POLITICS

WASHINGTON — It took Democrats nearly a year to respond with a unified message to President Trump’s signature policy initiative, harnessing national outrage over the administration’s immigration enforcement tactics in Minnesota this week to leverage government funding and demand change.

Yet divisions persist as the party barrels toward midterm elections and, a year from now, the start of primary season. And Gavin Newsom stands right in the middle of them.

Staking the middle ground

A calibrated position by the California governor has placed him to the right of the party’s progressive base that has opposed the very existence of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for years — well before Republican lawmakers passed legislation doubling the agency’s budget, increasing its presence and visibility in American life.

Newsom has rejected calls for ICE to be abolished since the 2024 campaign, when Democrats saw clear alarms in public polling that showed President Biden and his vice president, Kamala Harris, on the back foot against Trump on immigration. To the contrary, Newsom has highlighted California’s cooperation with the agency, and his efforts to protect that relationship from progressive local lawmakers.

While Trump’s federalization of the California National Guard last summer was prompted, in part, by protests in Los Angeles against ICE raids across the city, the governor’s reaction focused more on the president’s alleged abuses of power than on the ICE raids themselves. To the extent he did comment on them, Newsom characterized their deployment as unnecessary and gratuitous, a political tool used to intimidate the population.

After the killing of U.S. citizen Renee Good, 37, by ICE officers earlier this month, and days before the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti, also 37 and a U.S. citizen, by Border Patrol agents last weekend, Newsom told conservative podcaster Ben Shapiro that his position against abolishing the agency had not changed. And he disassociated himself from a social media post by his office that characterized ICE’s conduct in Minneapolis as “state-sponsored terrorism.”

“California has cooperated with more ICE transfers probably than any other state in the country, and I have vetoed multiple pieces of legislation that have come from my Legislature to stop the ability for the state of California to do that,” Newsom told Shapiro.

The immigration enforcement agency received a massive influx of cash for detention facilities and recruitment last year with the passage of Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Republicans now hope to build on that law with even greater appropriations this year, providing ICE with more funding than most foreign militaries, including the armies of Iran, Turkey, Canada and Mexico.

“I disagreed when I think a candidate for president by the name of Harris said that in the last campaign,” Newsom added, of calls to abolish the agency. “I remember being on [MS NOW’s Chris Hayes’ show] hours later saying, ‘I think that’s a mistake.’ So, absolutely.”

A progressive rallying cry

It’s a position in stark contrast with potential 2028 Democratic hopefuls that could pose a challenge to Newsom’s presidential ambitions.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democratic lawmaker from New York said to be considering a bid, has referred to ICE as “a rogue agency that should not exist.” The agency “doesn’t deserve a dime” of federal dollars, she has said, “until they can prove they are honoring human rights.”

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont), also rumored to be considering a run for the nomination, has advocated explicitly for ICE to be replaced with a new entity, built from scratch, without the baggage of the Sept. 11–era agency.

“Frankly, we need to tear down the ICE agency and have a new federal agency to enforce immigration law under the Justice Department,” Khanna said this week.

After Pretti’s death, Newsom also called for a pause to any “new funding” for ICE. He did not call for a review of its existing, historic levels of funding.

“Suspend the LAWLESS mass deportation raids nationwide NOW — ICE is no longer just deporting dangerous criminals,” the governor wrote on X. “Send the border patrol back to the border. End the militarization of ICE.”

Showdown on Capitol Hill

Pretti’s death is already complicating efforts to avert another government shutdown in Washington, as Democrats — joined by some Republicans — view the episode as a tipping point in the debate over the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies.

Senate Democrats pledged this week to block funding for the Department of Homeland Security unless changes are made to ICE operations in Minnesota. And Democrats in the House are calling for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s departure as a condition in shutdown negotiations with the White House. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) threatened to pursue her impeachment if Trump doesn’t fire her first.

Both demands track with Newsom’s latest position. The California governor was harshly critical of Senate Democrats when, during the shutdown late last year, a core bloc voted with Republicans to reopen the government without achieving any meaningful concessions in their weeks-long fight over healthcare tax breaks.

The latest Democratic uproar over ICE tactics threatens a similarly broad spending package that also includes funding for the rest of the government, including the departments of Defense, Education, Health, Labor and Transportation.

“Senate Democrats have made clear we are ready to quickly advance the five appropriations bills separately from the DHS funding bill before the Jan. 30 deadline,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said this week.

“The responsibility to prevent a partial government shutdown,” he added, “is on [Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.)] and Senate Republicans.”

Times staff writer Ana Ceballos, in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Spencer Pratt knows you love to hate him. Now he wants to lead Los Angeles
The deep dive: Housing costs are crippling many Americans. Here’s how the two parties propose to fix that
The L.A. Times Special: How once-exiled filmmaker Brett Ratner staged a Hollywood comeback with ‘Melania’

A note to readers: I will be out on parental leave until April, but fear not, California Politics will be in capable hands. You’ll keep getting the latest each week from my distinguished colleagues.

I’ll see you all soon,
Michael Wilner

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

For just $95, the acquisitive President Trump could have a replica of the iconic “The Buck Stops Here” sign that sat atop President Truman’s Oval Office desk, gift-boxed from the Harry S. Truman Presidential Library and Museum Store. But this gewgaw isn’t gold; it’s wood. And yet that’s not the reason it wouldn’t be at home on Trump’s desktop.

Here’s why: As far as Trump is concerned, the buck never stops with him.

That’s never been more evident than this month, in the president’s fly-above-it-all attitude toward his administration’s armed occupation of Minneapolis. Ostensibly a campaign against immigrants who lack legal status, the occupation has (at this writing) killed two U.S. citizens exercising their 1st Amendment rights to protest the anti-constitutional brutality of federal agents.

Trump couldn’t even be bothered to postpone his black-tie White House screening of Amazon’s $75-million gift documentary of his wife, “Melania,” on Saturday, just hours after 37-year-old VA nurse Alex Pretti died and as Minneapolis seethed. When the president did interject, he mostly just escalated tensions. Again.

After the earlier killing of Renee Good, Trump posted to Minnesotans: “The day of reckoning and retribution is coming!” and deployed an additional 1,000 armed, masked agents for a total of 3,000. Further mayhem was widely predicted. And on Saturday, after at least two of those agents pumped 10 shots point-blank at Pretti while he was pinned down, Trump’s first reaction was this escalatory, blame-the-victim post over a photo: “This is the gunman’s gun, loaded (with two additional full magazines!), and ready to go.”

Got that? According to the president, Pretti was the gunman in what I and many other Americans saw as his murder by Trump’s militia. The buck, and the bullets, stopped with Pretti.

Trump continued to blame the victim for days, including on Tuesday in Iowa, by repeatedly contending (over the angry opposition of his pals in the gun lobby) that Pretti “shouldn’t have been carrying a gun.” It was a holstered handgun that Pretti legally owned and carried, which he never “brandished” as the feds claimed and which was taken from him before he was shot.

Not once in the year since he loosed this militant deportation campaign in U.S. cities has Trump openly questioned the lawless tactics. Since Pretti’s killing, the president hasn’t publicly upbraided his Department of Homeland Security or his most senior advisors — Stephen Miller, the White House architect of Trump’s anti-immigrant policies; Kristi Noem, his puppy-killing Homeland Security secretary; and Gregory Bovino, his cruelly performative (former) Border Patrol commander in Minneapolis (after Los Angeles, Chicago and New Orleans) — for their immediate and repeated slanders of Pretti as a “domestic terrorist” and “an assassin” who aimed to “massacre law enforcement.”

Those were all lies, as the world soon saw thanks to the courageous protesters on the scene documenting the agents’ lawlessness with cellphone cameras. And now, even some (few) Republicans in Congress are assailing Noem, Miller and Bovino, calling for their resignation, firing or, in Noem’s case, impeachment.

Enough, however, with the focus on Noem, Miller, Bovino or others of Trump’s “best.” It’s good that Republicans are finally rousing to object to administration actions. But they should quit cloaking their complaints in language that absolves the boss. These Republicans would have us believe that Trump is faultless, ill-served and misled by his advisors.

Among the foremost modelers of this behavior is Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who grew a bit of spine in the summer after he announced that he wouldn’t seek reelection. Yet he still blames everyone around Trump, not Trump himself.

What Noem has done in Minnesota “should be disqualifying,” Tillis told reporters Tuesday. “It’s making the president look bad.” Later, he ranted about both Noem and Miller, lamenting that immigration used to be Trump’s and Republicans’ best issue until that duo “destroyed it through their incompetence.” Last week, he blamed Miller for “getting the president in a difficult circumstance” over Greenland, as if it wasn’t Trump himself who insanely demanded that Denmark and NATO allies hand over the island protectorate to the United States — because it’s “psychologically important for me.”

This is Trump’s paramilitary force at Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol. These advisors are his hires at the White House and in the Cabinet. And these are his policies.

The president is consistently the arsonist who attempts to take credit for putting out his own fires (like last week’s conflagration at Davos over Greenland) when they get out of control. Which is to say, when poll after poll confirms both the policies’ and Trump’s growing unpopularity.

Forget that he won’t accept the buck: It still should stop with him.

As Noem insisted in a statement to Axios on Tuesday: “Everything I’ve done, I’ve done at the direction of the president and Stephen [Miller].”

She and Bovino, heretofore so fond of cosplaying in getups that scream “I’m tough,” are now wearing tire tracks. With Trump’s dispatch of border advisor Tom Homan to Minneapolis, they’ve essentially been designated as scapegoats for the tragedies in Minnesota. But not Miller: “The president loves Stephen,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told Axios.

