POLITICS

Stay informed about the latest developments in politics with our comprehensive political news coverage. Get updates on elections, government policies, international relations, and the voices shaping the political landscape.

Alex Saab and the Mutating Realities of Chavismo

Alex Saab was once presented by the Venezuelan state as a symbol of national sovereignty. Today, the same state refers to him simply as “the Colombian citizen Alex Naim Saab Morán.”

That contradiction is not a side detail in the Saab saga. It is the story.

For years, chavismo invested extraordinary political and symbolic capital into transforming Saab from a relatively obscure businessman into something much larger: diplomat, political prisoner, sanctions-era patriot, and eventually minister of commerce. When he was detained in Cape Verde in 2020 on U.S. money laundering charges, the Maduro government reacted as though a senior state official had been kidnapped by a hostile empire. State media launched nonstop campaigns demanding his release. Venezuelan diplomats lobbied internationally on his behalf. Officials presented copies of his Venezuelan passport in foreign courts. Delcy Rodríguez herself described him as an innocent Venezuelan diplomat persecuted by Washington.

The regime did not merely defend Saab. It fused his fate with the idea of Venezuelan sovereignty itself.

And yet today, after reports that Saab was quietly detained inside Venezuela for months before being surrendered to the United States, the same state apparatus appears eager to emphasize something entirely different: his Colombian nationality.

The legal logic is obvious enough. Venezuelan law generally prohibits the extradition of Venezuelan nationals. Saab’s status as a naturalized citizen may have provided the government with the legal flexibility needed to facilitate his transfer while preserving a veneer of constitutional procedure.

But politically, the reversal is extraordinary.

Until recently, Saab was not treated as a foreign intermediary operating on behalf of Venezuela. He was treated as Venezuela. Attacks on Saab were framed as attacks on the republic itself. His return from Cape Verde during the Biden-era prisoner exchange was celebrated as a geopolitical victory. In January, Delcy Rodríguez publicly thanked him for his “dedication and commitment to the homeland” while announcing he would assume “new responsibilities.”

Only months later, he became deportable.

The Saab affair exposes how late chavismo governed through mutable political realities rather than stable institutional principles.

What changed was not merely the regime’s opinion of Saab. The operative meaning of Saab himself changed according to political necessity. He was successively businessman, envoy, diplomat, patriot, minister, revolutionary symbol, and now effectively a legally manageable Colombian citizen. The categories surrounding him  (citizenship, sovereignty, legality, loyalty) were treated less as fixed institutional realities than as flexible political instruments.

This is what gives the entire saga its distinctly Orwellian quality.

The issue is not simply propaganda. All political systems engage in propaganda. The issue is the degree to which political reality itself became fluid. Yesterday’s indispensable patriot becomes today’s silent liability. Yesterday’s sovereign diplomat becomes today’s extraditable foreign national. The contradiction is not resolved so much as administratively absorbed.

For Venezuelans, this dynamic has become painfully familiar. Years of institutional improvisation, overlapping authorities, constitutional contortions, and contradictory official narratives have gradually normalized incoherence as a governing method. People learn not to ask whether political narratives are internally consistent, but whether they remain operationally useful.

The Saab saga condenses that evolution into a single character arc.

And yet this is not merely a story about narrative manipulation. It is also a story about how chavismo itself changed under the pressure of sanctions, isolation, and survival.

During the years of maximum international pressure, Saab’s networks reportedly became central to the regime’s economic adaptation. Food imports, opaque oil transactions, offshore procurement systems, sanctions workarounds, and parallel financial structures increasingly blurred the distinction between state policy and survival improvisation. Saab occupied a hybrid role inside that world: part businessman, part diplomat, part financial operator, part sovereign representative.

That ambiguity was not accidental. It reflected the logic of a state learning to survive siege conditions.

But survival systems often produce figures who become simultaneously indispensable and dangerous. The very people who help preserve a regime during periods of extreme pressure can later become liabilities once strategic priorities shift. As Venezuela moved from total isolation toward tentative normalization, figures associated with the sanctions-era architecture increasingly carried diplomatic, financial, and political costs.

The fall of Tareck El Aissami and the PDVSA crypto scandal had already hinted at this transition. Entire internal networks once tied to the regime’s survival mechanisms suddenly became objects of public investigation and selective purge. Saab’s extradition pushes that logic much further. Unlike the internal anti-corruption campaigns of previous years, this was not simply the revolution disciplining itself. It was the state externally relinquishing one of its own.

And perhaps that is why the Saab affair feels so psychologically significant inside chavismo itself.

For years, the movement functioned through implicit assumptions about loyalty and protection. Certain figures appeared untouchable because they embodied too much of the system’s operational history and symbolic legitimacy. Saab seemed to belong to that category. His sudden transformation from protected patriot to expendable liability suggests that the category itself may be disappearing.

That does not necessarily mean the regime is collapsing. Authoritarian systems can survive long after ideological coherence erodes. But it does suggest a deeper transformation underway: the gradual evolution of chavismo from revolutionary movement into survival-oriented governing apparatus.

Revolutionary systems rely on myths that are supposed to remain stable over time. Survival systems prioritize flexibility instead.

The Saab affair reveals what happens when that flexibility extends not only to policy, but to reality itself.

Source link

News Analysis: Trump spent two days with Xi in Beijing. Was he outplayed?

As President Trump left Beijing on Friday, Chinese social media resurfaced a familiar nickname for the president — flattering at first glance — declaring that Chuan Jianguo, the “Nation Builder,” had returned.

It was not meant as a compliment. The nation he is building, according to the Chinese, is not the United States but their own, through a series of inadvertent yet costly mistakes inflicted by Trump at home and abroad.

  • Share via

If the Chinese government was self-assured entering Trump’s summit with Xi Jinping, then the results of the state visit, in which Beijing refused to offer Trump any meaningful deals or concessions, signal their unmistakable confidence in American decline.

Chinese government statements in local media stating as much made their way back to Trump as he was departing, aggravating the president, a U.S. official said. But the White House secured a clarification from the Chinese that seemed to placate Trump. America was only declining under President Biden, they said — not anymore.

President Trump and President Xi Jinping tour Zhongnanhai Garden in Beijing

President Trump and President Xi Jinping tour Zhongnanhai Garden on Friday in Beijing.

(Evan Vucci / Pool via Getty Images)

The Trump administration argues the trip was a success, having secured the display of conciliation and partnership the president had sought after years of increasingly dangerous acrimony.

Foreign policy hawks on China will be displeased with his new direction of friendship and cooperation with a government they view as openly hostile to the United States. But Trump seems to have reached a similar conclusion as past administrations, that China might require a relationship in pursuit of, as Xi put it, “constructive strategic stability.”

Trump was notably out of character throughout his stay here, deferential to his host, marveling at displays of Chinese power and reticent to speak with the press.

Five times over two days, Trump referred to Xi as his friend, taking every public opportunity to offer his compliments and pats on the back. None of it was reciprocated. The Chinese leader, Trump told Fox News in an interview, was “all business” in private, as well, apparently uninterested in his overtures of personal goodwill.

Presidents Xi and Trump tour Zhongnanhai Garden.

Presidents Xi and Trump tour Zhongnanhai Garden on Friday.

(Evan Vucci—Pool/Getty Images)

The summit may ultimately be remembered as the moment when Trump recognized a shifting power dynamic, where an American president had the rare and uncomfortable experience of entering a meeting clearly overmatched.

“I think the most important thing is relationship,” Trump said in the interview, describing the summit as “historic.”

“It’s all about relationship,” he added. “I have a very good relationship with President Xi.”

Taiwan was discussed ‘the whole night’

Little of substance was accomplished over two days of talks. But Chinese officials expected no less after warning Trump’s team before the summit that its minimal preparation had failed to lay the groundwork for diplomatic agreements.

Still, the lack of breakthroughs may come as a relief to some in Washington. Trump appears to have held to a long-standing U.S. line on Taiwan, for now, refusing to provide Xi with clarity on whether the United States would defend the self-ruled island if China tries to reclaim it by force.

The two men discussed the matter “the whole night,” Trump told Fox.

If China attacked, “they would be met harshly, and bad things will happen,” Trump said. Yet within the same answer, he questioned Taiwan’s “odds” against China if war were to break out, even with U.S. help, noting its proximity to the Chinese mainland and its vast distance away from the United States.

Whether Trump will proceed with arms sales to Taiwan — passed by Congress and obligated by law under the Taiwan Relations Act — is still an open question.

“If you kept it the way it is, I think China is going to be OK with that,” Trump said, referencing an ambiguous status quo around Taiwan’s status, “but we’re not looking to have somebody say, ‘Let’s go independent because the United States is backing us.’ ”

“Taiwan would be very smart to cool it a little bit,” he added. “China would be smart to cool it a little bit. They ought to both cool it.”

President Trump departs as President Xi looks on after a visit to Zhongnanhai Garden on Friday.

President Trump departs as President Xi looks on after a visit to Zhongnanhai Garden on Friday.

(Evan Vucci/ Pool via Getty Images)

Curious company

Trump’s choice of company in the U.S. delegation left the Chinese with questions over the purpose of the trip.

Lara Trump, a Fox News host and the president’s daughter-in-law, attended alongside her husband, Eric Trump, whose presence as a private citizen running the Trump Organization was a direct appeal to Beijing to treat the administration like a family business. Brett Ratner, director of the “Rush Hour” series and a documentary on the first lady that bombed at the box office, was given prime placement along with America’s top business leaders.

The last time a secretary of Defense attended a presidential state visit to China was on Richard Nixon’s famous trip in 1972. Chinese officials were unsure what to make of Pete Hegseth’s presence — whether it was meant to convey a softer stance, a hardening one, or simply an ignorance of basic diplomatic protocol.

Trump said he felt personally honored by the lavish welcome he received on the edge of Tiananmen Square, outside the Great Hall of the People, where China hosts all visiting dignitaries.

Before a lunch at Zhongnanhai, the secretive headquarters of the Chinese Communist Party, Trump asked Xi if he was special for getting to visit the compound. He was the fourth U.S. president to do so.

While the Trump administration offered itself glowing reviews of the outcome of the summit, the Chinese government offered little to say as he departed. And Chinese media highlighted Beijing’s resolute stance on American priorities — from trade to the Iran war — as evidence of Chinese confidence and American decline.

But all that business wasn’t the point of the trip, Trump told Fox’s Bret Baier. For the president, it was all personal.

“I want to thank President Xi, my friend, for this magnificent welcome,” Trump said in his toast at the state banquet, repeating the personal overture. “The American and Chinese people share much in common. We value hard work. We value courage and achievement. We love our families and we love our countries.

“Together, we have the chance to draw on these values to create a future of greater prosperity, cooperation and happiness and peace for our children,” Trump added. “We love our children. This region and the world — it’s a special world, with the two of us united and together.”

Source link

Voter voices from the San Gabriel Valley on California governor’s race

Eddie Martinez can’t stand Donald Trump. So when Eric Swalwell entered the race for California governor, Martinez had his candidate.

“I liked the way he took Trump on, the impeachment thing in Congress,” Martinez said of the former Bay Area congressman, a Trump nemesis who served as one of the House prosecutors in 2021 when Democrats held the wayward president to account for the second time.

Then, suddenly, Swalwell’s campaign collapsed under the weight of allegations of abuse, including charges he sexually assaulted a former aide. With Martinez’s choice out of the running, the Democrat turned to the candidate who’d been his second pick all along, Xavier Becerra.

Martinez has been familiar with Becerra for decades, going back to when the former congressman, state attorney general and Biden Cabinet member was in the state Assembly. To his credit, said the 65-year-old retired public relations strategist, Becerra has largely kept clear of controversy and there’s never been a whiff of personal scandal — an important consideration after Swalwell’s spectacular self-destruction.

On top of all that, Martinez said as he prepared to drop his mail ballot at a post office in Alhambra, it would be nice for California to elect its first Latino governor in modern times. It’s been, Martinez observed, more than 150 years.

With the gubernatorial primary entering its final two weeks, a contest that had been stubbornly formless has finally gained coherence. Becerra, who’d been widely given up for dead as he foundered near the bottom of polls, has unexpectedly emerged as the Democrat to beat.

“He has the most experience,” said Ruben Avita, a 57-year-old actor who leans Democratic and is tilting toward Becerra over hedge-fund billionaire Tom Steyer. “At this point,” Avita said as he waited to catch a double feature at a cineplex in Monterey Park, “I want someone with a proven track record.”

Among the Republicans running, Trump’s pick — conservative commentator Steve Hilton — seems firmly ensconced atop the GOP field.

“He’s got a lot more common-sense approach than any of these other idiots,” said Wayne The Flame — yes, he explained, that’s his legal name —which, while not exactly a ringing endorsement, still counts as a vote.

The Claremont independent, retired at 73 after a career selling motorcycles and hot rods, described Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, the other major GOP contestant, as a racist and dismissed the entire Democratic field with a string of epithets. “Dumb—,” he said of the voters who keep putting the likes of them in power.

A dog standing alongside the legs of her heavily tattooed owner

Peaches, a chihuahua/boxer rescue, stands alongside her owner, Wayne The Flame

If not terribly enthused, at least The Flame has made up his mind. Many voters remain undecided — or, at least, not entirely wed to a candidate.

Some are holding on to their ballots longer than usual, awaiting any last-minute developments and weighing the election odds as though wagering in a high-stakes game of poker.

Like many Democrats, Bryce Dwyer’s concern is that Hilton and Bianco will seize both spots in June’s top-two primary, advancing to a November runoff and giving California its first Republican governor in 16 years.

A 40-year-old project manager at the Getty Research Institute, Dwyer held his 2-year-old daughter as his son, 6, romped on a pleasant afternoon in Sierra Madre’s Memorial Park. Across the street, the bells of Christ Church chimed the hour.

“None of the Democrats are putting forth anything that is making me excited,” said Dwyer, who’s ruled out Becerra (he doesn’t see much there) and is deciding between Steyer and former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter. He’s trying to cast his ballot strategically, the East Pasadena resident said, and “it’s the first time in a while I haven’t really had a clue who I’m going to vote for so close to election day.”

A woman in a red dress in profile with her hands held in front of her

Democrat Priscilla Vega of Monrovia has yet to settle on her candidate for governor

This is a deeply unsettled season in California, with precious little hope the next governor — whoever he or she turns out to be — will make things better anytime soon. That mix of discouragement and discontent surfaced repeatedly, like a dull ache, in conversations with dozens of voters across the San Gabriel Valley.

The region’s ethnic and economic diversity — from the working-class neighborhoods of Pomona through the Asian-majority suburbs to the mountainside mansions of San Dimas and Pasadena — make the valley a prime battleground in the race for governor.

Alana H., who asked not to use her last name, said she wasn’t even bothering to vote.

