posted on social media when they turned in their press badges.

“It’s such a tiny thing, but I was really proud to see my picture up on the wall of Pentagon correspondents,” wrote Heather Mongillo, a reporter for USNI News, which covers the Navy. “Today, I’ll hand in my badge. The reporting will continue.”

Mongillo, Youssef and others emphasized that they’ll continue to do their jobs no matter where their desks are. Some sources will continue to speak with them, although they say some in the military have been chilled by threats from Pentagon leadership.

In an essay, NPR reporter Tom Bowman noted the many times he’d been tipped off by people he knew from the Pentagon and while embedded in the military about what was happening, even if it contradicted official lines put out by leadership. Many understand the media’s role.

“They knew the American public deserved to know what’s going on,” Bowman wrote. “With no reporters able to ask questions, it seems the Pentagon leadership will continue to rely on slick social media posts, carefully orchestrated short videos and interviews with partisan commentators and podcasters. No one should think that’s good enough.”

The Pentagon Press Assn., which has 101 members representing 56 news outlets, has spoken out against the rules. Organizations from across the media spectrum, from legacy organizations like the Associated Press and the New York Times to conservative outlets like Fox and Newsmax, told their reporters to leave instead of signing the new rules.

Only the conservative One America News Network signed on. Its management probably believes it will have greater access to Trump administration officials by showing its support, Gabrielle Cuccia, a former Pentagon reporter who was fired by OANN earlier this year for writing an online column criticizing Hegseth’s media policies, told the AP in an interview.

Bauder writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Laurie Kellman in London contributed to this report.

Several airports in California have refused to play a video featuring U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem blaming Democrats for delays due to the federal government shutdown.

The video, playing for travelers waiting in Transportation Security Administration security lines at airports across the country, comes as the government entered a third week of a shutdown after Congress failed to reach an agreement on funding legislation.

“It is TSA’s top priority to make sure you have the most pleasant and efficient airport experience as possible while we keep you safe,” Noem says in the video. “However, Democrats in Congress refuse to fund the federal government and because of this many of our operations are impacted, and most of our TSA employees are working without pay.”

Officials at multiple airports in California say they are not playing the video at their locations. They include: John Wayne Airport in Orange County, Hollywood Burbank Airport, San Diego International Airport, San José Mineta International Airport, Sacramento International Airport, Oakland San Francisco Bay Airport and San Francisco International Airport.

Officials from Los Angeles International Airport did respond to questions on whether the video was being played there.

Some airport officials have refused to play the video, calling it inappropriate. On Tuesday, the ranking member of the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation called for Noem to be investigated for possibly breaking the Hatch Act by asking airports to play the video.

“Recent reports indicate DHS is using taxpayer dollars and federal assets to produce and air a video message featuring Secretary Noem, in her official capacity, making political attacks against Democratic Members of Congress,” Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) wrote in a letter addressed to the Office of Special Counsel and reviewed by The Times. “This message is not just false; it appears to violate the prohibitions contained in the Hatch Act.”

The act, according to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, is to “ensure that federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion,” as well as protect federal employees from political coercion at work.

Noem’s video was received by airports on Thursday and was followed up by a verbal request from DHS officials to play it at security checkpoints, multiple airport officials told The Times.

The reasons the video is not being shown for California fliers varies.

In Orange County, airport spokesperson AnnaSophia Servin said that Homeland Security requested, to the airport’s director, that the video be played, but a final decision has not yet been made. In Burbank, political messaging is prohibited, officials said. In San José, an airport spokesperson said there have been no shutdown impacts and therefore no reason to play the video.

At San Francisco International Airport, officials determined that the video wasn’t helpful.

“SFO limits messaging at our security checkpoints to information intended to help passengers be prepared to go through the security screening process,” a spokesperson said in an email. “Any content, whether in video or print form, which does not meet this standard, will not be shown.”

When The Times asked Homeland Security officials to respond to airports not playing Noem’s video, spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin responded with Noem’s video statement blaming Democrats.

But California airports aren’t the only locations choosing not to play Noem’s message.

Airports in Oregon, Las Vegas, Charlotte, Atlanta, Phoenix, Seattle have also opted not to play it.

“We did not consent to playing the video in its current form, as we believe the Hatch Act clearly prohibits use of public assets for political purposes and messaging,” said Molly Prescott, a spokesperson for the Port of Portland, which manages Portland International Airport, said in a statement.

Oregon law also prohibits public employees from politicking on the job.

“We believe consenting to playing this video on Port assets would violate Oregon law,” she said.

Officials in New York also pushed back against airing the video.

“It is inappropriate, unacceptable, and inconsistent with the values we expect from our nation’s top public officials,” New York’s Westchester County Executive Ken Jenkins said in a statement. “The [Public Service Announcement] politicizes the impacts of a federal government shutdown on TSA Operations, and the County finds the tone to be unnecessarily alarmist.”

According to the Homeland Security website, more than 61,000 TSA employees continue to work despite a lapse in appropriations, and a lack of a paycheck to employees.