Of course he does. Miller is Trump’s Mini-Me. Which brings us back to: Blame Trump.

The imperative to hold Trump accountable is why I’m cool to calls to impeach Noem. Democrats seeking her removal include House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York and former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and they’re joined by a few Republicans. It feels good to say it, and such calls are fine as a message of disgust, especially in a midterm election year. But Congress is Republican-controlled, remember, which is to say Trump-controlled.

For the same reason, Trump himself is insured — for now — against impeachment. But as he’s acknowledged, if Democrats take control after November, that would probably change. Forget that the Senate probably wouldn’t convict him, just as it declined to do twice after his impeachments in his first term. But at least, come 2027, he could be forced to take the buck.

Bluesky: @jackiecalmes
Threads: @jkcalmes
X: @jackiekcalmes

Although the two dominant political parties–Republican and Democratic–get most of the attention and their candidates win most offices, there are four other ballot-qualified parties in California: American Independent, Green, Libertarian, and Peace and Freedom. Buoyed by a surge in voter disaffection and disgust with the political status quo, the minor parties are fielding candidates in a number of major California races. Yet victory is likely to remain elusive: The combined voter registration of the four parties totals only 450,000. Most often, these parties enter races not so much to win as to force the discussion of certain issues that they feel might otherwise be ignored. Here is a look at the parties and the issues they stand for. All but the Green Party have entered candidates in the U.S. Senate races, and those candidates are also listed here. Candidates in other races are listed on Pages 6, 7 and 8.

AMERICAN INDEPENDENT:

Origins: Supporters of former Alabama Gov. George C. Wallace’s 1968 presidential bid formed this party. Today, it disavows the racism once associated with Wallace but promotes fiscal conservatism and a generally right-wing agenda. The party is loosely Loosely affiliated with the U.S. Taxpayers Party elsewhere in the nation. But it is not related, as some mistakenly believe, to businessman Ross Perot’s independent presidential candidacy.

Membership: 217,197 registered voters (1.54% of state’s total registration).

Issues: The party wants to reduce government spending across the board, including cuts in the military budget. It would terminate all foreign aid. American Independent candidates want to eliminate the federal income tax and the Internal Revenue Service. They would repeal many environmental and other government regulations and impose term limits for elected officials. They advocate removing the federal role in schools. They favor the death penalty and would outlaw abortion.

U.S. Senate candidates: Marketing consultant Paul Meeuwenberg for the two-year seat, Castroville businessman Jerome McCready for the six-year seat.

GREEN:

Origins: The newest of California’s alternative parties, the Greens were certified as an official party in January after a registration drive that targeted environmental rallies, anti-Gulf War marches and rock ‘n’ roll concerts. Members include environmentalists, feminists and peace activists, among others. Despite the party’s fledgling status, members have already won about a dozen nonpartisan local offices across the state. Sixteen Greens are running for seats in the Congress and the Legislature this fall , most of them in Southern California. Most members live in the San Francisco Bay Area The party is patterned after the European Green parties but there are no financial ties.

Membership: 95,116 registered voters (0.67% of total).

Issues: The Greens favor strong environmental protection, or “ecological wisdom.” The party would like to see deep defense cuts, with the “peace dividend” going to education and other domestic programs. The party favors abortion rights, nonviolence and community-based economics. It also advocates vegetarian meals in schools and jails.

U.S. Senate candidates: None.

PEACE AND FREEDOM:

Origins: The party grew out of the anti-war movement of the 1960s, first qualifying for the ballot in California in 1968. Party membership began to wane after the Vietnam War but it is making a small comeback as the party broadens its platform to include a variety of liberal and socialist issues. Still largely a California party.

Membership: 68,182 registered voters (0.48% of total).

Issues: The party promotes multiracial harmony and the righting of racial inequities as a prerequisite for bringing the national economy back to life. It advocates huge cuts in defense spending and the conversion of the nation’s defense industry to civilian business. The party also favors redistribution of the wealth, achieved through taxing the rich and raising the minimum wage.

U.S. Senate candidates: Gerald Horne, professor of history and chairman of the black studies department at UC Santa Barbara, running for the two-year seat. Genevieve Torres, a cancer researcher, is listed on the ballot as the party’s candidate for the six-year seat, but because of internal disputes, many in the party have distanced themselves from her campaign.

LIBERTARIAN:

Origins: On the ballot in all 50 states, the Libertarian Party was founded in 1971 in Colorado. It promotes a synthesis of social Darwinism, individualism and laissez-faire economics. The party is fielding 100 candidates in congressional and local races in California.

Membership: 66,994 registered voters (0.47% of total).

Issues: The Libertarian Party stands for a hands-off style of government and the defense of personal liberties. Libertarian candidates believe in putting a cap on federal spending, reducing defense spending and eliminating foreign aid. They would phase out federal subsidies to businesses and to state and local governments. They support a voucher system in schools and would eliminate the Department of Education, the Environmental Protection Agency and most government offices. Because they believe in limited government, Libertarian candidates advocate legalization of drugs, prostitution and gambling.

U.S. Senate candidates: Self-described entrepreneur and motivational speaker Richard Boddie for the two-year seat; computer programmer June Genis for the six-year term.

A Los Angeles County judge ruled Wednesday that a corruption case against L.A. City Councilman Curren Price can move forward to trial, ensuring the misconduct scandal will hang over the veteran politician’s final year in office.

L.A. County Superior Court Judge Shelly Torrealba determined that prosecutors had provided enough evidence to move forward on four counts of voting on matters in which Price had a conflict of interest, four counts of embezzlement and four counts of perjury.

Price, who is set to leave the City Council after reaching his term limit at the end of the year, declined to comment after the hearing.

The councilman, who has represented South L.A. for more than a decade, was charged in June 2023. Prosecutors allege Price repeatedly voted to approve sales of land to developers or funding for agencies who had done business with his wife, Del Richardson, and her consulting company. Some of the votes involved funding and grants for the L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the city housing authority.

Price, 75, is also accused of perjury for failing to include Richardson’s income on disclosure forms and embezzlement for including her on his city health insurance plan before they were legally married. He is due back in court in March, Torrealba said.

Richardson was named as a “suspect” in the district attorney’s office’s initial investigation in 2022, according to documents made public last year, but she was never charged with a crime. She has been among a group of Price’s supporters who have been in court for the past week. The two wore matching burgundy suits during Wednesday’s hearing.

Much of the weeklong proceeding centered around whether Price knew of potential conflicts of interest before casting votes, or intended to hide his financial stakes in them from the public. Delphi Smith, a former staffer for the councilman, and Price’s deputy chief of staff Maritza Alcaraz took the stand to explain the process they used to flag problematic council votes for Price and insisted they made their best efforts to highlight agenda items linked to vendors or agencies who had worked with Richardson.

“If the Councilman voted on something that was a potential conflict, he did so without knowing,” Alcaraz testified Wednesday.

L.A. County Deputy Dist. Atty. Casey Higgins, however, said Price is ultimately responsible for disclosing conflicts of interest and argued blaming his subordinates was not a defense to corruption charges.

“It’s not only hiding. It’s trying to create a wall around himself, to create this plausible deniability,” Higgins said. “It’s this ostrich with his head in the sand approach.”

Higgins said Alcaraz and Smith were “trying to jump in front of the bus” and that it was impossible to believe that Price had no knowledge of the conflicts. The dealings allegedly took place between 2019 and 2021 — after a 2019 Times investigation revealed he voted on decisions involving at least 10 companies in the same years they were listed as providing at least $10,000 in income to Richardson’s firm.

Price’s defense attorney, Michael Schafler, has argued there is no evidence that Price knew of the conflicts, and claimed payments to Richardson had no influence on Price’s voting decisions. All of the votes referenced in the criminal complaint passed with overwhelming support, and Price’s vote made no difference in the final result.

“There’s been no evidence presented that Mr. Price acted with any wrongful intent. No testimony from any witness … who said Mr. Price acted with willful intent,” Schafler said Wednesday. “I’ve never seen a public corruption case like that in my life.”

There were enormous sums of money on the line in each vote referenced in the criminal complaint. Richardson took in more than a half-million from October 2019 to June 2020 from the city housing authority before Price voted in favor of millions in grant funding for the agency, according to an amended complaint filed against Price last year.

Prosecutors also alleged Price wrote a motion to give $30 million to the L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Authority during a time frame when Richardson was paid upward of $200,000 by the agency.

After Torrealba’s ruling, Schafler said he was “disappointed” but thought the evidence presented over the past week revealed that “the prosecution’s case has a lot of gaps, a lot of holes, it’s based largely on speculation.”

Some of Price’s City Council colleagues have said Price’s alleged crimes were tantamount to paperwork errors, and should have been handled by the city’s Ethics Commission.

While questioning former employees of Price and Richardson, Higgins sought to paint a more nefarious picture. He repeatedly scrutinized the way that Price’s staff and a former employee of Del Richardson & Associates compiled a list of the firm’s projects that could represent conflicts and communicated about them.

Much of the conflict information was placed on a flash drive and given to Smith in person by Martisa Garcia, an employee of Richardson, Higgins said. Updates to the file were then made over the phone, and not discussed via e-mail, according to Higgins. When Smith and Alcaraz discussed votes in which Price might have to recuse himself, they did so on personal phones rather than city-issued devices, according to evidence Higgins put forth.