She ticked off some reasons: The soaring price of gas and rising cost of, essentially, everything else. The fear her college-age daughter will never be able to buy a home in California. Worse, is her loss of faith. She no longer believes in the promise, once taken for granted, that each generation will improve its lot over the last. And, Alana said, she’s not alone: “Anyone who’s an average person is in the same boat, we’re all just trying to stay afloat.” Standing in front of the post office in Alhambra, the 52-year-old paddled her arms as though to keep from sinking.

A man stands in front of a wall full of framed pictures

Jaunenito Pavon, in his Glendora wine and chocolate bar, would like California to elect a governor who could unify the state. He’s still deciding on a candidate

The politicians in both parties are “so out of touch,” she said, “all they’re doing is fighting over this and that, when everyone I know doesn’t care what party you’re in. They just want to put food on their table. They want their kids to have a better life.”

Shelby Moore has some of the same concerns. Forget about ever buying a home, said the 30-year-old California native, a Democratic-leaning independent. It’s no small feat scraping up money for rent. “I’ve lost almost every single friend that I went to high school or college with,” Moore said between waiting tables at a Mediterranean restaurant in Glendora. “They’ve all moved out of state.”

A waitress places food on the table at a Glendora restaurant

Shelby Moore, 30, a waitress in Glendora, said all her friends from high school and college have left California because it’s so expensive.

She’ll definitely vote, Moore said, though she doesn’t know for whom. One of the Democrats. Someone who’ll work to make California more affordable and keep people like her friends from being priced out.

In Claremont, Eric Hurley was another undecided Democrat. He attended last month’s gubernatorial debate at Pomona College, where the 56-year-old professor teaches psychological science and Africana studies. Otherwise, he’s been too busy to pay much attention to the race.

But it’s important, Hurley said, that whoever wins “keep fighting the good fight and standing by our liberal principles. I would hate to see someone in the governor’s office start capitulating to what the current administration is asking.”

A man sitting outside a coffee shop with his image reflected in the window

Democrat Eric Hurley is undecided in the governor’s race. But he wants someone who’ll stand up to the Trump administration.

Others seconded that notion, that California needs to stand as a bulwark against Trump and his excesses, such as the draconian crackdown that has terrorized the state’s large immigrant population.

But there’s not a great appetite for the sort of performative pushback that’s won the current governor a wide audience on social media and boosted Gavin Newsom’s political stock as he positions himself ahead of the 2028 presidential campaign.

Jennifer Harris, 56, is a single mom in Monrovia who oversees payroll at a food manufacturing company. She has to stretch each of her dollars to make ends meet; soon she’ll be shelling out $30,000 a year for her daughter to go to college. Buying a home, Harris said, is out of the question.

She confessed to chuckling at the governor’s memes — an over-the-top oeuvre that includes Newsom as super hero, Newsom as religious beacon, Newsom as romance-novel hunk — and his other cheeky jabs at the president. “But that’s not an adult way to handle it,” Harris said between errands in Monrovia’s quaint shopping district. “It’s not solving any problems.”

Better, she said, for the next governor — she hasn’t decided whom she’ll support — to focus on practicalities: improving the economy, making housing and healthcare more affordable, dealing with homelessness and the underlying mental health issues.

A woman seen in profile

Jennifer Harris said Gov. Newsom’s over-the-top social media presence is amusing. But she wants the next governor to focus on more practical things.

Britnee Foreman echoed that sentiment.

The 41-year-old, who lives in Azusa and works in the music business, was meeting a friend, Priscilla Vega, 43, for lunch in Monrovia. Along with a meal, the two Democrats shared their concerns about inflation and income inequality.

“Memes are great for publicity,” said Foreman, who’s deciding between Becerra and Porter, based on their policy experience. (Vega, a lifestyle marketer, has yet to narrow down her choice.)

A woman gestures while discussing the California governors race

Britnee Foreman says the next governor needs policies “with teeth,” not an active social media presence.

“But I prefer policy,” Foreman went on. “I don’t want them just to be the popular person out there on social media. It’s great if they’re tweeting and have a cute little Insta-story. But I need their policies to have teeth and actively move us forward. And not just look like it’s moving forward.”

After nearly eight years, amid widespread unease, California seems ready to put the Newsom era in the past. It’s just not clear what path voters will choose, or which candidate they’ll prefer to steer the state toward, hopefully, a better place.

Source link

Some in GOP want ballots to be counted by hand, not machines

A growing effort to raise suspicion about the security of voting systems has kindled a back-to-the-future moment among conservatives in some parts of the U.S.

Republican lawmakers in at least six states have introduced legislation that would require all election ballots to be counted by hand instead of electronic tabulators. Similar proposals have been floated within some local governments, including about a dozen New Hampshire towns and Washoe County in the presidential battleground state of Nevada.

The push for hand-counting ballots comes amid mistrust of elections stoked by many Republicans who advance the false narrative that widespread fraud cost former President Trump reelection in the 2020 contest.

Despite no evidence of widespread fraud or major irregularities, conspiracy theories have proliferated among his allies that voting systems were somehow manipulated to favor Democrat Joe Biden. That has prompted calls to ban electronic tabulators used to scan ballots, record votes and compile race tallies.

“It’s our responsibility, and it should be our desire, to count every vote and to imbue confidence in our citizenry that our elections are fair and free, and that their vote is being counted,” said New Hampshire state Rep. Mark Alliegro, sponsor of a hand-counting bill that is similar to ones proposed in Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Washington and West Virginia.

Alliegro said he was motivated by his analysis of recounts in nearly 50 New Hampshire state legislative races, not by the 2020 presidential election.

But some of the bill’s supporters reference the 2020 election to explain why they argue his hand-count legislation is needed. They cite a belief — despite evidence disproving it — that Trump actually won a landslide victory and that cheating is the only way to explain how New Hampshire voters elected a Republican governor and GOP majorities in the Legislature, but then backed Democrats for federal office.

Critics of the proposals to ditch electronic ballot tabulators and return to hand-counting are blunt about what they see as the motivation.

“It’s coming from conspiracy theories and lies,” said Sylvia Albert, director of voting and elections for Common Cause, a nonpartisan group that advocates for expanded voter access. “It’s attempting to lower people’s confidence in elections.”

Albert and others said it’s unrealistic to think election officials can count millions of ballots by hand and report results quickly, given that ballots often include dozens of races. The partisan review last summer of the 2 million ballots cast in Maricopa County, Ariz., which included a hand count, took several months and hundreds of people to complete.

“If you have a jurisdiction with 500 voters, you might be OK. But if you have a jurisdiction with thousands of voters, tens of thousands of voters, hundreds of thousands of voters, it’s just not going to work,” said Jennifer Morrell, a former elections clerk in Colorado and Utah who now advises state and local election officials.

Even in New Hampshire’s small towns, hand-counting is a complicated, lengthy process when a typical ballot might include 50 questions, said Milford Town Clerk Joan Dargie, who spoke against the proposed legislation on behalf of the New Hampshire City and Town Clerks Assn. She estimates her town would have to boost election workers from 200 to 350, and said many of her fellow clerks have said they will quit if they have to tabulate every ballot by hand. “People who are asking to get rid of machines obviously haven’t worked in an election,” she said.

As one example, Cobb County, Ga., performed a hand tally ordered by the state after the 2020 election. It took hundreds of people five days to count just the votes for president on roughly 397,000 ballots, said Janine Eveler, elections director for the county in metro Atlanta. She estimates it would have taken 100 days to count every race on each ballot using the same procedures.

Counting by machine isn’t just faster. Multiple studies have shown it’s also more accurate, said Charles Stewart, professor of political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

The first research on the topic was done almost two decades ago, comparing recounts of New Hampshire races that were originally tabulated by hand with those tabulated by machines. In that study and subsequent research, the machines won, he said.

“Counting votes is very tedious. Human beings are bad doing tedious things, and computers are very good at doing tedious things,” Stewart said.

Most states also conduct postelection audits that are designed to identify any irregularities with ballot scanning and counting. But with many Republicans believing Biden was not legitimately elected, election machines have become a popular target.

In Nevada, a Republican county commissioner is pushing a proposal that would require hand-counting of all ballots, along with a return to primarily in-person voting and beefing up uniformed security at polling places.

“I’m 82 years old, and I’ve been through a lot of elections,” said Washoe County Commissioner Jeanne Herman. “I know that something is not right.”

The proposal has drawn opposition from other commissioners, the biggest labor union in the state and a rare front-page editorial in the largest newspaper in northern Nevada, which said the measure could cost taxpayers “millions of dollars to chase down Facebook rumors of illusory election fraud.”

In West Virginia, a bill to repeal the state law governing tabulation machines died in committee earlier this month. In Missouri, lawmakers have not yet acted on a proposal that would ban electronic voting machines and tabulation equipment and require hand-counting to be livestreamed and recorded.

The bill’s sponsor, Republican state Rep. Mitch Boggs Jr., said he has no proof elections have been manipulated but is responding to constituent concerns.

“You file what the constituents are asking for,” Boggs said. “But at the end of the day, what they’re really wanting is just the transparency. They want to know that our elections are secure.”

Republican state Rep. Petty McGaugh said the legislation would delay election results and likely undermine their accuracy. When she became clerk of rural Carroll County in 1995, election staff were still hand-counting ballots by marking tallies in blocks of five on paper. She noticed multiple errors and eventually switched the county to an electronic tabulation system.

“I don’t really think that in this day and age we need to go back to hand-counting where it’s so susceptible to human error,” she said. “We’ve got to start trusting electronics and computers.”

In New Hampshire, that message seems to have gotten through. Last week, a state House committee unanimously recommended killing the hand-counting legislation and voters in nine towns where the question was on the ballot in local elections rejected it.

Source link

Sen. Cassidy ousted in Louisiana GOP primary, as two rivals advance to runoff

Sen. Bill Cassidy, a Republican who has occasionally asserted his independence from President Trump, failed to advance in Saturday’s GOP primary runoff in Louisiana, as a Trump-backed foe and another candidate finished in the top two spots.

U.S. Rep. Julia Letlow won the most votes, capitalizing on the power of Trump’s endorsement in his latest attempt to purge his party of people he views as disloyal. State Treasurer John Fleming came in second to join her in the next round of voting.

Trump supported Letlow over Cassidy, one of seven Republican senators who voted to convict him during his second impeachment trial over the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Cassidy, a doctor, has also clashed with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over vaccine policy, even though he provided crucial support to help Kennedy get confirmed.

By receiving less than 50% of the vote, Letlow and Fleming, a former U.S. House member and Trump administration official, were unable to avoid the runoff, which will take place June 27. The winner will almost certainly take the November general election because of the state’s Republican leanings.

The Louisiana primary comes in the middle of a month of campaigns by Trump to exact retribution on politicians he views as having crossed him. On May 5 he helped dislodge five of seven Indiana state senators who rejected his partisan gerrymander plan.

Next Tuesday, U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky will face a Trump-backed challenger, Ed Gallrein, in another Republican primary. Massie angered Trump by opposing his signature tax legislation over concerns about the national debt, pushing for the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files and opposing his decision to go to war with Iran.

The president leveled insults at Cassidy on Saturday morning, calling him “a disloyal disaster” and “a terrible guy” on social media. In the evening he followed up with: “Congratulations to Congresswoman Julia Letlow on a fantastic race, beating an Incumbent Senator by Record Setting Numbers.”

Jeanelle Chachere, a 66-year-old nurse, said she considers Cassidy “a phony” and voted for Letlow solely because Trump endorsed her.

“I’m going by what he says, because I like what he does,” she said.

Election changes stir concern

The election was scrambled by a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision focused on Louisiana gutting a part of the Voting Rights Act that affects how congressional maps are drawn. Although the Senate primary is moving forward, Louisiana leaders decided to delay House primaries until a future date to allow them to redo district lines ahead of time, a shift that threatened to cause confusion for voters Saturday.

Mary-Patricia Wray, who has consulted for Republican and Democratic candidates in Louisiana, said before the vote that the change could weigh against Cassidy by dampening turnout among voters who are less fervently pro-Trump.

“Suspending the congressional primaries hurts Cassidy,” she said. “Some people believe the Senate primary is canceled.”

Cassidy also complained that a new primary system enacted last year confused voters by requiring them to ask for a partisan ballot instead of the all-party primary previously in place. He said some called his office to say they had been unable to vote for him.

“The process that was set up was destined to be confusing,” Cassidy told reporters Friday.

Dadrius Lanus, executive director of the state Democratic Party, said his team fielded hundreds of calls from voters statewide who said the changes undermined their ability vote as they planned.

“A lot of the information should have gotten to voters well in advance,” Lanus said. “It’s literally been a whirlwind of confusion.”

A costly primary

Cassidy waged an aggressive campaign to convince voters he should not be counted out. Wray was among the political consultants who, as election day neared, gave the senator a chance of pulling off an upset.

The senator’s campaign was expected to have spent roughly $9.6 million on advertising through May 16, according to the ad-tracking firm AdImpact. And Louisiana Freedom Fund, a super PAC supporting him, was on track to spend $12.3 million.

By comparison, Letlow’s campaign, which launched Jan. 20, spent roughly $3.9 million, while a super PAC backing her, the Accountability Project, spent about $6 million.

Fleming’s campaign spent about $1.5 million.

Cassidy and Louisiana Freedom Fund ran ads attacking Letlow within days of her entering the race for supporting diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, which Trump has tried to root out of the federal government.

Letlow, a college administrator before her election to the House, said she supported DEI while interviewing for the position of president of University of Louisiana-Monroe in 2020.

The ads, an attempt to characterize Letlow as a progressive trying to pass as a conservative, were one way Cassidy tried to flip the script in a race where he was on the outs with Trump.

Trump’s campaign

The senator’s vote in favor of convicting Trump after his 2021 impeachment has shadowed Cassidy throughout his second Senate term.

John Martin, a 68-year-old retired engineer in south Louisiana, said he would vote for Letlow because he was still upset by Cassidy’s decision. He waved a flier from Letlow’s campaign showing her standing alongside the president.

“I know a lot more about Cassidy than I do about her,” Martin said. “But if she’s endorsed by Trump, I’m going to believe that.”

Cassidy steered clear of Trump’s ire last year, supporting Kennedy to lead the Department of Health and Human Services despite his public reservations about the nominee’s anti-vaccine views.

Mark Workman, a 75-year-old retired infectious disease physician in the New Orleans suburbs, said he backs Fleming. Had Cassidy “stood up and blocked RFK,” Workman said, he would have supported the senator for taking a strong and courageous stance.

“He had the ability to stop him,” Workman said, “and he was too weak to do that.”

As chair of the Senate Health Committee, Cassidy has been more publicly critical of Kennedy, including over funding cuts for vaccine development.

Trump blamed Cassidy for the failed nomination of his second choice for surgeon general, Casey Means, who raised doubts about vaccinating newborns for hepatitis B, a practice Cassidy supports. Trump withdrew the Means nomination and decried Cassidy.