Higgins suggested Price’s staff was trying to hide the conflicts of interest.

“Was the thumb drive used to avoid public records requests?” Higgins asked Alcaraz, who curtly replied “No.”

Generally speaking, California Public Records Act requests for an elected official’s communications will only capture what is contained on government devices, not personal phones or e-mails. A spokeswoman for Price, Angelina Valenica, said there was no “intent to avoid PRA requirements” on the part of Price’s staff.

“The Councilmember was not involved in the handling, transport or storage of this information,” she said. “He relied on and trusted his staff to handle the matter appropriately and to seek guidance as necessary.”

While it’s unlikely Price will stand trial before his term runs out, the case could loom large over the race to replace him. A field of seven candidates is running for his council seat, including Price’s deputy chief of staff, Jose Ugarte, who has faced allegations that he failed to disclose consulting income that are similar to the basis of the perjury charges against his boss.

Chris Martin, a candidate and civil rights attorney with Black Lives Matter Los Angeles, said Wednesday that if the allegations are true, Price and his staff need to step down.

“It’s a serious breach of public trust. It’s important that we have leaders in the 9th District who will walk with integrity,” Martin said. “It also seems like he’s got a major issue with his staff enabling him. They should all resign.”

WASHINGTON — President Bush, in a surprise announcement, disclosed Friday that he will seek a $500-million increase in government funding next year for Head Start, a 25-year-old program intended to help disadvantaged youngsters prepare for elementary school.

Bush said the proposed 36% jump in federal spending is intended to expand the program–one of the few remaining elements of Lyndon B. Johnson’s War on Poverty–so it can reach 70% of the disadvantaged 4-year-olds in the nation.

Elsewhere in the draft $1.23-trillion federal budget for the fiscal year that begins next Oct. 1, Bush is expected to propose $37 billion in spending cuts and revenue increases to meet a congressionally mandated deficit-reduction target of $64 billion next year.

The budget–Bush’s first full-scale statement of his priorities for the federal government–will include a renewed call for a lower capital gains tax rate, tax credits for adoptions and for child care, and a proposed “family savings account” that would allow people to accumulate tax-free earnings on up to $5,000 put away each year.

Although the package contains no general tax hikes, it is expected to include as much as $12 billion in various revenue increases that would take money out of people’s pockets, including $5 billion in proposed user fees.

The plan calls for further cuts in Pentagon spending after adjusting for inflation, but Congress is expected to demand even deeper savings. Bush’s spending blueprint will call for modest savings of about $3.8 billion from holding defense outlays to $292 billion next year, compared to the $286 billion total for this fiscal year.

Deputy Defense Secretary Donald J. Atwood, who briefed congressional staff members Friday, called the Pentagon’s budget request “realistic” and said its efforts to scale back its budget in the next five years deserve support.

In tentative spending plans for the next five years, the Pentagon has proposed to reduce its budget by 2% annually after accounting for inflation, which would allow only a gradual rise from $292 billion next year to $311.8 billion in fiscal 1995.

Congressional sources said that Defense Secretary Dick Cheney had slated a long list of relatively small weapons and ordnance programs for termination. None of the Pentagon’s most costly programs, including the B-2 Stealth bomber–for which $5.5 billion will be sought in 1991–were killed or scaled back significantly.

Cheney is certain to raise hackles on Capitol Hill with decisions not to seek additional funds for production or development of the Marine Corps’ V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and the Navy F-14 fighter jet. The Pentagon last year proposed to terminate both programs, prompting angry lawmakers to restore some funds to keep the programs alive.

The budget also contains about $5 billion in proposed Medicare savings, along with another $2.5 billion from yet another Administration attempt to require state and local workers to pay for Medicare coverage.

Altogether, about 18 or 19 programs would be terminated.

On the other side of the ledger, Bush is expected to call for increased spending on the environment, particularly a stepped-up program to combat global warming, and a boost in spending on space, drug enforcement and treatment, and AIDS research and prevention.

The overall education budget would rise by $500 million, but not enough to keep up with inflation. As a result, some college students would lose their eligibility for Pell Grants, and others would be required to accept smaller stipends.

The 1,592-page budget document was in its final press run on Friday, said Donna Alexander, a spokeswoman for the Government Printing Office. Some 24,000 of the blue-jacketed documents are being printed, and they will go on sale Monday at government book shops for $38 each.

Bush, his aides, and other government officials have carefully disclosed most of the key elements on his agenda this year. He will be free in the State of the Union address Wednesday evening to focus on the overall direction he would like to see the country take this year, rather than having to present a “laundry list” of problems and programs.

In disclosing the Head Start funding proposal to an audience of adopted children and parents taking part in a White House program on adoption, Bush said he would seek “the largest increase ever–half a billion additional dollars–for Head Start.”

“This new funding will increase the Head Start enrollment to 667,000 children and bring us to the point where we can reach 70% of this nation’s disadvantaged 4-year-olds through Head Start,” he said.

Bush said “every American child with special needs, whether physical, emotional, or material, deserves the opportunity for a full and happy life.”

The increase is approximately 10 times as big as the additional amount sought for the program by the Department of Health and Human Services, White House Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater said.

The President’s announcement surprised advocates of assistance for children and Democratic politicians, with one Democratic political adviser remarking: “That’s smart politics.”

Bush, who said frequently during the 1988 political campaign that he wanted to become the “education” President, had come under increasing pressure to move toward that goal by increasing federal funding for a variety of education programs.

Such pressure emerged at the meeting Bush led at the University of Virginia last September, where he conferred with the nation’s governors on education needs across the country. Fitzwater said the Head Start proposal stemmed directly from that conference.

The Head Start program grew steadily during the Ronald Reagan Administration from about $800 million in 1981 to about $1.2 billion when he left office. In 1990, the Head Start program is receiving $1.386 billion. It provides early educational skills, health care and social counseling for preschool children from families living at or below the poverty level. Staff writer Melissa Healy contributed to this story.

A third round of “No Kings” protests is coming this spring, with organizers saying they are planning their largest demonstrations yet across the United States to oppose what they describe as authoritarianism under President Trump.

Previous rallies have drawn millions of people, and organizers said they expect even greater numbers on March 28 in the wake of Trump’s immigration crackdown in Minneapolis, where violent clashes have led to the death of two people.

“We expect this to be the largest protest in American history,” Ezra Levin, co-executive director of the nonprofit Indivisible, told The Associated Press ahead of Wednesday’s announcement. He predicted that as many as 9 million people will turn out.

“No Kings” protests, which are organized by a constellation of groups around the country, have been a focal point for outrage over Trump’s attempts to consolidate and expand his power.

“This is in large part a response to a combination of the heinous attacks on our democracy and communities coming from the regime, and a sense that nobody’s coming to save us,” Levin said.

Last year, Trump said he felt attendees were “not representative of the people of our country,” and he insisted that “I’m not a king.”

‘No Kings’ shifts focus after Minneapolis deaths

The latest round of protests had been in the works before the crackdown in Minneapolis. However, the killing of two people by federal agents in recent weeks has refocused plans.

Levin said they want to show “support for Minnesota and immigrant communities all over” and oppose “the secret police force that is murdering Americans and infringing on their basic constitutional rights.”

“And what we know is, the only way to defend those rights is to exercise them, and you do that in nonviolent but forceful ways, and that’s what I expect to see in ‘No Kings’ three,” Levin said.

Trump has broadly defended his aggressive deportation campaign and blamed local officials for refusing to cooperate. However, he’s more recently signaled a shift in response to bipartisan concern over the killing of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on Saturday.

Previous ‘No Kings’ protests have drawn millions across the U.S.

In June, the first “No Kings” rallies were organized in nearly 2,000 locations nationwide, including cities, towns and community spaces. Those protests followed unrest over federal immigration raids and Trump’s deployment of the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles, where tensions escalated with protesters blocking a freeway and setting vehicles on fire.

They were organized also in large part to protest a military parade in the nation’s capital that marked the Army’s 250th anniversary and coincided with Trump’s birthday. “No Kings” organizers at the time called the parade a “coronation” that was symbolic of what they characterized as Trump’s growing authoritarian overreach.

In response, some conservative politicians condemned the protests as “Hate America” rallies.

During a second round of protests in October, organizers said demonstrations were held in about 2,700 cities and towns across the country. At the time, Levin pointed to Trump’s sweeping immigration crackdown, his unprecedented promises to use federal power to influence midterm elections, restrictions on press freedom and retribution against political opponents, steps he said cumulatively represented a direct threat to constitutionally protected rights.

On social media, both Trump and the official White House account mocked the protests, posting computer-generated images of the president wearing a crown.

The big protest days are headline-grabbing moments, but Levin said groups like his are determined to keep up steady trainings and intermediate-level organizing in hopes of growing sustainable resistance to the Trump administration’s actions.

“This isn’t about Democrats versus Republicans. This is about do we have a democracy at all, and what are we going to tell our kids and our grandkids about what we did in this moment?” Levin said. “I think that demands the kind of persistent engagement. ”

Kinnard writes for the Associated Press.

Democrats Jasmine Crockett and James Talarico differed more on style than substance in their first debate for U.S. Senate in heavily Republican Texas, though they distinguished themselves somewhat on the future of ICE and impeachment of President Trump.

Crockett, an outspoken second-term U.S. House member, and Talarico, a more soft-spoken four-term state representative, generally echoed each other on economic issues, healthcare and taxes.

Both called for a “fighter” in the role. Crockett, who is Black, said she was better positioned to attract disaffected Black voters, while Talarico, a Presbyterian seminarian who often discusses his Christian faith, suggested he could net rural voters unhappy with Republicans.

The hourlong discussion, before hundreds of labor union members and their families at the Texas AFL-CIO political convention, served as an early preview for themes Democrats hoping to overtake the Republican majority in the Senate in November are likely to stress throughout the midterm campaign.

The nominee chosen in the March 3 primary will face the winner of a Republican contest between four-term Sen. John Cornyn, Rep. Wesley Hunt and state Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton.

Impeachment of Trump

Crockett said she would support impeachment proceedings against Trump, beginning with investigating his use of tariffs. Crockett has supported impeachment measures in the House.

“I think that there is more than enough to impeach Donald Trump,” Crockett said. “Ultimately, do I think we should go through the formal process? Absolutely.”

Talarico stopped short of suggesting whether he would support impeachment proceedings, except to say, “I think the administration has certainly committed impeachable offenses.”

Instead, Talarico said he would, as a senator, weigh any evidence presented during an impeachment trial fairly, given that the Senate does not bring impeachment charges but votes to convict or acquit. “I’m not going to articulate articles of impeachment here at a political debate,” he said.

Both candidates address ICE funding

Both candidates condemned the shooting of a man in Minneapolis by federal immigration officers Saturday, and ICE’s heavy presence in the city, though Talarico was more adamant about cutting funding to the agency.

Both said they support bringing impeachment proceedings against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, under whom ICE serves. But Crockett was less specific about cutting their funding.

“We absolutely have to clean house,” she said. “Whatever that looks like, I’m willing to do it.”

Talarcio more specifically said of ICE funding, “We should take that money back and put it in our communities where it belongs.”

Differences of style

While both candidates said the position requires “a fighter,” Crockett cast herself as a high-profile adversarial figure while Talarico said he had been confronting Republicans in the Texas Statehouse.

“I am here to fight the system, the system that is holding so many of us down,” said Crockett, a 44-year-old Dallas civil rights lawyer and former public defender who has built her national profile with a candid style marked by viral moments.

“It is about tapping into the rawness of this moment,” Crockett said of what Democratic primary voters are seeking.

Talarico, a former public school teacher, cast himself as someone who had been actively opposing the Republican-controlled state legislature.

He pointed to his opposition to Texas’ Republican Gov. Greg Abbott’s agenda in Austin, notably on tax credits for Texans who choose private schools for their children.

“We need a proven fighter for our schools, for our values, for our constituents in the halls of power,” he said. “I think we need a teacher in the United States Senate.”

Taxes, healthcare and economy

Crockett and Talarico generally aligned on domestic policy, including support for higher taxes.

Both candidates proposed ending tariffs as a way of lowering consumer prices.

“We have to roll back these tariffs,” Crockett said. “It’s hurting farmers and ranchers who are filing a record number of bankruptcies.”

Talarico was more direct about his support for higher taxes on the nation’s wealthiest earners.

“What I will not compromise on is making sure these billionaires pay for all that they have gotten from this country,” Talarico said, though he stopped short of suggesting how much he would seek to raise taxes.

Crockett voted last summer against the tax-cut and spending-reduction bill passed by the Republican-controlled Congress and signed by Trump. The bill extended tax cuts enacted during Trump’s first administration.

She also said she supported Medicare for all, a government-backed health insurance plan for all Americans.

“If we truly believe that everyone should have access to healthcare, we can make that a reality with bold leadership,” she said.

Talarico supports the concept, and spoke favorably about universal basic income, without suggesting he would specifically support it in the Senate.

“I’m very encouraged by some pilot programs of universal basic income,” he said.

Beaumont writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Marco Rubio left the door open Wednesday to future U.S. military action in Venezuela, telling lawmakers that while the Trump administration does not anticipate further escalation, the president retains the authority to use force if Venezuela’s interim leadership or other American adversaries defy U.S. demands.

Rubio’s remarks came hours after President Trump deployed what he called a “massive armada” to pressure Iran back to the negotiating table over its nuclear weapons program, amid broader questions about how recent U.S. tensions with Denmark over Greenland are affecting American relations with NATO allies.

“The president never rules out his options as commander in chief to protect the national interest of the United States,” Rubio told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “I can tell you right now with full certainty, we are not postured to, nor do we intend or expect to take any military action in Venezuela at any time.”

The appearance marked Rubio’s first public testimony before a congressional panel since U.S. forces seized former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and brought him to New York to face narco-trafficking charges nearly a month ago. Rubio was pressed by Democratic lawmakers over congressional war powers and whether the operation had meaningfully advanced democracy in Venezuela.

“We’ve traded one dictator for another. All the same people are running the country,” said Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). Acting President Delcy Rodríguez “has taken no steps to diminish Iran, China or Russia’s considerable influence in Venezuela.”

Rodríguez, who formerly served as Maduro’s vice president, has committed to opening Venezuela’s energy sector to American companies, providing preferential access to production and using revenues to purchase American goods, according to Rubio’s testimony.

But questions remain about Rodríguez’s own alleged ties to trafficking networks. The Associated Press reported that she has been on the DEA’s radar for years for suspected involvement in drug and gold smuggling, though no public criminal charges have been filed.

And despite Trump’s warning that Rodríguez would “pay a very big price” if she does not cooperate, she has pushed back in public against U.S. pressure over trade policy.

“We have the right to have diplomatic relations with China, with Russia, with Iran, with Cuba, with all the peoples of the world. Also with the United States. We are a sovereign nation,” Rodríguez said earlier this month.

Venezuela is among the largest recipients of Chinese loans globally, with more than $100 billion committed over recent decades. Much of that debt has been repaid through discounted oil shipments under an oil-for-loans framework, financing Chinese-backed infrastructure projects and helping stabilize successive Venezuelan governments.

U.S. military leaders have warned Congress about Iran’s growing strategic presence in the hemisphere, including concerns over ballistic missile capabilities and the supply of attack and surveillance drones to Venezuela.

“If an Iranian drone factory pops up and threatens our forces in the region,” Rubio said, “the president retains the option to eliminate that.”

Democrats also argued that the administration’s broader foreign policy is undercutting U.S. economic strength and alliances, particularly in competition with China.

Despite Trump’s tariff campaign, China posted a record global trade surplus in 2025, lawmakers noted, while estimates show U.S. manufacturing employment has declined by tens of thousands of jobs since the tariffs took effect.

Senators pushed back on the State Department’s assertion that U.S. policy has unified allies against China, arguing instead that tariffs and recent military escalations involving Greenland, Iran and Venezuela have strained relations with key partners. They pointed to Canada as an example, noting that Ottawa recently reached a trade deal with China amid concerns about the reliability of the United States as a partner.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a Republican dissenter on Venezuela, rejected the Trump administration’s framing of Maduro’s capture as a law enforcement operation rather than an act of war.

He pressed Rubio on congressional authorization.

“If we said that a foreign country invaded our capital, bombed all our air defense — which would be an extensive bombing campaign, and it was — removed our president, and then blockaded the country, we would think it was an act of war,” Paul said as he left the hearing.

Congressional Republicans voted to dismiss a war powers resolution earlier this month that would have limited Trump’s ability to conduct further attacks on Venezuela after two GOP senators reversed course on supporting the legislation.

They did so based on informal assurances from the administration that it would consult members of Congress before taking military action.

“I was a big fan of [congressional] consultation when I was sitting over there,” Rubio said, joking about his tenure as a senator on the committee. “Now, you know, it’s a different job, different time.”

The War Powers Act dictates how the executive must manage military operations, including that the administration must notify Congress within 48 hours of a military operation.

“And if it’s going to last longer than 60 days, we have to come to Congress with it. We don’t anticipate either of these things having to happen,” Rubio said.

He added that the administration’s end goal is “a friendly, stable, prosperous Venezuela,” and cautioned that free and fair elections would take time as the administration works with Rodríguez to stabilize the country.

“You can have elections all day, but if the opposition has no access to the media … those aren’t free and fair elections,” Rubio said. “There’s a percentage of the Venezuelan population … that may not have liked Maduro, but are still committed to Chavista ideology. They’ll be represented in that platform as well.”

Rubio fell short of providing concrete timelines, prompting skepticism from lawmakers who cited ongoing reports that political prisoners remain jailed and that opposition figures such as Edmundo González Urrutia and María Corina Machado would still be blocked from seeking office. He will meet with Machado this week to discuss her role in the ongoing regime change.

“I’ve known Maria Corina for probably 12 or 13 years,” Rubio said. “I’ve dealt with her probably more than anybody.”

But the reality on the ground remains difficult, he said, adding the administration has hedged its bets on the existing Venezuelan government to comply with U.S. efforts to stabilize the economy and weed out political violence before fair elections can be held.

“The people that control the guns and the institutions of government there are in the hands of this regime,” Rubio said.

The Pasadena Jewish Temple and Center filed a lawsuit against Southern California Edison Tuesday, claiming the electric company was to blame for igniting last year’s Eaton fire, which destroyed the congregation’s historic sanctuary, preschool and other buildings.

“Our congregation has been without a physical home for more than a year, at a time when our members had the deepest need for refuge and healing,” Senior Rabbi Joshua Ratner said in a statement. “While we’ve continued to gather and support one another, the loss is deeply felt.”

David Eisenhauer, an Edison spokesman, said the company would respond to the complaint through the court process.

“Our hearts remain with the people affected by the Eaton fire,” Eisenhauer said. “We remain committed to wildfire mitigation through grid hardening, situational awareness and enhanced operational practices.”