Challenger waited for Trump’s backing

Letlow considered running last year but only entered the race after Trump announced his endorsement in January.

By that time Fleming, who was elected state treasurer in 2023, was already in the race as a Trump devotee. But Landry was looking for a better-known challenger, and he suggested Letlow to the president.

Letlow had an unconventional and tragic entry into politics.

In 2020, while she was a college administrator, her husband, Luke, was elected to the U.S. House but died of COVID-19 before he could be sworn in. Letlow ran for and won the seat in a March 2021 special election and was reelected in 2022 and 2024.

Beaumont and Brook write for the Associated Press and reported from Des Moines and Baton Rouge, respectively

Source link

Congressman Tests His Winning Streak

Rep. Xavier Becerra isn’t worried that he has less money and fewer endorsements than other candidates running for mayor of Los Angeles. He isn’t worried because the lessons he has gleaned from his 11 years in public office are that Things Work Out. Opportunities Arise. The Underdog Surprises People.

If you lived a life shaped by luck and discipline and powerful patrons, a life that propelled you, after one term as a state assemblyman, to become a respected member of Congress, you might feel the same way.

At age 43, driven less by a determined vision than by a strict work ethic and influential allies, Becerra has accumulated a fair share of political success, particularly considering he had no ambition for public office until about a decade ago.

As chairman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, he forged strong relationships with Capitol Hill leaders and President Clinton. He won a plum assignment on the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, the first Latino so named. Colleagues from both parties regard him as sharp and fair-minded.

This time around, however, happenstance and hard work may not be enough. The mayor’s race is testing Becerra’s political acumen and his sunny string of luck. The candidate once perceived as the “favorite son” among up-and-coming Latino leaders is jousting for recognition in a crowded field. Even former allies such as County Supervisor Gloria Molina say they are puzzled that he is running.

Becerra has been slow to develop a compelling message for his candidacy. He has infuriated some Latino leaders who fear that he will split community support with fellow candidate and former Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa, preventing either one from winning. He has come under fire for his role in President Clinton’s controversial commutation of a drug trafficker’s sentence.

Becerra’s involvement in the commutation flap was a jarring contrast to the most persistent image of the congressman–that of a clean-cut, above-the-board legislator, a man some colleagues admire as the “Boy Scout” of politics.

Becerra’s mother, Maria Teresa, has a favorite story about her son. One Sunday morning when he was about 8 years old, he tired of waiting as she readied his three sisters for Mass at their south Sacramento church.

“Vamos, Mama,” he said. “Mass starts in 10 minutes.”

“Si, hijo,” she responded. “Paciencia.”

But Becerra couldn’t wait. Not willing to risk being late, he walked out the door and down the seven blocks to church by himself.

The entire truth about that Sunday may be a little less saccharine.

“I probably didn’t want to go to a later Mass and miss football,” Becerra said recently, laughing.

Hard Work and Good Grades

The only son among four children, Becerra always got good grades. He broke up fights in high school. He helped his father do construction work as a teenager, quick to handle the heavy labor.

Even then, he succeeded with a combination of chance and by-the-books meticulousness.

Take golf.

It was not the obvious sport for the son of a construction worker growing up in a one-bedroom house. But an elementary school friend’s father was an avid player, and gave his son a set of golf clubs. The two boys putted around in the friend’s backyard after class. When they grew older, they played at a small public course nearby, sharing a single set of clubs.

Finally, Becerra’s father scraped together enough money to buy him a cheap set of Kmart clubs. But he didn’t have enough to pay for lessons. So Becerra mastered golf much as he would tackle politics: by cramming.

He went to the library and checked out golf books. He cut the weekly golf tips column out of the Sacramento Bee. Finally, by his senior year at C.K. McClatchy High School, he made the varsity golf team.

During high school, Becerra also mastered a very different hobby: poker. He became so good that years later, during a trip to Las Vegas with his parents, a casino offered him a job as a dealer.

While he gained command of some subjects with focus and diligence, chance also set him on his course to college.

One day in high school chemistry class, a friend who had botched an exam tossed aside his application to Stanford University. Becerra picked it up and, on a whim, filled it out. He didn’t know where the campus was until he and his mother drove there to enroll him in the fall of 1976.

The son of Mexican immigrants–his mother grew up in Guadalajara and his father, Manuel, was born in Sacramento but raised in Tijuana–Becerra would become the first in his family to graduate from college.

Close friend Arturo Vargas, who met Becerra at Stanford, said he “always had a clean-boy image, almost to a fault.”

“On campus, people tended to drink beer and be rowdy,” said Vargas, now the executive director of the National Assn. of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, based in Los Angeles. “The time I knew him, he was more likely to drink milk.”

Another college acquaintance said he was “the straightest Chicano I knew. It looked like his short-sleeved shirts were ironed.” (They were.)

When his girlfriend–now wife–Carolina Reyes was downstairs in the lounge of the Casa Zapata dorm leading meetings of the Chicano activist organization MEChA, Becerra was more likely to be upstairs studying. Friends encouraged him to take a greater leadership role on campus, but Becerra was intent on getting into law school. (He did, graduating from Stanford Law in 1984.)

“I was the grandiose one who wanted to conquer the world, and he did too, but he wanted to do it step by step,” said Reyes, now an obstetrician.

After working for Legal Aid in Massachusetts while his wife attended Harvard Medical School, Becerra came back to Sacramento to work for state Sen. Art Torres, who had been his boss during a post-college fellowship. He moved to Los Angeles in 1986 to run Torres’ district office.

Soon, he met Eastside political operative Henry Lozano, chief of staff for the venerable Rep. Edward Roybal, the dean of local Latino politics. One day on the golf course, Lozano asked Becerra, so when are you going to run?

He wasn’t.

“I’m a policy guy,” Becerra told Lozano.

A few years later, Lozano and other Eastside community leaders invited Becerra–by then a deputy attorney general–to meet. They posed the question again, more specifically: Will you run for the open state Assembly seat in the San Gabriel Valley?

“I guess we were considered kingmakers,” said Frank Villalobos, a longtime Eastside activist who was at the meeting. “When we asked someone, it was pretty much considered giving them el dedazo.”

El dedazo, literally the fingering from a powerful person: It’s your turn.

New Generation of Latino Leaders

Becerra looked stunned. He thought they were kidding, until he realized no one was laughing. He’d have to talk to his wife, he said.

“My vision was I was going to be the right-hand person that an elected official counts on to do the memos, to advise,” he said. “You know, the one you always see in the movies whispering in the ear of the official, and then all of a sudden the eloquent question comes out.”

But once planted, the idea took root.

A group known as the “macho dogs”–Lozano, Villalobos, future city Councilman Mike Hernandez, future Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg and Molina’s husband, Ron Martinez–put together his campaign.

Torres, Becerra’s old boss, loaned staff and helped Becerra raise money. They challenged the candidates being backed by two other powerful Latinos. (Later, Molina, then an assemblywoman, endorsed Becerra and brought on her political team.)

The fresh-faced, Stanford-educated Becerra fit the image voters were seeking, weary as they were of scandal in the wake of state Sen. Joseph Montoya’s political corruption conviction.

Becerra’s victory kicked off a new era in Latino politics, a rise in young, polished college graduates who offered a different mold of leadership than many of their roughhewn elders.

Two years later, Roybal decided to retire from Congress after 16 terms.

The power brokers, including Molina, approached Becerra again. This time, he had the support of both the powerful county supervisor and Roybal.

Becerra moved into the district, sleeping on his friend Villaraigosa’s couch for a few nights before he found an apartment. Fending off criticism that he was a carpetbagger, he won a tough primary against school board member Leticia Quezada and handily beat his Republican opponent that November.

Last fall, he won reelection with 83% of the vote.

Becerra’s relationship with Villaraigosa–and their competition on the ballot–has served as a tense undercurrent to the mayor’s race. Becerra resisted efforts last year by Molina and Henry Cisneros, the former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, to broker a compromise so that only one Latino would be in the race.

Becerra has repeatedly told supporters that he refused to cut a deal with Villaraigosa because he doesn’t believe in el dedazo.

But isn’t that exactly how he got into office?

He laughed at the question.

“Those were tiny dedos,” he said. “What they offered wasn’t enough to push me over the finish line.”

Others disagreed.

“He’d be nowhere if Gloria Molina hadn’t put him in office,” said one Latino leader and longtime associate who did not want to be identified.

When pressed, Becerra acknowledged he got help.

“I am where I am because of others,” he said. “What I’m saying is I’ve never been part of the establishment.”

‘Not the Best at Playing the Game’

Whatever the origins of his success, Becerra thrived in Congress. His diligent attention to detail earned praise from members of both parties. A fluent Spanish speaker, he has spent much of his time pressing issues affecting his Latino constituency, such as restoring benefits to legal immigrants and defending bilingual education.

“He’s sort of one of the few young dynamic Latino leaders in the House,” said Amy Walter, a congressional analyst for the Cook Political Report. “He’s very intelligent and well-respected, even by Republicans I talk to.”

Although he has succeeded in climbing the Washington ladder, Becerra has also, on occasion, dramatically demonstrated his political naivete.

“I understand the politics,” Becerra said. “I’m not the best at playing the game.”

In 1993, the freshman legislator took on Dan Rostenkowski, then the powerful chairman of the Ways and Means Committee–which Becerra was trying to join.

Rostenkowski wanted to cut welfare benefits to legal immigrants, to fund an extension of unemployment benefits. Becerra and other Hispanic Caucus members objected. They negotiated with House leaders to preserve the payments to blind, elderly and disabled legal immigrants.

An amended bill was drafted with Rostenkowski’s reluctant approval. But before it went to the floor for a vote, Becerra made a fatal mistake. During a weekly Democratic whip meeting, he rose to thank the leadership for supporting the bill. Rostenkowski, still frustrated at the change, growled at him.

Becerra could have stopped talking at that point. But he didn’t.

Breaching House protocol, the young congressman took on the veteran chairman, arguing that legal immigrants had every right to be in the country.

What ensued was an almost unheard of shouting match, as Becerra continued to raise his voice over the chairman’s bellows. Later, on the floor, Rostenkowski lambasted the amended bill as damaging to jobless Americans. The compromise failed. The next day, the original plan passed and was signed into law.

“I learned a lot from that,” an unrepentant Becerra said recently. “There were people who said to me afterward, ‘Xavier, if you just kept your mouth shut, you had it. You had won.’ I said, ‘Why do we have to win that way?’ ”

Becerra’s actions also backfired in late 1996, when he took a four-day educational trip to Cuba just as he was bidding to become chairman of the Hispanic Caucus.

Predictably, his trip set off a firestorm of criticism in the Cuban exile community. The three Cuban American legislators were furious he had visited the island and not denounced Fidel Castro’s regime.

Becerra was eventually elected chairman of the caucus, but its two Cuban American Republicans resigned from the group, ending its bipartisan clout.

Over time, Becerra did develop some political prowess: Under his guidance, the caucus successfully lobbied to win back some of the benefits for legal immigrants cut in 1994, and pushed Clinton to include more Latinos in his administration.

But questions about his political judgment persist, most recently centering on the case of convicted drug dealer Carlos Vignali. Becerra, who has received nearly $14,000 in political donations from Vignali’s father, Horacio, wrote a letter to Clinton in November asking for a review of Vignali’s conviction. He also called a White House counsel–on Clinton’s last night in office–to inquire about the status of the case. Vignali’s sentence was commuted the next day.

His involvement, along with that of other Los Angeles leaders, contributed to the firestorm of controversy that flared over the pardons and commutations granted by Clinton.

Surprised by the criticism, Becerra said that it did not occur to him that he might be seen as using his political leverage on behalf of a donor. He was merely trying to get information, he said. He insists that he never asked Clinton outright to give Vignali clemency–merely to see if his 15-year sentence was too harsh.

Becerra entered the Los Angeles mayor’s race with a few advantages, some shrewdly obtained. He has won convincingly in a district that ranges from Boyle Heights west to Hollywood. Facing minimal competition in his last reelection campaign, he spent almost $860,000–including almost $400,000 on television ads–to boost his name recognition citywide just as the mayoral election approached. It may have paid off: A recent Los Angeles Times poll put Becerra in the thick of a many-candidate tussle for second place behind the front-runner, City Atty. James K. Hahn.

But Becerra’s campaign has suffered from a central disadvantage. Having been fingered by fate for so long, Becerra has found it difficult to answer the most basic of questions: Why is he running?

As recently as December, almost a year after he entered the race, he told Times reporters that he had not yet come up with a message for his candidacy. “I have to figure that out,” he said.

More recently, he said his interest in becoming mayor grew after he battled with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and Los Angeles Unified School District over their federal funding.

“It was real frustrating and I thought, we have to do better than this,” he said. “The more it became clear that no one was stepping forward who I felt inspired by, the more I started thinking about it. It’s worth a shot.”

(Friends also confirm that his wife, an obstetrician at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, wanted him to return to Los Angeles so he could spend more time with their three young daughters.)

Not the Only Golden Boy

After casting about for a campaign theme, Becerra eventually sought to tie his disparate proposals together under the rubric of “neighborhoods first.” But his specific ideas tend to resemble mom-and-apple-pie bromides.

He talks about getting every child a library card, about making the Los Angeles Zoo the best in the nation, about making sure everyone has a good school, grocery store, fire station and place to worship near home.

During mayoral forums, while the other candidates draw specific rationales for their candidacies, Becerra repeats his neighborhoods theme religiously, often redundantly.

“We have to do the little things right,” he tells audiences. “Some people say, that’s small thinking. But there’s no way I can think about these big things until we start to get the little things right.”

Some wonder aloud why Becerra is running. He has raised the least money of the top six candidates in the April 10 primary election, and had only about $600,000 on hand at the end of February, compared to Hahn’s $2.2 million. Villaraigosa’s presence on the ballot further complicates Becerra’s chances.

“At one time, he was the golden boy of Hispanic politics in Los Angeles, and now he’s finding out there’s others who have a claim to that title,” said Sergio Bendixen, a Miami-based political analyst and pollster who has experience in California campaigns.

While some say his political path has been made easier by influential champions, Becerra insists that his lack of sheer ambition means he is not overly enticed by the power that accompanies elected office.

“I don’t covet it,” he said. “I fear people who must have it, whatever it takes.”

He brushes aside criticism that he is ill-positioned for victory. People had the same doubts about his prospects when he first ran for office, he said.

His sunny analysis of the toughest race of his career: “We have nowhere to go but up.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Xavier Becerra

* Born: Jan. 26, 1958, in Sacramento.

* Education: Stanford University, bachelor’s degree in economics (1980); Stanford University Law School (1984).

* Personal: Married to Carolina Reyes, obstetrician at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. Three daughters: Clarisa, 7, Olivia, 5, and Natalia, 3.