The temple had served hundreds of Jewish families since 1941. Congregation members were able to save little more than its sacred Torah scrolls.

The lawsuit, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, claims Edison failed to follow its own safety protocols despite advance warnings of extremely dangerous red flag conditions in an area known to be at high threat of wildfires.

The complaint points to the utility’s failure to de-energize its transmission lines that night, as well as its decision to leave up a decommissioned line that hadn’t carried electricity for decades.

It also cites a Times investigation that found that Edison fell behind in doing maintenance that it told state regulators was needed and began billing customers for.

“SCE’s maintenance backlog and unutilized maintenance funds show that it was highly likely that the subject electrical infrastructure that ignited the Eaton Fire was improperly inspected, maintained, repaired, and otherwise operated, which foreseeably led to the Eaton Fire’s ignition,” the complaint states.

The lawsuit seeks financial compensation for destruction of the campus, as well as injunctive relief aimed at preventing Edison from causing more wildfires in the future.

The government investigation into the cause of the fire has not yet been released.

Pedro Pizarro, chief executive of Edison International, the utility’s parent company, has said that a leading theory is that a century-old, dormant transmission line in Eaton Canyon briefly became energized that night, causing sparks that ignited the fire.

Edison is already facing hundreds of lawsuits from fire victims, as well as one by the U.S. Department of Justice. The utility is offering compensation to victims who agree to give up their right to sue the company for the blaze.

Under California law, most of those payments, as well as the lawsuit settlements, are expected to be covered by a state wildfire fund that lawmakers created to shield the three biggest for-profit utilities from bankruptcy if their equipment ignites a catastrophic fire. Some wildfire victims say the law has gone too far and doesn’t keep the utilities accountable for their mistakes.

The temple’s lawsuit details how investigators have found Edison’s equipment to have caused multiple wildfires in the last 10 years, including the the Round Fire in 2015, the Rey Fire in 2016, the Thomas, Creek, and Rye fires in 2017,and the Woolsey Fire in 2018.

Investigators also found that Edison’s power lines sparked the Fairview fire in 2022, which killed two people.

WASHINGTON — Democratic senators are narrowing a list of demands for changes to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement with a partial government shutdown looming by week’s end, hoping to pressure Republicans and the White House as the country reels from the deaths of two people at the hands of federal agents in Minneapolis.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has not yet outlined what his caucus will ask for before a crucial Thursday vote on whether to move forward with spending legislation that funds the Department of Homeland Security and a swath of other government agencies. Democrats were to meet Wednesday and discuss several possible demands, including forcing agents to have warrants and identify themselves before immigration arrests, and they have pledged to block the spending bill in response to the violence.

“This madness, this terror must stop,” Schumer said, calling for immediate changes to ICE and U.S. Border Patrol.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has said he is waiting for Democrats to outline what they want and he suggested that they need to be talking to the White House.

It was unclear how seriously the White House was engaged and whether the two sides could agree on anything that would appease Democrats who are irate after federal agents fatally shot U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti this month.

With no evident negotiations underway, a partial shutdown appeared increasingly likely starting Saturday.

Democrats weigh their demands

As the Republican administration pursues its aggressive immigration enforcement surge nationwide, Democrats have discussed several potential demands in the Homeland Security bill.

Those includes requiring judicial warrants for immigration arrests, mandating that federal agents have to identify themselves, ending arrest quotas, sending agents back to the border and forcing DHS to cooperate with state and local authorities in investigations into any incidents such as the two shooting deaths in Minnesota.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Democrats are looking at changes that will “unite the caucus, and I think unite the country,” including ending the “roving patrols” that Democrats say are terrorizing Americans around the country.

“None of this is revolutionary,” said Murphy, the top Democrat on the subcommittee that oversees Homeland Security spending. “None of this requires a new comprehensive piece of legislation.”

Schumer and Murphy have said any fixes should be passed by Congress, not just promised by the administration.

“The public can’t trust the administration to do the right thing on its own,” Schumer said.

Republicans say any changes to the spending would need to be passed by the House to prevent a shutdown, and that is not likely to happen in time because the House is not in legislative session this week.

“We can have conversations about what additional oversight is required, what additional laws we should consider, but not at the expense of shutting down the government,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas).

Many obstacles to a deal

Despite some conversations among Democrats, Republicans and the White House, it was unclear whether there could be a resolution in time to avoid a partial shutdown.

The House passed the six remaining funding bills last week and sent them to the Senate as a package, and that makes it difficult to strip out the Homeland Security portion as Democrats are demanding. Republicans could break the package apart with the consent of all 100 senators, which would be complicated, or through a series of votes that would extend past the Friday deadline.

It was unclear whether President Trump would weigh in.

Republican leaders had hoped to avoid another shutdown after last fall’s 43-day closure that revolved around Democrats’ insistence on extending federal subsidies that make health coverage more affordable for those enrolled in the Affordable Care Act marketplace.

Even if the Senate could resolve the issue, House Republicans have made clear they do not want any changes to the bill they have passed. In a letter to Trump on Tuesday, the conservative House Freedom Caucus wrote that its members stand with the president and ICE.

“The package will not come back through the House without funding for the Department of Homeland Security,” according to the letter.

Democrats say they won’t back down.

“It is truly a moral moment,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “I think we need to take a stand.”

Jalonick and Freking write for the Associated Press.

LONDON — The crime was in London, the suspect was Russian and the witness who saw the beating on a video call was in the United States and happened to be the youngest son of President Trump.

Barron Trump called police in the British capital and his intervention more than a year ago led Wednesday to the assault conviction of Matvei Rumiantsev, who admitted he was jealous of his girlfriend’s friendship with Trump.

Trump said he placed a late night FaceTime call to the victim, a woman he met on social media, and was startled when it was answered by a bare-chested man.

“This view lasted maybe one second and I was racing with adrenaline,” Trump told police. “The camera was then flipped to the victim getting hit while crying, stating something in Russian.”

The call was hung up after a few seconds and Trump then phoned London police in a recording in which Trump desperately pleaded for help as the dispatcher insisted he answer basic questions about the victim.

“How do you know her?” the operator asked after a back-and-forth dialog.

“I don’t think these details matter, she’s getting beat up,” Trump said.

“Can you stop being rude and actually answer my questions?” the dispatcher said. “If you want to help the person, you’ll answer my questions clearly and precisely, thank you. So how do you know her?”

Police went to the address on Jan. 18 and arrested Rumiantsev, 22, a receptionist who lived in London.

He was acquitted in Snaresbrook Crown Court of rape and choking the woman on the night Trump called police, and an additional rape and assault alleged in November 2024.

Rumiantsev testified that he was jealous of Trump but that he also felt badly for him because he thought that his girlfriend was leading him on.

Defense lawyer Sasha Wass said that Trump didn’t know the woman had a boyfriend and questioned how much he could have seen in five or seven seconds of video.

Wass said that the woman exploited her ties to Trump to make her boyfriend envious in a “relationship full of dramas.”

Trump, 19, the only child of Donald and Melania Trump, didn’t testify in the case.

Justice Bennathan advised jurors before they began deliberating to treat Barron Trump’s accounts — on the recording of his call to police and his follow-up email to investigators — with caution because he hadn’t been subjected to cross-examination.

“If he had done so, no doubt, he could have been asked about things such as whether he ever got a good view of what happened, whether he actually saw (the woman) being assaulted, or jumped to this conclusion on the basis of her screams,” Bennathan said. “He might also have been asked whether his perception was biased because he was close friends with (her).”

Rumiantsev was also convicted of perverting the course of justice, because he sent the woman a letter from jail asking her to retract her allegations. He’s scheduled to be sentenced on March 27.

Melley writes for the Associated Press.

UNION CITY, Ga. — FBI agents were executing a search warrant at the Fulton County elections office near Atlanta on Wednesday, an agency spokesperson confirmed.

An FBI spokesperson said agents were “executing a court authorized law enforcement action” at the county’s main election office in Union City, just south of Atlanta. The spokesperson declined to provide any further information, citing an ongoing matter.

The search comes as the FBI under the leadership of Director Kash Patel has moved quickly to pursue the political grievances of President Trump, including by working with the Justice Department to investigate multiple perceived adversaries of the Republican commander-in-chief.

The Justice Department had no immediate comment.

Trump has long insisted that the 2020 election was stolen even though judges across the country and his own attorney general said they found no evidence of widespread fault that tipped the contest in Democrat Joe Biden’s favor.

He has long made Georgia, one of the battleground states he lost in 2020, a central target for his complaints about the election and memorably pleaded with its then-secretary of state to “find” him enough votes to overturn the contest.

Last week, in reference to the 2020 election, he asserted that “people will soon be prosecuted for what they did.” It was not clear what in particular he was referring to.

Fulton County District Atty. Fani Willis in August 2023 obtained an indictment against Trump and 18 others, accusing them of participating in a wide-ranging scheme to illegally try to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. That case was dismissed in November after courts barred Willis and her office from pursuing it because of an “appearance of impropriety” stemming from a romantic relationship she had with a prosecutor she had appointed to lead the case.

Brumback writes for the Associated Press.

MINNEAPOLIS — The man who sprayed an unknown substance on Democratic U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar at a town hall in Minneapolis is a convicted felon who has made online posts supportive of President Trump.

Anthony Kazmierczak, 55, was convicted of felony auto theft in 1989, has been arrested multiple times for driving under the influence, and has had numerous traffic citations, Minnesota court records show. There are also indications he has had significant financial problems, including two bankruptcy filings.

Police say Kazmierczak used a syringe to spray an unknown liquid at Omar during Tuesday’s event after she called for the abolishment of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the firing or impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem following the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by immigration enforcement officers. Officers immediately tackled and arrested Kazmierczak, who was jailed on a preliminary third-degree assault charge, police spokesperson Trevor Folke said.

Photos of the syringe, which fell when he was tackled, showed what appeared to be a light-brown liquid inside. Authorities haven’t yet publicly identified the liquid.

After the attack, there was a strong, vinegarlike smell in the room, according to an Associated Press journalist who was there. Forensic scientists were called in, but none of the roughly 100 people who were there had a noticeable physical reaction to the substance.

Omar continued speaking for about 25 minutes after Kazmierczak was ushered out, saying she wouldn’t be intimidated. While leaving, she said she felt a little flustered but wasn’t hurt, and that she was going to be screened by a medical team.

She later posted on X: “I’m ok. I’m a survivor so this small agitator isn’t going to intimidate me from doing my work. I don’t let bullies win.”

A Trump supporter

Kazmierczak hadn’t been formally charged or scheduled for an initial court appearance as of Wednesday morning. The Hennepin County Attorney’s Office has until Thursday to charge him but could seek an extension. A spokesperson for the prosecutor’s office didn’t immediately return a call seeking further information.

It isn’t clear if Kazmierczak has a lawyer who could speak on his behalf. The county’s chief public defender, Michael Berger, said the case hasn’t been assigned to his office.

In social media posts, Kazmierczak described himself as a former network engineer who lives in Minneapolis. Among other things, he made comments critical of former President Joe Biden and referred to Democrats as “angry and liars.”

“Trump wants the US is stronger and more prosperous,” Kazmierczak wrote. “Stop other countries from stealing from us. Bring back the fear that enemies back away from and gain respect that If anyone threatens ourselves or friends we will (expletive) them up.”

In another post, Kazmierczak asked, “When will descendants of slaves pay restitution to Union soldiers families for freeing them/dying for them, and not sending them back to Africa?”

Often at odds with the president

Omar, a progressive, has been a frequent target of Trump’s barbs since she joined Congress in 2019.

That year, Trump urged Omar and three other freshmen congresswomen of color known as “the squad” to “ go back ” to their countries if they wanted to criticize the U.S. Omar was the only one of the four born outside of the U.S., having immigrated to the country as a child when her family fled violence in Somalia.

Trump stepped up his criticism of Omar in recent months as he turned his focus on the Minneapolis-St. Paul area, which is home to about 84,000 people of Somali descent — nearly a third of the Somalis living in the U.S. During a Cabinet meeting in December, he referred to her as “garbage.” And he has linked the Twin Cities immigration crackdown to a series of fraud cases involving government programs in which most of the defendants have roots in the East African country.

The White House did not respond to a Tuesday message seeking comment. But, when asked about the attack Tuesday night, he told ABC News that he hadn’t watched the footage and accused her of staging the attack. “She probably had herself sprayed, knowing her,” Trump said.

Earlier Tuesday, the president criticized Omar as he spoke to a crowd in Iowa, saying his administration would only let in immigrants who “can show that they love our country.”

“They have to be proud, not like Ilhan Omar,” he said, drawing loud boos at the mention of her name.

He added: “She comes from a country that’s a disaster. So probably, it’s considered, I think — it’s not even a country.”

Lawmakers face rising threats

The attack came days after a man was arrested in Utah for allegedly punching U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost, a Democrat from Florida, in the face during the Sundance Film Festival and saying Trump was going to deport him.

Threats against members of Congress have increased in recent years, peaking in 2021 following the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol before dipping slightly only to climb again, according to the most recent figures from the U.S. Capitol Police.

Following Tuesday’s attack on Omar, U.S. Capitol Police said in a statement that the agency was “working with our federal partners to see this man faces the most serious charges possible to deter this kind of violence in our society.”

Lawmakers have discussed the impact of the threatening political climate on their ability to hold town halls and public events, with some even citing it in their decisions not to seek reelection.

Biesecker and Bargfeld write for the Associated Press. Biesecker reported from Washington. AP reporter R.J. Rico in Atlanta contributed to this report.

For months, Gregory Bovino has been the public face of President Trump’s sweeping immigration raids across U.S. cities.

When the brash Border Patrol commander charged into Los Angeles last summer with the stated mission of arresting thousands of immigrants, he was unapologetic as agents smashed car windows, concealed their identities with masks, seized brown-skinned Angelenos off the streets, and descended on MacArthur Park on horseback.

In Minneapolis, when a federal officer shot and killed U.S. citizen Renee Good on Jan. 7, Bovino’s response to Fox News’ Sean Hannity was, “Hats off to that ICE agent.”

And when a Border Patrol agent shot Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse, on Saturday, Bovino again defended the killing. Pretti, he said, looked like someone who “wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.”

But as public outrage has swelled against the Trump administration’s aggressive tactics, Bovino’s future is in limbo. On Monday, Trump deployed border advisor Tom Homan to Minnesota, with Bovino reportedly set to depart the region.

Now, the question remains: will Bovino’s departure really change the Trump playbook?

Ariel G. Ruiz Soto — a senior policy analyst at the Migration Policy Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank — said Bovino’s exit, if true, could represent a pivotal moment in immigration enforcement in the nation’s interior.

“I think it signals that the tensions have risen so significantly that there’s beginning to be ruptures and fragments within the Trump administration to try to figure out how to do this enforcement more efficiently, but also with more accountability,” Ruiz Soto said.

Other immigration experts, however, question the significance of sidelining Bovino.

“I think it’s a grave mistake to think the change in the personnel on the ground constitutes a change in policy,” said Lucas Guttentag, a professor of law at Stanford University who specializes in immigration. “Because the policy remains the same: to terrorize immigrant communities and intimidate peaceful protesters.”

Even if Bovino is ousted or given a lesser role, Guttentag said, national immigration policy is still shaped by Stephen Miller — the White House deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security advisor who has embraced hardline enforcement tactics.

“They’re still threatening to use military action,” Guttentag said. “They still want to keep the National Guard on call. All of those fundamental policies, as well as deporting people who had legal status, sending people to third world countries without any due process, adopting detention rules that deprive people of hearings to be eligible for release, all of that’s continuing.”

“Simply changing from Bovino to Homan,” he added, “doesn’t signal anything significant in terms of policy.”

::

So far, the Department of Homeland Security has remained publicly tight-lipped about what’s next for Bovino, and did not respond this week to inquiries from The Times.

However, the Associated Press reported Monday that Bovino and some federal agents were expected to leave Minneapolis as early as Tuesday. The Atlantic, citing DHS sources, reported that Bovino had been demoted from his role of Border Patrol commander at large and would return to his former job in El Centro, Calif.

DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin disputed that Monday, saying on X that Bovino “has NOT been relieved of his duties.” White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt described him as a “wonderful person” and “a great professional” who would “continue to lead Customs and Border Patrol throughout and across the country.”

There has been mounting criticism of and public protest against the administration’s activities since the launch of Operation Metro Surge in Minnesota last month. Trump said he sent Homan to Minnesota “to de-escalate a little bit.”

“Bovino is very good, but he’s a pretty out-there kind of a guy,” Trump said Tuesday during an interview on Fox News’ “The Will Cain Show.” “And in some cases that’s good. Maybe it wasn’t good here.”

::

A pugnacious 55-year-old who was born in California but raised in North Carolina, Bovino’s muscle-bound physique, green military greatcoat and gel-spiked hair seemed straight out of MAGA central casting.

Barreling into Los Angeles in June to command the Trump administration’s mass immigration raids, he seemed to relish confrontation as protests erupted and troops were deployed across the city.
“All over … the Los Angeles region, we’re going to turn and burn to that next target and the next and the next and the next, and we’re not going to stop,” Bovino told the Associated Press last summer. “We’re not going to stop until there’s not a problem here.”

When Bovino met legal setbacks, he was defiant.

In August, an appeals court upheld a temporary restraining order blocking his agents from targeting people in Southern and Central California based on race, language or vocation without reasonable suspicion they are in the U.S. illegally.

Bovino responded by posting a video on X that first showed L.A. Mayor Karen Bass telling reporters that “this experiment that was practiced on the city of Los Angeles failed” before cutting to himself grinning. As a frenetic mix of drums and bass kicked in, the video transitioned to footage of federal agents jumping out of a van to chase people down.

“When you’re faced with opposition to law and order, what do you do?” Bovino wrote. “Improvise, adapt, and overcome!”

After Bovino led agents in Los Angeles, he pivoted to Chicago to serve as the commander of Operation Midway Blitz. Then, he went to New Orleans before heading to Minnesota to lead what officials called Homeland Security’s “largest immigration operation ever.”

The fatal shootings of Good and Pretti by federal agents this month sparked outrage and protests, both in Minneapolis and around the nation.

Ruiz Soto said that the controversy over the Trump immigration policy was no longer just about immigrants.

“It’s about constitutional rights and it’s about U.S. citizens,” Ruiz Soto said. “For the broader public, it’s now much more immersive. It’s now much more in their face.”

After Border Patrol agents tackled Pretti to the ground and shot him, many Americans were outraged to hear Bovino and other senior Trump administration officials make false statements regarding the incident.

The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement that Pretti approached federal officers on the street with a 9-millimeter semiautomatic handgun and “violently resisted” when officers tried to disarm him.