* Party: Democrat

* Career: Member of the U.S. House of Representatives, 1993-present; state assemblyman, 1990-1992; deputy attorney general, 1987-1990.

* Strategy: Becerra is counting on the support of nearly 78,000 people who voted for him in his congressional bid in November. His campaign hopes to win more votes by pushing his “Neighborhoods First” theme in small community meetings. He is also working to shore up Latino support with frequent appearances in Spanish-language media.

*

Times researcher Maloy Moore contributed to this story.

About This Series

The Times today presents the first of six profiles of the major candidates for mayor of Los Angeles. The articles will appear in the order in which the candidates will appear on the ballot.

Source link

Mayoral hopeful Spencer Pratt woos Valley voters in a rival’s district

Lake Balboa resident Jose Meraz is looking for a mayor who will turn L.A. around, cleaning up streets that he says are “filled with garbage.”

Schoolteacher Tracey Schroeder, a Republican candidate for state Assembly, is unhappy about crime, open-air drug use and the slow rebuilding effort in the wake of the Palisades fire, which destroyed thousands of homes.

Greg Whitley, a resident of Reseda, said he’s frustrated with homelessness and the influx of what he called “criminal illegal aliens.”

“I live with the Spanish community. Great people,” he said. “But these illegals that come here for criminal reasons, they’re making them look bad, and they don’t like it.”

All three showed up outside a five-bedroom home in Sherman Oaks on Saturday, looking to speak with reality TV personality Spencer Pratt, now waging an insurgent campaign for Los Angeles mayor in the June 2 election.

Mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt, left, poses with a supporter

Mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt, left, poses with a supporter during a community meet-and-greet event Saturday at a home on Longridge Avenue in a residential neighborhood of Sherman Oaks.

(Etienne Laurent/For The Times)

Standing in the entry to the home’s two-car garage, the onetime star of “The Hills” spent more than two hours shaking hands, giving hugs and posing for photos with his admirers, who waited in line under punishing San Fernando Valley sunshine.

Pratt used social media to invite the public to the campaign event, which took place in the district represented by one of his mayoral opponents, City Councilmember Nithya Raman.

He did not deliver any speeches outside the property, which is listed for rent on Zillow for $15,950 per month. He and a member of his security personnel said he was not taking interviews.

Pratt has been running in voter surveys behind Mayor Karen Bass, who is running for reelection, sometimes swapping places with Raman for second and third. He turned in a strong debate performance this month and has been outpacing his rivals in fundraising, according to the most recent disclosure reports.

While running for office, Pratt has blamed Bass for the 2025 wildfire that destroyed much of Pacific Palisades, including his home. He has railed against the city’s handling of homelessness, saying he would pursue a “treatment first” approach toward people with drug addiction who are living on the street.

Mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt, back to the camera, speaks with supporters

Mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt, back to the camera, speaks with supporters Saturday during a community meet-and-greet event.

(Etienne Laurent/For The Times)

Pratt said recently that he wants to increase Los Angeles Police Department staffing to 12,500 officers over the next decade, up from about 8,600. Speaking with one supporter on Saturday, he said the city needs to “make sure all the laws are being enforced.”

“Plenty of functioning cities enforce their laws,” he said.

That message resonated with many of the people in line.

“He is advocating for the safety and security of our families — specifically, for mothers to be able to walk their kids to school,” said Saba Lahar, a resident of Sherman Oaks, moments after talking to the candidate.

Pratt fans dropped off ballots, picked up lawn signs and stopped to pick up coffee drinks from the Hustle N Dough doughnut truck parked out front.

Some showed up even though they cannot cast ballots in L.A.

A man photographs his father holding a "Pratt for L.A. Mayor" sign in the street

Ruben Jr., no last name given takes a picture of his father during mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt’s community meet-and-greet Saturday in Sherman Oaks.

(Etienne Laurent/For The Times)

Brian Rodda, who runs a walking food tour company, described himself as “an unsatisfied Angeleno” even though he lives in West Hollywood, which is not part of the city of L.A.

“Sadly, because I do live in West Hollywood, I cannot vote for him,” he said. “But I certainly think we need a change.”

Source link

Colorado governor commutes election denier Tina Peters’ sentence after Trump pressure

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis on Friday commuted the sentence of election conspiracy theorist Tina Peters following pressure from President Trump, the latest instance of the president using his influence to reward those who echoed his baseless claims of mass fraud as the cause of his 2020 election loss.

Trump has championed the case of Peters, a 70-year-old former county clerk who was sentenced to nine years behind bars after being convicted in a scheme to make a copy of her county’s election computer system. She will be released June 1.

In April, a Colorado appeals court upheld her conviction but ordered Peters to be resentenced because it said the judge who sent her to prison wrongly punished her for speaking out about election fraud, a decision that Polis praised.

In a letter to Peters, Polis wrote that she was convicted of serious crimes and deserved to spend time in prison. “However, this is an extremely unusual and lengthy sentence for a first time offender who committed nonviolent crimes,” the governor wrote.

He added that Peters’ application “demonstrates taking responsibility for your crimes, and a commitment to follow the law going forward.”

Trump posted around the time of the announcement on his social media platform: “FREE TINA!”

A woman wears a We the People pin along with numerous Free Tina Peters stickers

Jeany Rush, 76, wears a We the People pin along with numerous Free Tina Peters stickers during the Colorado Republican State Assembly on April 11 at Massari Arena on the Colorado State University Pueblo campus in Pueblo, Colo.

(Timothy Hurst/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images)

‘Affront to the rule of law’

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold criticized the decision by the governor — a fellow Democrat — saying that “it was a dark day for democracy” and that ”selling out our state’s justice system for Trump is an affront to the rule of law.”

“A clear message is being sent to those willing to break the law and attack democracy for the president — they will likely not face consequences for their actions,” Griswold said at a news conference.

Peters has been serving her sentence at a prison in Pueblo after being convicted in 2024 by jurors in Mesa County, a Republican stronghold that supported Trump.

Peters sneaked in an outside computer expert, an associate of MyPillow Chief Executive Mike Lindell — a fellow election denier — to make a copy of her county’s Dominion Voting Systems election computer server as state officials updated it in 2021. Peters joined Lindell onstage at a “cybersymposium” that promised to reveal proof of election rigging, after which video and photos of the update, including passwords, were posted online.

After the commutation announcement, Peters issued a statement through her attorney thanking Polis and apologizing.

“Five years ago I misled the Secretary of State when allowing a person to gain access to county voting equipment. That was wrong,” Peters said. “I have learned and grown during my time in prison and going forward I will make sure that my actions always follow the law, and I will avoid the mistakes of the past.”

She also condemned threats and violence against voters, county clerks and election workers.

Gubernatorial candidates weigh in

Polis is ineligible to seek reelection due to term limits, and the candidates running to succeed him weighed in on his decision.

Sen. Michael Bennet, a Democrat in the race, said that he vehemently disagreed with the commutation and that Peters knowingly broke the law, undermined elections and was convicted by a jury.

“Lawlessness only breeds more lawlessness,” Bennet said. “With President Trump continuing to attack Colorado, we must do everything we can to stand strong for our institutions and the rule of law.”

A Republican candidate, state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, said she would have preferred that the trial judge revisit Peters’ sentence as ordered by the appeals court before the governor considered any commutation.

“A commutation or pardon by a governor should be reserved for truly extraordinary circumstances,” Kirkmeyer wrote in a statement. “The governor has a responsibility to apply justice fairly, consistently, and without bias.”

Trump’s influence

Peters was convicted of state, not federal, crimes, which put her beyond the reach of Trump’s pardon power, which he used to free those convicted of crimes for the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. So the president championed her cause through the media.

Trump has lambasted both Polis, calling him a “Scumbag Governor,” and the Republican district attorney who prosecuted her, Daniel Rubinstein, for keeping Peters in prison. He has referred to Peters as “elderly” and “sick.” Earlier this year, Trump uninvited Polis from a White House meeting with governors over the case.

The president had said Colorado was “suffering a big price” for refusing to release her. His administration has been choking off funds, ending federal programs and denying disaster aid. It also announced the dismantling of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado and relocated the U.S. Space Command from the state to Alabama.

Matt Crane, executive director of the Colorado County Clerks Assn., said the commutation “signals that it is open season on our election and election officials.”

“Gov. Polis is bending the knee to the same political voices and conspiracy theories that are undermining belief in our democratic institutions,” Crane said. “This is now Gov. Polis’ legacy. He will not be able to run from it.”

Peters’ health

Peters’ lawyers have said her health has declined in prison. Peters, who had part of her right lung removed in 2017, started coughing frequently after the prison’s heating system was turned on for the winter and has had trouble sleeping due to chronic pain from fibromyalgia, her lawyers said.

In January, Peters was involved in a scuffle with another inmate but was found not guilty of assault following a prison disciplinary hearing, Colorado Department of Corrections spokesperson Alondra Gonzalez-Garcia said. Peters was found guilty of being in a location without authorization.

The federal Bureau of Prisons tried but failed to get Peters moved to a federal prison. In January, Polis said he was considering granting clemency for Peters, calling her sentence “unusual and harsh“ for a first-time, nonviolent offender. In March he repeated those arguments in a lengthy post on the social media platform X.

Polis defended his decision Friday in a social media post.

“I’ll always stand for free speech and to make sure that we live in a country that no matter what your viewpoints are, you are not incarcerated longer because of them,” Polis said.

In contrast to some other Democratic governors, Polis, who portrays himself as a political iconoclast, has at times taken an accommodating stance toward Trump. Though he criticized the president’s tariff and immigration policies, the governor praised earlier moves by Trump such as creating the Department of Government Efficiency, which was run by billionaire Elon Musk, and the choice of vaccine critic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to run the Department of Health and Human Services.

Slevin and Riccardi write for the Associated Press. AP writers Ali Swenson in New York, Jacques Billeaud in Phoenix and Audrey McAvoy in Honolulu contributed to this report.

Source link

In Montgomery, thousands rally to defend voting rights

Thousands of people rallied Saturday in the cradle of the modern civil rights movement to mobilize a new voting rights era as conservative states dismantle congressional districts that helped secure Black political representation.

U.S. Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey called Montgomery “sacred soil” in the fight for civil rights.

“If we in our generation do not now do our duty, we will lose the gains and the rights and the liberties that our ancestors afforded us,” Booker said in the Alabama capital.

The crowd was led in chants of “we won’t go back” and “we fight.”

“We are not going down without a fight. We are not going down to Jim Crow maps,” Shalela Dowdy, a plaintiff in the Alabama redistricting case said, alluding to racial gerrymandering in several states that has followed the recent Supreme Court decision to roll back the Voting Rights Act.

A crowd of thousands gathered in front of the city’s historic Alabama Capitol, where the Confederacy was formed in 1861 and where the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. spoke in 1965 at the end of the Selma-to-Montgomery voting rights march. The stage, set in front of the Capitol, was flanked from behind by statues of Confederate President Jefferson Davis and civil rights icon Rosa Parks — dueling tributes erected nearly 90 years apart.

Speakers said the spot was once the temple of the Confederacy and transformed into holy ground of the civil rights movement.

Some in the crowd said the effort to redraw lines has echoes of the past.

“We lived through the ’60s. It takes you back. When you think that Alabama’s moving forward, it takes two steps back,” said Camellia A. Hooks, a 70-year-old Montgomery resident.

The rally began in Selma, where a violent clash between law enforcement and voting rights activists in 1965 galvanized support for passage of the Voting Rights Act. It then moved to the state Capitol, where King gave his “How Long, Not Long” speech the same year.

The Supreme Court ruling involving Louisiana hollowed out a tenet of the Voting Rights Act that was already weakened by a separate high court decision in 2013 and then narrowed further over the years. That helped clear the way for stricter voter ID laws, registration restrictions and limits on early voting and polling place changes, including in states that once needed federal pre-clearance before they could change voting laws because of their historical discrimination against Black voters.

Veterans of the civil rights movement are alarmed by the speed of the rollbacks, noting that protections won through generations of sacrifice have been weakened in little more than a decade.

Kirk Carrington, 75, was a teen in 1965 when law enforcement officers attacked marchers in Selma on what became known as Bloody Sunday. A white man on a horse wielding a stick chased Carrington through the streets on that day, he said.

“It’s really just appalling to me and all the young people that marched during the ’60s, fought hard to get voting rights, equal rights and civil rights,” Carrington said. “It’s sad that it’s continuing after 60-plus-odd years that we are still fighting for the same thing we fought for back then.”

The effect in Montgomery

Montgomery is home to one of the congressional districts that is being altered in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling.

A federal court in 2023 redrew Alabama’s 2nd Congressional District after ruling that the state intentionally diluted the voting power of Black residents, who make up about 27% of its population. The court said there should be a district where Black people are a majority or near-majority and have an opportunity to elect their candidate of choice.

But the Supreme Court cleared the way for a different map that could let the GOP reclaim the seat. While the matter remains under litigation, the state plans special primaries Aug. 11 under the new map.

Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures, who won election in the district in 2024, said the dispute is not about him but rather people’s opportunity to have representation.

“When Republicans are literally turning back the clock on what representation, what the faces of representation look like, what the opportunities, legitimate opportunities for representation look like across this country, then I think it starts to resonate with people in a little bit of a different way,” Figures said.

Alabama House Speaker Nathaniel Ledbetter, a Republican, said the Louisiana ruling provided an opportunity to revisit a map that was forced on the state by the federal court.

“People tend to forget what happened. When this thing went to court, the Republican Party had that seat, congressional seat 2,” Ledbetter said last week. “There’s been a push through the courts to try to overtake some of these red state seats, and that’s certainly what happened in that one.”

Evan Milligan, the lead plaintiff in the Alabama redistricting case, said there is grief over the dismantling of the Voting Rights Act, but it is crucial that people recommit to the fight.

“We have to accept that this is the new reality, whether we like it or not,” Milligan said. “We don’t have to accept that this will be the reality for the next 10 years or two years or forever.”

Chandler writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

State Begins Accepting Gays’ Domestic Partner Sign-Ups

Citing reasons financial, emotional and political, hundreds of gays and lesbians around California took advantage of a new law Monday and began the process of registering with the state as domestic partners.

To some it seemed a giant step, to others a baby step, toward full recognition of their relationships.

“We are involved in a commitment with caring and loving and all the things I hear people say about their husbands and wives,” said Sam Catalano, a state employee who hummed the wedding march as he and his partner paid $10 to become registered couple No. 66 at the secretary of state’s office in Sacramento.

“But today I have gained one benefit, and those married couples have 1,400,” he said, citing federal studies that estimate more than 1,000 legal benefits of marriage.

Actually, the legislation signed into law last year by Gov. Gray Davis–AB 26 by Assemblywoman Carole Migden (D-San Francisco)–affords some same-sex couples two benefits: hospital visitation rights (which could otherwise be restricted to family members) and health insurance coverage for the dependents of government employees covered by CalPERS, the state retirement system.