But according to videos taken on the scene, Pretti was holding a phone, not a handgun, when he stepped in front of a federal agent who had shoved a woman to the ground. The agent shoved and pepper-sprayed him and then multiple agents forced him to the ground. In the middle of the scrum, an agent secured a handgun. Less than a second later, the first shot was fired.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem asserted without evidence that Pretti had committed “an act of domestic terrorism,” and said her agency would lead the investigation into his killing.

Federal officials also denied Minnesota state investigators access to the shooting scene in south Minneapolis, prompting local and state officials to accuse the Homeland Security agency of mishandling evidence.

In the days since the shooting, Democrats in Congress have called for Noem to be removed from office.

“The country is disgusted by what the Department of Homeland Security has done,” Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Tuesday in a joint statement. “Kristi Noem should be fired immediately or we will commence impeachment proceedings in the House.”

When asked by reporters Tuesday whether Noem would step down, Trump said: “No.”

By sidelining Bovino, Ruiz Soto said the Trump administration appears to be sending a larger message.

“They’re going to try to restrict or home in the Border Patrol’s authority or at least the way they participate in operations and are going to now go back,” he said. “Or at least try to emulate more of the prior ICE model.”

Guttentag, however, said that while the public is seeing a tactical retreat on the part of the Trump administration, the problems went beyond Bovino’s leadership.

“So it’s not just the leadership, it’s the lack of training,” Guttentag said. “It’s the message that we’re getting from the very top, the statements from the vice president and others, that they have legal immunity. It’s the instructions to be as aggressive as they can be, and it’s also the lack of quality in the hiring and training process. All of that continues regardless of who the person on the ground is.”

Drawing on decades of experience after having dealt with the beating of Rodney King, the killing of George Floyd and more, American law enforcement leaders, civil rights advocates and other legal experts have honed best practices for officers making street arrests, conducting crowd control and maintaining public safety amid mass protests.

Officers are trained to not stand in front of or reach into moving vehicles, to never pull their firearms unless it is absolutely necessary, and to use force only in proportion to a corresponding threat. They are trained to clearly identify themselves, de-escalate tensions, respect the sanctity of life and quickly render aid to anyone they wound.

When police shootings occur, leaders are trained to carefully protect evidence and immediately launch an investigation — or multiple ones — in order to assure the community that any potential wrongdoing by officers will be fairly assessed.

According to many of those same leaders and experts, it has become increasingly clear in recent days that those standards have been disregarded — if not entirely tossed aside — by the federal immigration agents swarming into American cities on the orders of President Trump and administration officials tasked with overseeing the operations.

In both small, increasingly routine ways and sudden, stunning bursts — such as the fatal shootings of U.S. citizens Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis — agents have badly breached those standards, the experts said, and without any apparent concern or investigative oversight from the administration.

Agents are entering homes without warrants, swarming moving vehicles in the street and escalating standoffs with protesters using excessive force, while department leaders and administration officials justify their actions with simple, brash rhetoric rather than careful, sophisticated investigations.

“It’s a terrible disappointment,” said former Los Angeles Police Chief Michel Moore. “These tactics — if you call them that — are far and away out of touch with contemporary policing standards.”

“This isn’t law enforcement, this is terror enforcement,” said Connie Rice, a longtime civil rights attorney who has worked on LAPD reforms for decades. “They’re not following any laws, any training. This is just thuggery.”

“They use excessive force against suspects and protesters, they detain and arrest people without legal cause, they violate the 1st Amendment rights of protesters and observers,” said Georgetown law professor Paul Butler, a former federal prosecutor.

“These types of tactics end up hurting all of law enforcement, not just federal law enforcement, even though state and locals didn’t ask for these types of tactics, and, frankly, have been moving away from them for years out of a recognition that they undermine trust in communities and ultimately hurt their public safety mission,” said Vanita Gupta, associate attorney general under President Biden and head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division under President Obama.

The White House said Trump does not “want any Americans to lose their lives in the streets,” believes what happened to Pretti was “a tragedy” and has called for an “honorable and honest investigation.” But administration officials also have defended the immigration crackdown and the federal agents involved, blaming protesters for interfering with law enforcement operations and accusing critics of endangering agents. However, many of those critics said it is the tactics that are endangering officers.

Gupta said Trump’s immigration surge “deeply strains the critical partnerships” that local, state and federal law enforcement agencies typically have with one another, and puts local leaders in an “incredibly challenging position” in their communities.

“State and local chiefs have to spend 365 days of the year building trust in their community and establishing legitimacy … and in comes this surge of federal agents who are acting out of control in their communities and creating very unsafe conditions on the ground,” Gupta said. “That is why you’re seeing more and more chiefs and former chiefs speaking out.”

Moore said the tactics are “unnecessarily exposing those agents to harm, physical harm, as well as driving an emotional response and losing legitimacy with the very public that, as an agency, they are saying they are there to protect.”

Issues on the ground

Good was fatally shot as she tried to drive away from a chaotic scene involving federal agents. The Trump administration said the officer who shot her was in danger of being run over. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, without evidence, accused Good, 37, of being a “domestic terrorist.”

Experts questioned why the group of agents swarmed Good’s vehicle, why the officer who fired positioned himself in front of it, and whether the officer was in fact in danger of being hit given Good was turning her wheel away from him. They especially questioned his later shots into the vehicle as it was passing him.

Under best practices for policing, officers are never to shoot into moving vehicles except in exigent circumstances, and are trained to avoid placing themselves in harm’s way. “You don’t put yourself in that position because you have the option to just take down the license plate number and go arrest them later if you think they’ve violated the law,” said Carol Sobel, a Los Angeles civil rights attorney who has driven police reform for decades.

Moore said he was trained in the 1980s to avoid engaging with moving vehicles, yet “40 years later, you see not just one occasion but multiple occasions of those tactics” from immigration agents.

Pretti was fatally shot after trying to protect a woman who was violently shoved to the ground by an immigration agent also spraying chemical irritant. The Trump administration said that Pretti had a gun, and that the officers had acted in self-defense. Without evidence, Noem alleged Pretti, also 37, was “attacking” agents and “brandishing” the gun, while White House advisor Stephen Miller alleged that Pretti “tried to murder federal agents.”

Experts questioned why the agents were being so aggressive with the woman Pretti was trying to help, and why they reacted so violently — with a burst of gunfire — when he was surrounded by agents, on the ground and already disarmed.

Moore said that the officer who shoved the woman appeared to be using “brute force rather than efforts to create de-escalation,” and that spraying irritants is never suitable for dealing with “passive resistance,” which appeared to be what the woman and Pretti were involved in.

In both shootings, experts also questioned why the agents were wearing masks and failed to render aid, and lamented the immediate rush to judgment by Trump administration officials.

Gupta said the immigration agents’ tactics were “out of line” with local, state and federal policing standards and “offensive to all of that work that has been done” to establish those standards.

Bernard Parks, another former chief of the Los Angeles Police Department, said that videos from the two incidents and other recent immigration operations make it clear the agents are “totally untrained” for the operation, which he called “poorly designed, poorly trained,” with a “total lack of common sense and decency.”

Ed Obayashi, an expert in police use of force, said that although the agents’ actions in the two shootings are under investigation, it is “obvious” that Trump administration officials have not followed best practices for conducting those inquiries.

“The scenes have been contaminated, I haven’t seen any evidence or any what you would call standard investigative protocols, like freezing the scene, witness checks, canvassing the neighborhood, supervisors responding to try to determine what happened,” he said.

The path forward

Last week, California joined other Democrat-led states in challenging the crackdown in Minneapolis in court, arguing that Noem’s department “has set in motion an extraordinary campaign of recklessness and disregard for norms of constitutional policing and the sanctity of life.”

On Sunday, the International Assn. of Chiefs of Police, which has played a central role in establishing modern policing standards in the U.S., said it believes that “effective public safety depends on comprehensive training, investigative integrity, adherence to the rule of law, and strong coordination among federal, state, and local partners,” and called on the White House to convene those partners for “policy-level discussions aimed at identifying a constructive path forward.”

On Tuesday, Gov. Gavin Newsom and California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta reminded California law enforcement that they have the right to investigate federal agents for violating state law.

Gupta said the Trump administration failing to investigate fatal shootings by federal agents while “boxing out” local and state officials suggests “impunity” for the agents and “puts the country in a very dangerous place” — and state investigators must allowed in to investigate.

Butler said that the situation would definitely be improved if agents started adhering to modern policing standards, but that problems will persist as long as Trump continues to demand that immigration agents arrest thousands of people per day.

“There’s just no kind and gentle way,” he said, “to take thousands of people off the streets every day.”

SACRAMENTO — Two of the top Democratic candidates in the race for California governor are taking heat for their past votes to fund and support federal immigration enforcement as the backlash against the Trump administration’s actions in Minnesota intensifies after the shooting death of Alex Pretti.

Fellow Democratic candidates are criticizing Rep. Eric Swalwell and former Rep. Katie Porter for voting — in Swalwell’s case, as recently as June — to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and support its agents’ work.

Swalwell (D-Dublin) last year voted in favor of a Republican-sponsored resolution condemning an attack that injured at least eight people demonstrating in support of Israeli hostages, one of whom later died, in Boulder, Colo., and expressing “gratitude to law enforcement officers, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel, for protecting the homeland.”

He was one of 75 Democrats, including nine from California, to cross the aisle and vote in favor of the resolution.