With the new law, California became one of the nation’s pioneers in domestic partner policies. Twelve California cities and four counties, including Los Angeles, have their own policies giving health benefits to domestic partners, as do many corporations.

In Vermont last month, the state Supreme Court ruled that homosexual couples are entitled to all benefits and protections related to marriage. And in October, France became the first European nation to legalize civil solidarity pacts.

Across the country, 30 states have enacted laws to prevent same-sex marriages from being recognized, a Californians will decide on such a proposal in the March 7 primary election.

Tens of thousands of couples are expected to register under the domestic partners law. Same-sex couples are eligible, along with heterosexual couples over age 62, who sometimes hesitate to marry because of potential cuts in their Social Security income.

State analysts have no estimate of how much the registrations will cost the state and local governments.

State construction supervisor Billie Norman has been with her partner, Beverly Thames, for 14 years. Every year she has applied to add Thames to her health plan. Every year her application has been rejected.

“I could marry a man tomorrow and they’d give me insurance for him,” Norman said, flashing one of the matching diamond engagement rings the two wear. “We’re stable, we’re homeowners, we’re civil servants. There ought to be recognition of that.”

The state registration program signals a social shift, Norman said, that inches her and Thames closer to the Elvis-themed wedding they hope to have someday. Similar domestic partner bills passed the Legislature in 1994 and 1998 only to be vetoed by former Gov. Pete Wilson.

In March, California voters will vote on Proposition 22, the Limit on Marriages Act spearheaded by state Sen. Pete Knight (R-Lancaster), which would bar California from recognizing same-sex marriages. No state currently permits same-sex marriage, but some have court cases or legislation pending that could change the situation.

Proposition 22 spokesman Robert Glazier said the campaign has taken no position on domestic partnership registration, but “if someone wants to change marriage in California, they should do it in a very upfront way, not through a back door.”

Members of the “No on Knight” camp that opposes the measure predicted that publicity about partnership registration will work in their favor, highlighting the discrimination they believe gays and lesbians face in California and “how the Knight initiative will further discriminate against them,” said campaign manager Mike Marshall.

A small line of applicants greeted secretary of state employees when they arrived at 8 a.m. Monday to open the special filings desk, which falls under the ironically named “Limited Partnerships” division. All through the day couples wandered in, many having just learned of the opportunity in news accounts over the weekend.

By day’s end, spokesman Shad Balch said 71 couples had registered in Sacramento and at four branch offices around the state and hundreds more had taken out applications.

Among them were retirees and young people, middle class and poor, outspoken and shy. One couple has lived together for 29 years, another for three. For some it was the first official documentation of their relationship, for others one of a series of acknowledgments: city registrations, commitment ceremonies and corporate benefit extensions.

Ken Day, Catalano’s partner, said many gay couples they know are reluctant to even bother with the paperwork, a simple one-page form that can be mailed to the secretary of state but must be notarized.

Some think “it’s unnecessary and derivative,” he said. Others, he said, rolling his eyes, think the very idea is “too heterosexual.” A few were not ready for the commitment, which hinges on a pledge of joint responsibility for living expenses.

Among the many rights the state accords to married people but the new law does not extend to same-sex couples are Social Security benefits, inheritance provisions and health coverage after the death of the state employee. It does not give them any of the tax benefits of marriage, and they will not have the right to make medical decisions for each other.

Nor does the law untangle the complicated and expensive arrangements that gay and lesbian couples with children make to share health benefits with, and legal responsibility for, their children.

California Youth Authority counselor Cathyann Intemann spent $4,700 to adopt her partner’s daughter so she could count her as a dependent for her state health benefits. The couple rejoiced on learning Sunday that the new law would take effect in time to cover their second child, due this spring.

Intemann’s partner is a stay-at-home mother who estimated that she pays at least $3,000 a year for her own health insurance. “The bottom line is this saves us money in our household,” Intemann said.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

How to Register

The secretary of state’s office recommends that domestic partners mail registration forms to the Sacramento office, P.O. Box 944225, Sacramento, CA 94244-2250. Both partners’ signatures must be notarized and a fee of $10 enclosed. Forms are available at county clerks’ offices and online at https://www.ss.ca.gov, and can be filed in person at the secretary of state’s offices in these cities:

* Fresno: 2497 West Shaw Ave., Suite 101

* Los Angeles: 300 South Spring St., Room 12513

* San Diego: 1350 Front St., Suite 2060

* San Francisco: 455 Golden Gate, Suite 7300

Source link

L.A. police union targets leftist mayoral candidate Rae Huang, who’s running in fifth

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

We’ve reached the point in L.A.’s city election season where a juicy piece of news is popping off every day.

With a little over two weeks until the June 2 election, the campaigns’ remarks are getting more scathing, the spending more expensive and the scramble by supporters to get their chosen candidates into the top two more intense.

Like everyone else, we’re struggling to keep track of it all. In the meantime, here are a few of the more unusual moments from the past week:

The police union targets fifth-place candidate Rae Huang

You’ve probably heard about the digital attack ads put out by the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor warning voters that reality TV personality Spencer Pratt is “the LAST thing Los Angeles needs.”

Savvy political players said it wasn’t an attack ad at all, but rather a thinly veiled bid by the County Fed, a group that supports Mayor Karen Bass, to boost Pratt’s chances of making the Nov. 3 runoff election. Those observers say the mayor and her allies would rather run against Pratt, a Republican in a heavily Democratic city, than Raman during the campaign’s second round.

Now, another ad is up. But this time it’s from the Los Angeles Police Protective League, another union that is backing Bass’ reelection.

The league reported Wednesday that it’s spending about $100,000 on digital ads against mayoral candiate Rae Huang, who has been polling in the single digits.

Like the County Fed ad focused on Pratt, it’s not so much a lacerating attack as it is a list of the candidate’s beliefs.

“She supports the anti-business Green New Deal to increase taxes on corporations to provide free public transportation,” the digital ad says.

Once again, political sophisticates see a ruse, saying the police union is trying to lift Huang’s profile among voters, helping her pull support away from one of Bass’ top rivals, Councilmember Nithya Raman. Such a scheme, if successful, would ensure that Pratt ends up in the top two.

Asked about its new ad, league spokesperson Tom Saggau said the union is alerting voters that Huang “hates cops, corporations and real estate developers and voters should be aware.”

“It’s extremely important for voters to know about Rae Huang’s reckless plans to dismantle the police department and blow the city budget with free public transportation and other giveaways,” he said.

Huang said on social media that the police union is going after her because “they know change is possible.” At the same time, she acknowledged the ads were somewhat flattering.

“I think LAPD’s a little scared of me because they just spent over $100,000 in attack ads against me,” she said in a campaign video. “But they’re making me look good, so … thank you!”

Rob Quan, who is part of the advocacy group Unrig LA, replied to Huang at one point on X.

“They aren’t trying to stop you they are trying to boost you,” he wrote.

Raman backers really want Huang to drop out

With the primary campaign nearly over, impatient Raman supporters have been taking matters into their own hands, calling on Huang to drop out and ensure that Bass faces an opponent to her left.

Evan Goodrich, a Raman voter who lives in Echo Park, said he wants Raman in the top two. Voters shouldn’t squander their chance at getting a progressive mayor and creating change at City Hall, he told The Times.

Goodrich, 31, was more blunt on social media.

“Your campaign is broke, you have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning, and you’re costing us the most progressive viable candidate we have. It’s time to drop out!!!” he wrote, in a response to a Huang post.

Huang, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, said she’s not going anywhere.

During a Q-and-A posted on Reddit, she pushed back at the idea that her campaign is splintering the progressive vote, arguing that she views Raman as “neoliberal,” not progressive.

Raman has shifted her positions on police hiring, anti-encampment laws and Measure ULA, the tax on high-end real estate sales, Huang’s campaign said.

“I would not consider Nithya to be a progressive candidate, full stop. I do see her as being continuing to be a part of the establishment,” Huang said.

Huang did acknowledge that she sees Raman as being to the left of Bass.

Raman accuses Bass of ‘pay-to-play’ politics

As she battles to get into the top two, Raman launched a broadside against Bass this week, accusing her of engaging in multiple “pay-to-play” deals.

In a burst of social media posts, she accused Bass of negotiating “a sweetheart LAPD Union contract that bankrupted the city and a convention center expansion that will cost us over $4 billion after debt payments.” Special interests that supported those deals are now reciprocating, Raman said, by campaigning for the mayor.

Raman offered what she said is a fresh example of pay-to-play politics: the mayor’s push to allow owners of second homes to rent those places out on Airbnb or other short-term platforms, a practice currently prohibited by city law.

The Central City Assn., which supports the move, announced plans this week to spend $1 million on a campaign supporting Bass. A large part of its funding is coming from Airbnb, which also favors the idea. The downtown-based business group also supported Bass on the Convention Center.

“This is what pay-to-play politics looks like,” Raman said.

Bass has been defending her policy moves, saying the police raises were needed to keep officers from taking more lucrative jobs in other cities. The Convention Center expansion will boost tourism and a struggling downtown, Bass said.

The mayor also reiterated her support for the vacation rental policy, saying it would only be temporary, generating additional taxes for the city while ensuring more beds are available for the 2028 Olympic Games.

You’re reading the L.A. on the Record newsletter

Sign up to make sense of the often unexplained world of L.A. politics.

Bass campaign spokesperson Alex Stack called the allegations “another conspiracy theory from a failing candidate who is grasping at straws after her debate disasters and polling showing she won’t make the runoff.”

“The City should absolutely be exploring every way to maximize the economic benefit from the Olympics and to generate revenues paid by visitors, not Angelenos,” he said in a statement.

Nella McOsker, who heads the CCA, struck a similar note, praising Bass for supporting pro-business policies and calling Raman’s assertions “ridiculous.”

Wait, there’s a sheriff’s race?

If the mayor’s race has been blowing up, the contest for Los Angeles County Sheriff has been downright sleepy.

Sheriff Robert Luna, now seeking a second 4-year term, holds a substantial financial edge over the rest of the field, according to the most recent batch of fundraising reports.

In mid-April, Luna had more than $738,000 cash on hand, compared to about $114,000 for former Sheriff Alex Villanueva, who is attempting a comeback. Each of the other challengers had less than $50,000, spending reports show.

Sheriff’s Capt. Mike Bornman, one of the eight candidates running to unseat Luna, said the campaign had a single candidate forum in Compton, and that neither Luna nor Villanueva took part.

State of play

— BERN NOTICE: U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders announced Friday he is endorsing a handful of council candidates: Eunisses Hernandez on the Eastside, Hugo SotoMartínez in Hollywood, Faizah Malik on the Westside and Estuardo Mazariegos in South L.A. Sanders is also backing Deputy Atty. Gen. Marissa Roy in her bid for city attorney.

— HITTING THE MOTHERLODE: You can’t put a price on a mother’s love. Or can you? The independent expenditure committee working to elect city controller candidate Zach Sokoloff, bankrolled by his mother Sheryl Sokoloff, continued its campaign spending spree this week, reporting it had paid out nearly $4.8 million by Thursday. The latest tranche of money went toward attack ads against City Controller Kenneth Mejia.

— WAGE WARS: The City Council took the first step Wednesday toward scaling back a planned $30 hourly minimum wage for hotel and airport workers, in the hope of persuading business leaders to drop a planned ballot measure to repeal the city’s business tax. Under the plan, the hourly wage would reach $30 in 2030, instead of summer 2028. The move is not final and more deliberations are planned next week.

— OLYMPIC ANGST: State lawmakers pressed organizers of the 2028 Olympic Games about the effort to secure federal funding, pointing to Trump’s animosity toward California. Joey Freeman, vice president of state affairs for the LA28 Organizing Committee, assured legislators that his committee has a “wonderful working relationship” with the Trump administration. L.A. is on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars if the games lose serious money.

— POLL POSITION: A new voter survey showed Bass continuing to lead the pack of candidates in the mayor’s race, with Pratt in second and Raman third. Paul Mitchell, vice president of voter data firm Political Data Inc., questioned the poll’s accuracy, saying it oversampled Latinos and undersampled people over 50.

— DUMPING THE DEBATE: The FOX11 mayoral debate that had been planned for this week was canceled after Bass and Raman pulled out. Pratt had already declined to attend the event.

— TARGETING TAXES: L.A. County voters historically have been generous about sales tax hikes, signing off on increases to pay for public transit and homeless servcies. But with the public reeling from soaring gas prices and other rising costs, some are wondering if they will get behind Measure ER, a half-cent sales tax hike to pay for healthcare programs.

— DIGITAL FIRST: TV ads used to dominate in L.A. mayoral campaigns. But this year, candidates have been relying heavily on social media, posting snappy, off-the-cuff videos in the hope of going viral.

— REALITY, STARS: Songwriter/producer David Foster and his wife Katharine McPhee held a star-studded fundraiser for Pratt at their home, one that featured McPhee singing a parodied version of Tina Turner’s “The Best,” according to a video posted on X. Pratt has been scooping up donations from a number of Hollywood players, including Universal Music Group chief executive Lucian Grainge and Sandra Rebish, also known as TLC’s Dr. Pimple Popper.

QUICK HITS

  • Where is Inside Safe? The mayor’s signature program to combat homelessness went to Boyle Heights this week, tackling encampments at Hollenbeck Park and at the entry to the Sixth Street Bridge. The area is represented by Councilmember Ysabel Jurado.
  • On the docket next week: The council meets Tuesday to take another stab at renegotiating the terms of the $30-per-hour wage hike for airport and hotel workers.

Stay in touch

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

Source link

Cracked L.A. sidewalks are a symptom of a bigger breakdown

When I wrote last week about one of my favorite mountain ranges — L.A.‘s sidewalks — I immediately began fielding questions.

People wanted to know about the scoring system that awarded just 15 points, out of 45, to John Coanda and his wife, Barbara, who uses a wheelchair because of ALS. The Mar Vista couple had applied to the city’s Safe Sidewalks program to have some busted-up sidewalk in front of their home repaired.

With several sidewalk hazards on both sides of their block, Barbara can’t safely make it down her street. So how is it possible that under L.A.’s “Sidewalk Repair Program Prioritization and Scoring System,” their meager 15 points means they could be waiting “in excess of 10 years” for help?

I have the answers.

The Coandas got 15 points for being in a residential zone. But they didn’t meet the requirements for getting two additional awards of 15 points. They do not live within 500 feet of a bus or transit stop. And they had not been in the sidewalk repair backlog queue for more than 120 days.

It is not clear, however, that moving up to a score of 30 will bring out city work crews in less than 10 years. Knowing what I know, I wouldn’t bet on it.

The scoring system exists because in a lawsuit settlement 10 years ago, the city agreed to spend $1.4 billion over 30 years to repair damaged sidewalks and other infrastructure failures that impede the mobility of people with disabilities.

But there’s a backlog. A huge backlog, in the thousands. At my request, the city disclosed on Friday that it’s receiving about twice as many new disability-access repair requests each year as it’s addressing. In addition, the backlog for disability access requests and from residents applying for a sidewalk repair rebate program stands at roughly 30,000, with about 600 repairs being made each year.

As I said in a previous column, L.A. might indeed be all buttoned up by the ‘28 Olympics, but that would be 3028, not 2028.

Cracked sidewalks, to be clear, are but a symptom of a deeper, decades-long breakdown at City Hall. Basic services have been sacrificed to pay for employee compensation and pension costs the city can’t afford, with homeless services adding to the budget crisis.

By the way, I heard from one reader in response to my suggestion last week that if you can’t wait 10 years or more for the city to fix a broken sidewalk, you can apply to the rebate program, which will cover a portion of repairs. Don’t bother, said Lori Lerner Gray, who owns a house in Silver Lake and applied two years ago, but finally gave up.

“There is a massive waiting list and it’s a very complicated procedure just to try to get on it, let alone speak with anyone to help,” Gray said. “Once you finally get into the program, it’s impossible to proceed because of permits, engineering reports and finally you are required to bring the entire area to ADA compliance on your own dime.”

She said she was told she’d have to pay to relocate a utility pole.

And sidewalks aren’t the only infrastructure problem, as other readers noted. The city is way behind on filling potholes, repaving streets, installing curb ramps, making park improvements and replacing broken lights. I recently wrote about all the blight around City Hall, including the graffiti-tagged monument and fountain that has been inoperable for most of the last 60 years.

Oren Hadar, a Mid-City resident who writes about housing and transportation on his The Future Is L.A. website, reported last year in a Times op-ed that city streets were falling apart because the city had switched from repaving entire roads to doing what it called “large asphalt repair.”

With the switch, the city avoided federal requirements to upgrade curb ramps on repaved streets, Hadar said. He told me that when he travels to other cities near or far, “I’m always jealous of everything. Sidewalks are in better shape or there are better bike lanes. … You could go to even Santa Monica or Culver City. You don’t have to go far to see infrastructure that’s better.”

Other major cities have had formal infrastructure plans for years, while L.A. has ducked and dithered. Finally, earlier this month, Mayor Karen Bass introduced the city’s long-awaited CIP (capital infrastructure program), and offered a brutal assessment of what went wrong.

“For too long,” she said in the executive summary, “information has been scattered across departments, buried in lengthy reports and budgets, and difficult to fully understand. These challenges have had real consequences, contributing to decades of underinvestment in our built environment.”

The summary reads like an indictment of City Hall leadership and the manner in which public spaces have deteriorated. With Bass running for reelection, voters have to decide whether her role in those failures is grounds for dismissal, or her campaign-season pitch for a new day should help earn her a second term.

The report, with backing by members of the City Council, cited “fragmented systems and data silos,” “no shared vision across city departments,” “growing maintenance deferrals,” “slow, inefficient capital planning,” no “project intake standards,” “highly decentralized and uncoordinated grants,” “resource planning and staffing misalignment,” and “opaque capital planning process.”

Way to go, team.

You could take many of those same critiques and apply them to the haphazard way in which city and county leaders have addressed homelessness.

However, the city’s infrastructure plan does offer a framework for assessing the damage and prioritizing projects, and using charter reform to create a public works director position with greater authority. None of this will happen quickly, and given the budget crunch, you might be wondering how any of this would be paid for.

The suggestions in the report include bonds, a parcel tax, grants, fees on tickets to concerts and sporting events, fees on taxi and rideshare trips, and much, much more. None of this will be popular, especially if the public is unconvinced that city leaders can be trusted with more money.

Urban planner Deborah Murphy, chair of the city’s pedestrian advisory committee, noted that L.A. has gotten grants or state funding in the past for specific projects and then, because of staffing shortages or other stumbles, failed to hold up its end of the deal.

“It kind of ruins our reputation for getting future money,” Murphy said.

Jessica Meaney, executive director of Investing in Place and a longtime advocate for the infrastructure plan, is thrilled that the city has finally taken this step.

“But the key question is: who is actually in charge of making it happen?” she asked.

It’s critical, Meaney suggested, for city leaders to push for charter reform that puts infrastructure authority under a newly empowered public works director. If the city gets this right, she said, implementation of the infrastructure plan “could finally show Angelenos the true scale of deferred maintenance, make trade-offs visible, and create a road map for better sidewalks, streets, parks, and accessibility.”

If the current fragmented authority remains in place, Meaney said, the headline would be:

“No one is in charge of your sidewalk and City Hall is determined to keep it that way.”

steve.lopez@latimes.com

Source link

Quayle Comment Made for ‘Fruitful’ Week

TV or not TV. . . .

THAT’S ENTERTAINMENT: TV has rarely equaled the event-style entertainment of last week–Johnny Carson’s retirement from “The Tonight Show” and the controversial birth on “Murphy Brown.”

With Vice President Dan Quayle objecting to Murphy Brown’s out-of-wedlock motherhood, there was genuine national involvement in both the sitcom and Carson’s final show, which predictably drew his biggest audience ever–55 million viewers.

And Quayle’s remarks inevitably linked both events, providing material for Carson on his farewell outing, not to mention fueling gags during the week for “Tonight” guest Robin Williams, as well as David Letterman on his follow-up show.

Carson thanked Quayle on his last program “for making my final week so fruitful.”

The comedian also said: “I have not really made any plans (for retirement). But the events of this last week have helped me make a decision. I am going to join the cast of ‘Murphy Brown’ and become a surrogate father.”

Programs such as Ted Koppel’s “Nightline” tried seriously to come to grips with the issues raised by Quayle in his comments about values.

And the Los Angeles station that carries “Murphy Brown,” KCBS Channel 2, reported that of the more than 10,000 viewers who paid 50 cents to cast a vote in a 900-number call-in poll about Quayle and the “Murphy Brown” birth, 62% agreed with the vice president that the show set a bad example.

But the comedians had a free-swinging field day. On the Thursday outing of “Tonight,” Williams zeroed in on the vice president: “He’s one taco short of a combination plate.”

Letterman, meanwhile, was relentless. On Wednesday night, his list of “Dan Quayle’s Top 10 Other Complaints About TV” included: “Too much liberal news coverage, too little golf and cartoons.” On Thursday night, he said that one of the Top 10 things Quayle likes about TV is “Matlock” because it proves the judicial system is working.

With all the fuss, some observers noted that CBS will rerun the “Murphy Brown” birth on Sept. 7, Labor Day, and wondered whether the topical series might incorporate the controversy as it moves into the new fall season of an election year.

Williams, by the way, also had a “Tonight Show” observation about billionaire Ross Perot, a potential presidential candidate: “Well, you know he’s not going to write a bad check.”

The comedian also had some thoughts about Carson’s future: “You could run with Gorbachev. He doesn’t have a green card, but what the hell.”

In any case, it’s doubtful that Carson ever had better back-to-back shows than his two final broadcasts. The raucous, brilliant Thursday program with Williams and Bette Midler was a perfect prelude to the quiet, classy exit of the comedian on Friday.

And not only did Carson’s farewell attract 62% of the audience in 25 major cities, his lead-in also gave the Letterman show its highest ratings ever for those markets–with an amazing 43% share of the viewers.

In addition, while Carson’s share of the Los Angeles audience was likewise amazing at 72%, he also attracted a mind-boggling 77% of the television viewers in Portland, Ore.

Exit laughing–except for a touching monologue by Letterman on his show following Carson’s finale. Abandoning his wise-guy persona–well, for a few moments anyway–Letterman delivered a straight tribute, crediting the success of his show to the fact that it followed Carson.

In great part, true, especially at first. Letterman, however, has been a giant talent and an influential shaper of the television medium himself. But his salute was a fine gesture, acknowledging that somebody has to open the door for you.

SECOND BANANAS: Former TV sidekicks such as Ed McMahon, who was with Carson from the beginning on “Tonight,” have done quite well for themselves.

McMahon, of course, has “Star Search.” Regis Philbin, who used to play second fiddle to Joey Bishop on his late-night series, has a successful talk show. And Hugh Downs, who was Jack Paar’s sidekick on “Tonight” in the pre-Carson days, is co-host of “20/20” with Barbara Walters.

ACTOR: All the obits of Robert Reed naturally focused on his role as the father in “The Brady Bunch.” But that’s not how I remember him, because “The Brady Bunch” was not part of my life. For me, he will always be the young, dedicated attorney who co-starred with E. G. Marshall in the fine CBS series “The Defenders.” Reed was an earnest, convincing performer.

RETURN ENGAGEMENT: Fans of Hal Linden, who played the title role in the cop comedy “Barney Miller,” may want to take a look at his new one-hour series, “Jack’s Place,” which debuts tonight on ABC and finds him as the host and owner of “an intimate neighborhood cabaret.” Comedy writers, by the way, would do well to study the refinement, wit and elegance of “Barney Miller” to learn what the craft is really all about.

BASES LOADED: Well, of course Fox’s Los Angeles station, KTTV Channel 11, unloaded the Dodgers. Fox is building a national network, and you can’t have baseball games repeatedly preempting your regular series in the country’s second-biggest TV market, thus killing your ratings.

PADDED CELL: NBC is boasting about winning the May sweeps. Yeah, well, great. It won in large part because of the big finales of series that are leaving the network: “The Cosby Show,” “Night Court,” “Matlock” and “The Golden Girls.” Sweeps help to set ad rates for local stations, so the lunacy of fixing prices based on shows that won’t be there anymore is straight out of Kafka.

BULLETIN BOARD: If you haven’t yet caught “Swimming to Cambodia,” with Spalding Gray, it’s on KCET Channel 28’s “Movie City Showcase” Saturday night at 9.

BEING THERE: “On Ork, if someone wants to be president, we just say, ‘Sure, go ahead. It’s cool.’ “–Mork (Robin Williams) in “Mork and Mindy.”

Say good night, Gracie. . . .

Source link

Doubts Cast on Girl’s Account of Iraqi Atrocities in Kuwait

A teen-ager who shocked a congressional committee with her accounts of Iraqi atrocities in Kuwait was revealed Monday to be the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States–a fact concealed when she appeared at the late 1990 hearing, conducted as a vote loomed on America’s use of force in the Gulf.

Confirming an opinion article in Monday’s New York Times, California Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Burlingame) said Monday he knew that the 15-year-old girl, publicly identified only as Nayirah, was, in fact, the daughter of Kuwaiti envoy Sheik Saud al Nasir al Sabah.

Her identity was kept secret at her father’s request, Lantos said, because Saud feared that other family members still in Kuwait could become victims of Iraqi reprisals.

The girl’s testimony before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, which Lantos chairs, had a major impact on lawmakers sharply divided over authorizing President Bush to use force to liberate Kuwait.

Appearing before Lantos’ panel Oct. 10, 1990, the girl testified that she had recently escaped from Kuwait, where she had seen Iraqi soldiers storm into Al Adnan hospital and remove 15 babies from their incubators, leaving them “on the cold floor to die.”

Her account, which was similar to atrocity reports provided by a Kuwaiti doctor and other medical personnel, was later cited by several lawmakers in the speeches they gave in support of their decision to authorize the use of force against Iraq.

The testimony was later called into question, however, by Amnesty International and other human rights groups. After an Amnesty International investigation in Kuwait in April of the following year, an Amnesty spokesman said: “We became convinced . . . that the story about babies dying in this way did not happen on the scale that was initially reported, if, indeed, it happened at all.”

While Lantos knew the girl’s identity at the time of her testimony before his panel, other Congress members, including the Republican co-chairman of the caucus, Rep. John E. Porter of Illinois, said they did not.

Both congressmen defended the decision to have her testify and heatedly denied the suggestion, implicit in the New York Times opinion page piece by Harper’s magazine publisher John R. MacArthur, that lawmakers may have been duped into voting to go to war against Iraq by artful propaganda.

Times staff writers William Eaton and Don Shannon contributed to this report.

Source link

Obama: Why was ‘God’ taken out of platform in the first place?

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa might have heard two-thirds of delegates in the Time Warner Cable Arena approve changes to the Democratic Party platform early in the proceedings Wednesday night. But some delegates who were on the floor weren’t so sure he got the count right.

“I think it failed,” said Don Kershner, a delegate from Boise who said it sounded to him — sitting in the opposite end of the arena from the speaker’s platform — that at least 50% of delegates opposed the changes. Kershner was one of the only delegates from Idaho in the arena when the changes were made — itself a problem, he said. But he said he thought the party should have left well enough alone.

“They shouldn’t have messed with it,” said Kershner, wearing a white cowboy hat supporting the Boise State Broncos. “It’s clearly a dividing subject. We don’t want to drive a wedge into the party.”

PHOTOS: Scenes from the DNC

The drama occurred in the first moments of the convention proceedings Wednesday night, when Democratic officials reinserted language back into the official platform invoking God and affirming the role of Jerusalem as the Israeli capital.

Both passages had been in the 2008 version of the Democratic platform, but were removed in the drafting of this year’s edition.

President Obama personally had a hand in getting the language reinstated.

A Democratic official says the president was unhappy about the platform changes when he heard about them.

He told his staff to convey his opposition right away, which set the wheels in motion to reinstate.

On the “God” part, the official said, his response to hearing it was, “Why was it changed in the first place?”

But putting the passages back in the platform — a move Democratic officials appeared to think would go smoothly — caused loud objections in the convention hall.

Terri Holland was one of the people who voted against the amendments introduced Wednesday night. The New Mexico delegate from Albuquerque said she thought that Democrats had made the changes “to kow-tow to the religious right,” something the party should never do.

“I don’t think it has a business in anybody’s platform,” she said, about the part of the amendment that referred to giving “everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.”

Holland agreed that the first two votes Villaraigosa took did not get two-thirds approval. By the third time around, though, she said that her fellow “no” voters had given up the fight.

PHOTOS: Protests of the DNC

She and fellow delegate Richard Cooley said the proceedings were haphazard, and that the platform should have taken a paper ballot vote. Neither were even aware the changes would be made until Villaraigosa got up on the podium and started speaking.

“We’re Democrats, we love that stuff,” Holland said, about paper ballots.

Cooley added that Democrats had learned the importance of proper vote-taking in the Bush-Gore election in 2000. They shouldn’t take any vote for granted, he said, especially on such a divisive issue.

“We all have our own God,” he said.

Still, some delegates, including Charu Khopkar, a California delegate from Long Beach, said they thought Villaraigosa got the count right. Khopkar said he admired Villaraigosa for taking the time to ask three times for a vote, even if it’s not an issue that he cares deeply about one way or another.

“Myself, I am not a believer,” he said. “But I think it’s a perfectly appropriate part of the platform.”

Follow Politics Now on Twitter and Facebook

alana.semuels@latimes.com

Twitter: @AlanaSemuels

christi.parsons@latimes.com



Source link

Latin American nationals deported by the U.S. to Congo face an uncertain future

It’s an existence that Congo’s president has described as “living the Congolese dream.” For the 15 Latin Americans deported to the African nation under the Trump administration’s widely criticized crackdown on migrants, it feels more like a nightmare.

The Associated Press spoke with one, a 29-year old Colombian woman who confirmed what people deported to other African nations have described: A shackled deportation despite a U.S. immigration judge’s protection order. Confinement in a hotel with supervised outings.

And an impossible choice: Return to a home country with the risk of persecution or stay in Congo, a country the Colombian woman had never heard of before she arrived.

“They treat us like we’re children,” she said as their three-month Congolese visas near an end, with no plan in sight.

“What would one do in a completely unknown place, without a place to live and without knowing what to do?” she added, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals.

It was not immediately clear what a new U.S. court ruling, saying the U.S. likely broke the law by deporting a fellow Colombian to Congo, will mean for her.

A United Nations-affiliated group plays a central role

In her interview from the hotel in Congo’s capital, Kinshasa, where she and other deportees are held, the woman gave new details about the central role that a United Nations-affiliated body, the International Organization for Migration, is playing.

She said deportees are allowed to leave the hotel about once a week and only accompanied by IOM staff. When they shop at a supermarket or withdraw money they are quickly ushered back to their vehicle, with IOM staff never out of sight.

“They choose where we go and what we buy,” she said.

At the hotel, she said, IOM staff have organized activities like painting, music and volleyball but many deportees have stopped participating, bored with the routine. She goes for meals and remains in her room otherwise, making late-night calls to her 10-year-old daughter in Colombia and worrying when she will see her again.

Most striking is the role IOM staff are playing in presenting deportees with their possible fates.

They have offered the woman two paths: Return to Colombia, where a U.S. judge has ruled she cannot safely be sent back, while receiving IOM “protection and assistance,” or remain in Congo with no support.

“They are given impossible choices,” said Alma David, the woman’s U.S.-based attorney. “By deporting them to a third country with no opportunity to contest being sent there, the U.S. not only violated their due process rights but our own immigration laws and our obligations under international treaties.”

Congo is one of at least eight African countries that have made deals with the Trump administration to facilitate deportations of third-country nationals, which legal experts say are effectively a legal loophole for the U.S. Most deportees had received legal orders of protection from U.S. judges shielding them against being returned to their home countries, lawyers said.

The AP has interviewed others sent to African nations who were forced to make risky decisions, such as a gay Moroccan asylum-seeker deported to Cameroon, a country where homosexuality is illegal.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security did not respond to questions about the Colombian woman’s case, but it has asserted that third-country deportation agreements “ensure due process under the U.S. Constitution.” The Trump administration says the agreements are needed to “remove criminal illegal aliens” whose country of origin will not take them back.

Details of Congo’s deal with U.S. are unclear

The details of Congo’s deal with the Trump administration are not clear. Other countries have received millions of dollars to participate.

Earlier this month, Congolese President Félix Tshisekedi called the agreement an “act of goodwill between partners,” with no financial compensation. It comes as Washington has ramped up pressure on neighboring Rwanda over its support for the M23 rebel group that has seized cities in eastern Congo — a dynamic some analysts say may explain Kinshasa’s willingness to take deportees.

“We agreed to do so as a friendly gesture, simply because it was what the Americans wanted,” Tshisekedi said, adding that the migrants are free to leave Congo at any time.

“We understand that psychologically they must be unsettled because, at first, they dreamed of living the American dream, and now they are living the Congolese dream — in a country they probably did not know and may never even have noticed on a map of the world,” Tshisekedi said.

Congolese human rights groups have called it a violation of international refugee law. The Congo-based Institute for Human Rights Research described the situation as “arbitrary detention by proxy for the United States.”

The current U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement policy says if a government has made blanket diplomatic assurances that it won’t persecute people who are deported, no further process is required for deportation, not even giving deportees notice where they are being sent, said David, the attorney.

“When they told me they were going to deport me, I almost fainted,” the Colombian woman said. She was told about Congo the day before the flight.

She was detained at a routine check-in with ICE

She said she left Colombia in 2024, following threats from armed groups and abuse by a former partner who worked for the government.

She went to Mexico, where she waited for a border appointment booked with the U.S. government. When she presented herself at an Arizona port of entry in September 2024, immigration officials determined she had a credible fear of persecution, clearing her to apply for asylum, but kept her in ICE detention.

“You spend a year and a half locked up, living the same day over and over again. You see fights, punishments where people are locked in cells for many hours. You lose your privacy even to use the bathroom,” she said.

Some officers made racist remarks. “They made derogatory comments toward us as migrants, shouted at us all the time and sometimes denied basic things like showers as punishment,” she said.

In May 2025, a federal judge granted her protection under the U.N. Convention Against Torture, ruling she could not be safely returned to Colombia, according to court documents seen by the AP.

She filed a habeas corpus petition and won her release in February. She moved to Texas and was required to wear a GPS monitoring device, but at her first check-in appointment with ICE, she was detained again.

“All they told me was that I was under detention, as they had found a third country for me,” she said.

Less than three weeks later, she was put on a plane to Congo. She and the other deportees arrived on April 17 after a nearly 24-hour charter flight during which their hands and feet were restrained.

She doesn’t feel safe in Congo

Now they stay at a hotel near Kinshasa’s airport, in tidy white bungalows. Congo’s government covers the cost, the IOM said. It was not clear whether that would last after the deportees’ visas run out.

The hotel gates are locked according to one of the deportees lawyers. The Colombian woman also said security personnel do not let them leave on their own.

They were told they could apply for asylum, an option no one has chosen. “I don’t feel safe in Congo,” the woman said.

An IOM spokesperson said the organization has provided her with humanitarian assistance based on an assessment of her vulnerability. It includes “protection interventions, referrals, rights safeguarding and promotion of migrants’ overall well-being,” with no details.

The IOM also may offer “assisted voluntary return” — covering documents, flights, transit and temporary housing on arrival — with migrants’ consent.

The IOM said it plays no role in determining who is deported and reserves the right to withdraw its assistance for deportees if “minimum protection standards” aren’t met.

The Colombian woman remains in limbo, anxious. She said the food “has made us very sick,” with stomach ailments ongoing.

Local languages, like French and Lingala, are as foreign as her surroundings.

“The worst part is having to go through all of that without having committed any crime, simply for going to another country to ask for safety and protection.”

Banchereau writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Texas high court rejects removal of Democratic lawmakers who led quorum break over redistricting

The Texas Supreme Court on Friday refused to declare that Democratic lawmakers who briefly fled the state in 2025 to block a vote on new congressional voting maps pushed by President Trump had vacated their office.

The all-Republican court dealt a blow to Gov. Greg Abbott and state Republicans in their efforts to severely punish the more than 50 Democrats who bolted for New York, Illinois and Massachusetts in a bid to stop a vote on the maps during a special session. State Republicans had sought their arrest and threatened fines to bring them back to the state Capitol.

Abbott had argued in a lawsuit filed directly to the state’s highest civil court that state Rep. Gene Wu, the leader of the House Democratic caucus, and others had effectively abandoned their office.

Wu had argued that he was not abandoning his office in the quorum break, but was exercising a right to dissent.

In denying Abbott’s request, the court opinion written by Justice James Blacklock noted that the Republican-majority Legislature had adequately resolved the problem itself through measures such as fines against the missing lawmakers, and that they eventually returned on their own within a few weeks.

“In the end, a quorum was restored in two weeks’ time, without judicial intervention, by the interplay of political and practical forces,” Blacklock wrote.

“Courts have uniformly recognized that it is not their role to resolve disputes between the other two branches that those branches can resolve for themselves,” the opinion said.

If the issue rises again and the Legislature cannot effectively compel lawmakers to return, the court may someday consider whether the courts should step in, the opinion said.

“When Greg Abbott threatened to arrest and expel us for denying him a quorum, we told him he should ‘come and take it.’ He tried!” Wu said in a statement Friday. “Abbott was wrong, weak, and after all his bluster, he couldn’t come and take a damn thing.”

Wu and the other lawmakers eventually returned to Texas, and the new map was passed and signed into law by Abbott.

Wu had argued that because he had returned to the Capitol and the map was eventually signed into law, there was no longer any reason for the court to weigh in.

“Their return is robust proof that they never intended to abandon their offices,” Wu argued in legal briefs. “Despite the overheated rhetoric, this quorum break was always understood to be temporary.”

The Texas walkout intensified into a high-stakes national drama as Trump urged Texas and other GOP-controlled states to redraw their congressional districts to help Republicans maintain control of the U.S. House. The Texas map effort set off a wave of similar efforts across several states as governors from both parties pledged to redraw maps with the goal of giving their political candidates a leg up in the 2026 midterm elections.

The state constitution requires that at least 100 of the 150 House members be present to conduct business, and the quorum break effectively shut down a special legislative session Abbott had called to address redistricting and other issues, including aid to communities hit by the devastating July Fourth floods that killed more than 100 people.

In 2021, the court ruled that the Texas Constitution enables the possibility of a quorum break but also allows for consequences to bring members back.

Last year’s Democratic walkout was the third since 2003, when lawmakers bolted to stop a vote on a redistricting bill. They did it again in 2021 over an elections bill. In both cases, they were temporary victories as Democrats eventually returned and the Republican majority in the Legislature ultimately passed both measures into law.

Source link

Immigration authorities detain former Kansas mayor who voted illegally

The former mayor of a conservative Kansas town was taken into custody by immigration authorities after acknowledging last year that he had voted in elections despite not being a U.S. citizen.

Joe Ceballos, who was born in Mexico and is a legal permanent U.S. resident, was detained Wednesday during a meeting at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office in Wichita, Kan., according to his attorney, Jess Hoeme. He said Ceballos now fears he could be deported.

The 55-year-old resigned as mayor of Coldwater in December while facing state charges over voting as a noncitizen. While seeking citizenship in 2025, Ceballos admitted during an interview that he had voted, not knowing that green card holders don’t qualify, Hoeme said.

Ceballos was charged with voting illegally but pleaded guilty in April to misdemeanors in a deal with the Kansas attorney general. His case has drawn attention from the Trump administration and inspired supporters in his community, some of whom held signs reading “We Support Mayor Joe” and “ICE Out” as Ceballos walked into the federal building in Wichita.

“Let Joe go!” the crowd yelled.

“Thinking what could happen — it’s just kind of crazy,” Ceballos told reporters. “Obviously nervous. I don’t know what’s going to happen. I don’t know where they’re going to take me and what I can and can’t do inside there.”

An email seeking comment from the Department of Homeland Security was not immediately returned.

Trump and other Republicans have been warning of the dangers of noncitizens voting in elections since the beginning of the 2024 presidential election. Research, even by Republican election officials, show the problem is rare.

This year, Trump has been pushing Republicans in Congress to pass the SAVE Act, which among other things would require documented proof of U.S. citizenship to register and vote.

The administration also has significantly upgraded a program within Homeland Security that checks citizenship. At least 25 states, most of them controlled by Republicans, have used that system to check their voter rolls.

Ceballos was brought to the U.S. from Mexico by family when he was 4 years old. Hoeme said lawyers would next try to get an immigration judge to release him on bond.

He said Ceballos, at age 18, was encouraged to register to vote on the spot during a school field trip to the Comanche County courthouse. Ceballos has previously said in interviews with reporters that he voted for Republicans.

He was twice elected mayor of Coldwater, population 700, and also served on the city council. Ceballos won a new term in November but resigned after state Atty. Gen. Kris Kobach charged him with voting without being qualified and election perjury.

Kobach’s office, however, reached a deal with Ceballos. He pleaded guilty to disorderly election conduct, which Hoeme described as a misdemeanor similar to disturbing the peace.

“He has not been convicted of any kind of voter fraud. It should not have impacted his immigration status,” Hoeme said. “The Trump administration and ICE have doubled down on nonsense that he is a criminal.”

Ceballos has been a popular figure in Coldwater, where an advertisement in the Western Star newspaper encouraged people to support him.

“He’s kind of got to live the American dream, to come from absolutely nothing and build up — I don’t know about wealth — but to build up a business and have a job and be a productive part of society,” longtime friend Ryan Swayze told Wichita station KAKE-TV.

White writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Democrat Rep. Steve Cohen ending campaign after redraw of his Memphis district

Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee on Friday announced that he is ending his bid for reelection, his career upended by the redistricting battles that are sweeping the country after last month’s Supreme Court decision.

Republicans in Tennessee this month enacted a new U.S. House map that carves up Cohen’s majority-Black district, reshaping it to the GOP’s advantage as part of President Trump’s strategy to hold on to a slim majority in the November midterm elections.

“I don’t want to quit. I’m not a quitter. But these districts were drawn to beat me,” Cohen told reporters in his Washington, D.C., office.

Cohen is challenging the state’s redistricting effort in court and said that he would reenter the race if that lawsuit succeeded in restoring his old congressional district.

He lamented that Tennessee would likely shift to an entirely Republican congressional delegation after the next election, warning that it could also leave the state out of the loop once Democrats are able to regain the White House.

Redistricting targeted Cohen’s district

Tennessee was the first state to pass new congressional districts after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that significantly weakened federal Voting Rights Act protections for minorities. But more Southern states could follow. Republicans in Louisiana, Alabama and South Carolina also have taken steps toward redistricting.

Cohen has represented his Memphis-based district for about two decades, among the last of the white Democrats representing the South. He has been a longtime member of the House Judiciary Committee and has focused on strengthening voting access and civil rights.

“It’s unique in America that an African American majority district has elected a white guy, and that we’ve got a great relationship, great amount of support,” said Cohen, who is also the first Jewish person to represent Tennessee in Congress.

He was facing a primary challenge from state lawmaker Justin Pearson, a Black Democrat who represents Memphis in the state’s General Assembly. Pearson has said he will continue his campaign in the state’s newly redrawn 9th Congressional District.

But Cohen predicted that it would be nearly impossible for Tennessee Democrats to win a seat in Congress with the new districts. He added there was a chance the redistricting effort could “backfire on the Republicans” but that would require an “unbelievable registration effort among Democrats” and a massive vote turnout effort.

Cohen vows to oppose Trump

Sitting in his congressional office with staff looking on, Cohen pointed to photos of Memphis and local projects that he had championed during his career and expressed worry that Memphis voters would no longer have a voice in Washington. He also recounted how he had worked with the state’s Republican leaders to win funding during the Biden administration for a larger bridge to cross the Mississippi River into Memphis.

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a statement that Cohen was “a powerful champion for civil rights” and that “the City of Memphis, the Congress and the nation are better because of Steve’s commitment to making a difference.”

Cohen said that the Republican’s redistricting effort was being done “for Donald Trump to get one more vote, he thinks, to stop them from being impeached.”

Still, he vowed to use his remaining time in Congress to try to mount opposition to Trump, calling the president “the greatest threat to democracy and to decorum and grace that we’ve ever seen.”

Like many lawmakers, Cohen has often attracted attention with colorful outbursts during congressional debates and hearings. During Trump’s first term, in 2019, Cohen brought a bucket of fried chicken to a House Judiciary Committee hearing at which then-Atty. Gen. William P. Barr was a no-show.

“The message is Attorney General Bill Barr is not brave enough to answer questions from a staff attorney and members of the Judiciary Committee,” he said in a statement at the time.

Groves writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Conditions at California immigrant detention centers worse under Trump

A new report by the California Department of Justice found that conditions at immigrant detention facilities in the state have worsened as surging arrests under the Trump administration’s mass deportation campaign led to overcrowding and insufficient medical care.

For the 175-page report, which was released Friday, California Justice Department staff, along with correctional and healthcare experts, toured all seven facilities that existed in 2025 (an eighth facility, the Central Valley Annex in McFarland, began receiving detainees in April). The team analyzed internal documents and detainee records, and interviewed detention staff and 194 detainees.

“This is the federal government paying for-profit, private companies to run these detention centers, and they are running these detention centers with inhumane, cruel, and unacceptable conditions, “ California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said at a news conference Friday.

Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Lauren Bis, in a statement, defended the treatment of those held at detainment centers.

“No lawbreakers in the history of human civilization have been treated better than illegal aliens in the United States,” she said.

Bis added, “This is the best healthcare many aliens have received in their entire lives. Meals are certified by dietitians. Ensuring the safety, security, and well-being of individuals in our custody is a top priority at ICE.”

The inspections were possible because California enacted a law during the first Trump administration requiring state oversight and public reports detailing the conditions of immigrant detention facilities. Bonta said California is the only state in the country with such a law.

Such detailed reports have taken on outsized significance as the Trump administration has whittled down the Department of Homeland Security’s own oversight mechanisms.

The agency said it would respond later to a request for comment.

Christopher Ferreira, a spokesperson for The Geo Group, said the company’s services are monitored by DHS to ensure compliance with federal detention standards and contract requirements regarding detainees. The company oversees four facilities in California, including the Adelanto ICE Processing Center north of San Bernardino.

“The support services GEO provides include around-the-clock access to medical care, in-person and virtual legal and family visitation, general and legal library access, translation services, dietitian-approved meals, religious and specialty diets, recreational amenities, and opportunities to practice their religious beliefs,” Ferreira said.

He added that of the company’s immigration facilities are independently accredited by the American Correctional Assn. and the National Commission on Correctional Health Care.

CoreCivic operates the California City Detention Facility north of Lancaster and Otay Mesa Detention Center in San Diego. Spokesperson Ryan Gustin said the company had not been provided a copy of the report or reviewed its findings.

“The safety, health and well-being of the individuals entrusted to our care is our top priority,” Gustin said. He added that the company’s ICE-contracted facilities are “subject to multiple layers of oversight by our government partners” and auditors.

The report notes that CoreCivic did not make requested documents available to investigators, including records on use of force at the California City facility.

“The decision to deny Cal DOJ access to these files was remarkable in light of the serious legal claims that have been made against the facility, which allege that staff routinely engage in abusive behavior and unreasonable use of force against detainees, including deploying pepper spray, hitting a detainee with riot shields and holding him down with their knees on his back, and aggressively pushing a detainee,” the report states.

According to the report, the detainee population in California grew 162%, from 2,300 to more than 6,000 detainees, between site visits in 2023 and those in 2025. Most detainees had no criminal history and were classified as low-security.

Collectively, the facilities have the capacity to hold up to nearly 8,200 detainees.

Six people have died in ICE custody in California since the start of 2025 — four at Adelanto and two at Imperial Regional Detention Facility. In all of the Adelanto cases, family members alleged that the facility’s medical response was inadequate, the report said.

Inspectors found that staffing failed to keep pace with the growing numbers of detainees, particularly at Adelanto and at California City, where they saw “crisis-level healthcare understaffing.”

At Mesa Verde ICE Processing Center in Bakersfield, the report says, “Medical care delays, including specialty care and referrals, were widespread and appeared to be caused by delays in approvals by ICE Health Service Corps and canceled or dropped referrals due to transfers between facilities.”

The intake process for new detainees, which includes a medical and mental health screening, is supposed to take place within 12 hours of their arrival. But detainees at several facilities reported waiting days or weeks before receiving their housing assignment and medical screening, the report says. While waiting, some slept on the floor without access to water.

In its statement, the Department of Homeland Security said detainees undergo medical, dental, and mental health intake screening within 12 hours of arriving at each detention facility, a full health assessment within 14 days of entering ICE custody or arrival at a facility, and access to medical appointments and 24-hour emergency care.

Gustin, the CoreCivic spokesperson, said its facilities adhere to detention standards on staffing and medical care. Emergency care is available 24 hours a day, he said, and the facilities work closely with local hospitals and providers for specialized care.

Ferreira, the Geo Group spokesperson, said detainees have access to teams of medical professionals and off-site specialists, imaging facilities and emergency services.

At the Adelanto facility, detainees said water coolers remained empty for hours. Justice Department staff saw murky drinking water come out of the tap in the women’s housing unit.

At the Golden State Annex in McFarland and at Mesa Verde, detainees said they spent at least $50 per week on commissary items so they wouldn’t go hungry. Across most facilities, detainees reported undercooked food, a lack of dietary or allergy accommodations and irregular mealtimes.

Basic necessities are also an issue, according to the report. At the California City facility, detainees said they got so cold that they cut the ends off socks to make improvised sleeves and covered the air vents in their cells with sheets of paper.

According to the report, Otay Mesa is the only detention center in California with a policy requiring that detainees be strip searched after being visited by anyone other than their attorney. Detained women recounted being told strip in front of male officers, even when menstruating, the report said.

Gustin said CoreCivic follows federal detention standards regarding searches of detainees.

The report did highlight some improvements, including at the Imperial Regional Detention Facility in Calexico, which inspectors said appeared better staffed with medical and mental health care providers compared to their 2023 visit. Still, the review “identified concerns regarding the facility’s management of detainees with severe mental health issues, including two detainees who experienced extended stays in restrictive housing of over 200 days.”

Emily Lawhead, a spokesperson for Management & Training Corp., which oversees the Imperial facility, said the company takes the report seriously. She noted that the report also highlights prompt responses to sick-call requests, meaningful access to programming and recreation and expanded attorney access through 36 private phone booths.

But Lawhead said the company will examine the concerns raised in the report.

“If our review identifies gaps, delays, or missed standards, we will address them,” she said.

The state law requiring the detention facility inspections expires next year. A bill by state Sen. María Elena Durazo (D-Los Angeles) would make the inspections permanent. Another state bill, by Sen. Steve Padilla (D-San Diego), would prevent the excessive markup of products sold at detention center commissaries.

Source link

The Steyer campaign pays influencers. Their posts don’t always make that clear

In recent weeks, several social media influencers have popped up in online feeds touting the California gubernatorial campaign of billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer.

Some complain about the price of gasoline. Others mention environmental concerns. One cites her newfound sobriety as evidence that people can change — a nod to Steyer’s self-proclaimed metamorphosis from hedge fund titan to scourge of big corporations.

“I did not expect the most progressive governor candidate to be a billionaire, but look at the policies you guys,” said one content creator on TikTok with the user name Jaz R. “Hear me out. I know Tom Steyer is a billionaire, but he also is for the people.”

The posts include direct-to-the-camera appeals, with personal details interwoven into messages of support for Steyer. An influencer goes for a stroll as onscreen text touts Steyer’s policies. Some seek to convey authenticity, if occasionally ham-fistedly; one influencer mispronounces Steyer’s last name.

What they do not include is a disclosure that their creators were paid by the Steyer campaign to produce the videos, according to a complaint filed this week with California’s Fair Political Practices Commission and a Times review of the posts.

The complaint alleges that the Steyer campaign failed to notify the influencers it hired of their obligation to inform their audience when their posts have been sponsored by the campaign.

California passed a law in 2023 requiring that influencers disclose if they have been paid to create promotional content for or against a candidate or ballot measure, one of the few jurisdictions in the country with such a requirement. There is no such requirement at the federal level.

“Every time there’s a new technology, you have to create legislation that requires them to disclose,” said state Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Orange), who sponsored the bill.

Violating the law doesn’t carry criminal, civil or administrative penalties, but the FPPC can take influencers who break the law to court and ask a judge to force them to comply.

The complaint was filed by two California women — political influencers themselves — who said they noticed a number of new accounts that suddenly started posting similar-sounding videos promoting Steyer earlier this month.

“They had the exact same language, they had the same talking points,” said Beatrice Gomberg, who worked with Kaitlyn Hennessy in their digital sleuthing efforts.

The FPPC did not comment on the complaint.

Steyer’s campaign appears to have relied on paid influencers more than any candidate for governor, according to the most recent campaign finance filings.

That spending represents only a small fraction of the massive campaign war chest Steyer has seeded with nearly $180 million of his own money. But the complaint highlights the growing degree to which political candidates have come to seek out the authenticity that social media influencers seem to offer.

Steyer campaign spokesperson Kevin Liao said the campaign had properly followed the rules in hiring influencers and that the campaign is “confident” that Gomberg and Hennessy’s complaint is “baseless.”

“Creators make their living generating content. The campaign believes in compensating people for their time and work product and has paid creators to generate content,” Liao said in a statement. “Payments for creator content are disclosed in campaign finance reports, and we notify creators we directly work with of their disclosure requirements.”

While many of the new Steyer influencers have few followers, Steyer’s campaign disclosed in its most recent campaign finance report that it had paid thousands of dollars to numerous social media influencers with massive audiences, the Sacramento Bee reported.

Several of the videos produced by these popular social media personalities also failed to disclose that they had been paid by the campaign, according to the complaint and The Times’ review of the content.

But even accounts with few followers can still have a big impact if they are producing a steady stream of content supporting Steyer, said veteran California political strategist Mike Madrid.

“What they’re trying to do is trip the algorithm,” he said. “It looks like it has a bigger audience than it really does. It’s taking the concept of astroturfing into the digital age.”

Gomberg and Hennessy said they became friends after meeting at an April campaign event for Xavier Becerra, Steyer’s chief Democratic rival in the race, who holds a narrow advantage over Steyer in several recent political polls.

The pair have been prolific social media supporters of Becerra’s campaign ever since, though they insist they are not being paid for their efforts.

They said they discovered that many of the new pro-Steyer accounts seemed to be run by influencers — mostly women — who had previously created different social media accounts to hawk other products.

One of the pro-Steyer influencers had an online portfolio listing numerous clients, including the Steyer campaign and a gummy designed to boost arousal, according to the complaint and the Times review of the publicly accessible website.

The pair said they stumbled on an advertisement placed by a vendor for the campaign on a platform used by creators to find work. The advertisement indicated that creators would be paid $10 for each post, with bonuses for posts that amassed large viewership.

The vendor who posted the ad did not respond to a request for comment.

The advertisement has since been updated to say that it pays $1,000 per month and that creators will have to disclose that it is paid content.

As Gomberg and Hennessy dug deeper, they determined that some of the influencers promoting a candidate for governor weren’t even based in California.

A TikTok account using the handle jess.votes, for example, appears to be connected to a woman registered to vote in Florida. Other accounts were connected to women who indicated elsewhere that they were based in Pennsylvania, Missouri and Michigan.

Several influencers who created seemingly paid content promoting Steyer did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Times.

The brouhaha over paid social media content is just the latest instance of the growing political impact of online creators.

Eric Swalwell’s campaign for governor — and congressional career — came to an end after multiple women accused him of sexual assault. A pair of influencers had publicly raised concerns about Swalwell’s behavior and helped connect victims with journalists who produced highly detailed reports of the allegations.

The California law requires influencers to disclose in a political post’s audio or text that it was sponsored and who paid for it.

The onus is on the creators to make the disclosure, but campaigns are required to tell them that they must do so. Despite passage of the law, the issue has so far remained largely under the radar.

“I have dozens of candidates and campaigns and I have not heard this issue come up one time,” said a campaign finance lawyer who requested anonymity because they represent numerous candidates with active campaigns.

Gomberg and Hennessy said that they were driven to call attention to potential violations of the disclosure requirements because of their concern about the corrosive influence such paid content could have if left unchecked.

“You have people who have trust in these creators,” Hennessy said. “You have a responsibility to your audience.”



Source link

Supreme Court turns away Virginia Democrats seeking to reinstate new voting map

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday turned down an appeal from Virginia Democrats whose new voter-approved state election map was canceled by the state’s Supreme Court.

The justices made no comment, and the legal outcome came as no surprise.

The U.S. Supreme Court has no authority to review or reverse rulings by state judges interpreting their state’s constitution — unless the decision turned on federal law or the U.S. Constitution.

But the Virginia ruling came as a political shock, particularly after 3 million voters had cast ballots and narrowly approved a new election map that would favor Democrats in 10 of its 11 congressional districts.

That would have represented an increase of four seats for Democrats in the House of Representatives.

Even worse for Democrats, the court setback in Virginia came a week after the Supreme Court’s ruling in a Louisiana case had bolstered Republicans.

In a 6-3 decision, the justices reinterpreted the Voting Rights Act and freed Republican-controlled states in the South to dismantle districts that were drawn to favor Black Democrats.

In the two weeks since then, the GOP has flipped seven districts in Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana and Florida.

The Virginia Supreme Court decision pointed to a procedural flaw which turned on the definition of an “election.”

To amend the state Constitution, Virginia lawmakers must adopt the proposal twice — once before a “general election” and a second time after the election. It is then submitted to the voters.

Last fall, Democrats proposed to amend the state Constitution to permit a mid-decade redistricting.

However, by a 4-3 vote, the state justices said the General Assembly flubbed the first approval because it took place on Oct. 31 of last year, just five days before the election.

By then, they said, about 40% of the voters had cast early ballots.

In defense of the Legislature, the state’s attorneys said the proposed amendment was approved before election day, which complies with the state Constitution.

But the majority explained “the noun ‘election’ must be distinguished from the noun phrase ‘election day’.”

It reasoned that because early voters had already cast ballots before the constitutional amendment was first adopted, the proposal was not approved before the election.

The dissenters said the election took place on “election day” and the proposal had been adopted prior to that time.

The state’s lawyers adopted that view in their appeal and argued that under federal law, the election takes place on election day.
But the Supreme Court turned away the appeal with no comment.

The result is that a state amendment that won approval twice before both houses of the Legislature and in a statewide vote was judged to have failed.

The state says it will use the current map, which had elected Democrats to the House in six districts and Republicans in five.

Source link