“The fact that Eric Swalwell stood with MAGA Republicans in Washington to thank ICE while in California masked ICE agents terrorized our communities — despite Swalwell’s notorious and chronic record of absenteeism from Congress, is shamefully hypocritical,” former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, a rival Democrat running for governor, said in a statement.

Swalwell’s campaign dismissed the attack as a “political ploy” by “a desperate campaign” polling in single-digits.

“What Eric voted for was a resolution to condemn a horrific antisemitic attack in Boulder, CO that killed Karen Diamond, an 82-year old grandmother,” a campaign spokesman said in a statement. “The truth is no one has been more critical of ICE than Eric Swalwell.”

The exchange comes as Villaraigosa, Swalwell and other Democrats running to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is serving his final year in office, struggle to differentiate themselves in a tight race that lacks a clear front-runner.

In a poll released in December by the Public Policy Institute of California, Porter led the field with support from 21% of likely California voters. She was slightly ahead of former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra and conservative commentator Steve Hilton but had far from a commanding lead.

With the June 2 primary election fast approaching, the sparring among the candidates — especially in the crowded field of Democrats — is expected to intensify, with those leading in the polls fielding the brunt of the attacks.

The Trump administration’s immigration tactics face mounting political scrutiny after federal agents fatally shot Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care nurse from Minneapolis, during a protest over the weekend.

Pretti was the second U.S. citizen in Minneapolis to be killed by immigration officers in recent weeks. Renee Good, a 37-year-old mother, was shot in the head by an ICE officer Jan. 7. Federal officials have alleged it was an act of self-defense when Good drove her vehicle toward an officer — an assertion under dispute.

In recent days, Swalwell said that if elected, he would revoke the driver licenses of ICE agents who mask their faces, block them from state employment and aggressively prosecute agents for crimes such as kidnapping, assault and murder.

Tony Thurmond, another Democrat currently serving as California’s top education official, in an online political ad criticized Swalwell’s vote as well as several by Porter for bills to fund ICE and Trump’s border wall during the president’s first term.

Porter and Swalwell joined majorities of Democratic House members to support various spending packages in Congress, which included billions for a border wall and in at least one case, avoided a government shutdown.

“When others have stayed quiet, Katie has boldly spoken out against ICE’s lawlessness and demanded accountability,” said Porter campaign spokesman Peter Opitz.

Thurmond’s video touted his own background as a child of immigrants and support for a new law that attempts to keep federal immigration agents out of schools, hospitals and other spaces.

Tom Steyer, a billionaire Democrat also running for governor, said Tuesday that he supports abolishing ICE “as it exists today” and replacing it with a “lawful, accountable immigration system rooted in due process and public safety.”

Republicans blame Democrats and protesters

The two most formidable Republicans running for governor have generally supported Trump’s immigration strategy but have not commented directly on Pretti’s killing over the weekend.

Hilton, a former Fox News host, wrote in an email that “every sane person is horrified by the scenes of chaos and lawlessness in Minneapolis, and most of all that people are getting killed.”

But he linked violence to sanctuary policies in Democratic-run states and cities, including California, which prohibit local law enforcement from coordinating or assisting with federal immigration enforcement.

“The only places we’ve seen this kind of chaos are ‘sanctuary’ cities and states, where Democrat politicians are whipping people up into a frenzy of anti-law enforcement hate, and directly putting their constituents in harm’s way by telling them — from behind the safety of their own security details — to disrupt the enforcement of federal law,” Hilton said.

The conservative pundit said the “worst offender” is Newsom, whom Hilton accused of using “disgustingly inflammatory language designed to rile up his base in pursuit of his presidential ambitions.”

Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco’s campaign did not respond to questions about events in Minnesota. Bianco has repeatedly criticized California’s sanctuary state policy but affirmed last year that his department would not assist with federal immigration raids.

On Sunday, Bianco posted on X that “Celebrities and talking heads think they understand what it’s like to put on a uniform and make life or death decisions,” an apparent reference to the encounter that resulted in Pretti’s death.

SAN FRANCISCO — Katie Porter’s still standing, which is saying something.

The last time a significant number of people tuned into California‘s low-frequency race for governor was in October, when Porter’s political obituary was being written in bold type.

Immediately after a snappish and off-putting TV interview, Porter showed up in a years-old video profanely reaming a staff member for — the humanity! — straying into the video frame during her meeting with a Biden Cabinet member.

Not a good look for a candidate already facing questions about her temperament and emotional regulation. (Hang on, gentle reader, we’ll get to that whole gendered double-standard thing in a moment.)

The former Orange County congresswoman had played to the worst stereotypes and that was that. Her campaign was supposedly kaput.

But, lo, these several months later, Porter remains positioned exactly where she’d been before, as one of the handful of top contenders in a race that remains stubbornly formless and utterly wide open.

Did she ever think of exiting the contest, as some urged, and others plainly hoped to see? (The surfacing of that surly 2021 video, with the timing and intentionality of a one-two punch, was clearly not a coincidence.)

No, she said, not for a moment.

“Anyone who thinks that you can just push over Katie Porter has never tried to do it,” she said.

Porter apologized and expressed remorse for her tetchy behavior. She promised to do better.

“You definitely learn from your mistakes,” the Democrat said this week over a cup of chai in San Francisco’s Financial District. “I really have and I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about how do I show Californians who I am and that I really care about people who work for me. I need to earn back their trust and that’s what campaigns are literally about.”

She makes no excuse for acting churlish and wouldn’t bite when asked about that double standard — though she did allow as how Democratic leader John Burton, who died not long before people got busy digging Porter’s grave, was celebrated for his gruff manner and lavish detonation of f-bombs.

“It was a reminder,” she said, pivoting to the governor’s race, “that there have been other politicians who come on hot, come on strong and fight for what’s right and righteous and California has embraced them.”

Voters, she said, “want someone who will not back down.”

Porter warmed to the subject.

“If you are never gonna hurt anyone’s feelings, you are never gonna take [JPMorgan Chase Chief Executive] Jamie Dimon to task for not thinking about how his workers can’t afford to make ends meet. If you want everyone to love you, you are never gonna say to a big pharma CEO, ‘You didn’t make this cancer drug anymore. You just got richer, right?’ That is a feistiness that I’m proud of.”

At the same, Porter suggested, she wants to show there’s more to her persona than the whiteboard-wielding avenger that turned her into a viral sensation. The inquisitorial stance was, she said, her role as a congressional overseer charged with holding people accountable. Being governor is different. More collaborative. Less confrontational.

Her campaign approach has been to “call everyone, go everywhere” — even places Porter may not be welcomed — to listen and learn, build relationships and show “my ability to craft a compromise, my ability to learn and to change my mind.”

“All of that is really hard to convey,” she said, “in those whiteboard moments.”

The rap on this year’s pack of gubernatorial hopefuls is they’re a collective bore, as though the lack of A-list sizzle and failure to throw off sparks is some kind of mortal sin.

Porter doesn’t buy that.

“When we say boring, I think what we’re really saying is ‘I’m not 100% sure how all this is going to work out.’ People are waiting for some thing to happen, some coronation of our next governor. We’re not gonna have that.”

Gavin Newsom, she noted, was a high-profile former San Francisco mayor who spent eight years as lieutenant governor before winning the state’s top job. His predecessor was the dynastic Jerry Brown.

None of those running this time have that political pedigree, or the Sacramento backgrounds of Newsom or Brown, which, Porter suggested, is not a bad thing.

“I actually think this race has the potential to be really, really exciting for California,” she said. “… I think everyone in this race comes in with a little bit of a fresh energy, and I think that’s really good and healthy.”

Crowding into the conversation was, inevitably, Donald Trump, the sun around which today’s entire political universe turns.

Of course, Porter said, as governor she would stand up to the president. His administration’s actions in Minneapolis have been awful. His stalling on disaster relief for California is grotesque.

But, she said, Trump didn’t cause last year’s firestorm. He didn’t make housing in California obscenely expensive for the last many decades.

“When my children say ‘I don’t know if I want to go to college in California because we don’t have enough dorm housing,’ Trump has done plenty of horrible attacks on higher ed,” Porter said. “But that’s a homegrown problem that we need to tackle.”

Indeed, she’s “very leery of anyone who does not acknowledge that we had problems and policy challenges long before Donald Trump ever raised his orange head on the political horizon.”

Although California needs “someone who’s going to [buffer] us against Trump,” Porter said, “you can’t make that an excuse for why you are not tackling these policy changes that need to be.”

She hadn’t finished her tea, but it was time to go. Porter gathered her things.

She’d just spoken at an Urban League forum in San Francisco and was heading across the Bay Bridge to address union workers in Oakland.

The June 2 primary is some ways off. But Porter remains in the fight.

Thousands of middle-class Californians who depend on the state-run health insurance marketplace face premiums that are thousands of dollars higher than last year because enhanced federal subsidies that began during the COVID-19 pandemic have expired.

Despite fears that more people would go without coverage with the end of the extra benefits, the number enrolling in Covered California has held steady so far, according to state data.

But that may change.

Jessica Altman, executive director of Covered California, said that she believes the number of people dropping their coverage could increase as they receive bills with their new higher premiums in the mail this month. She said better data on enrollment will be available in the spring.

Altman said that even though the extra benefits ended Dec. 31, 92% of enrollees continue to receive government subsidies to help pay for their health insurance. Nearly half qualify for health insurance that costs $10 or less per month. And 17% of Californians renewing their Covered California policies will pay nothing for premiums if they keep their current plan.

The deadline to sign up for 2026 benefits is Saturday.

Here’s help in sorting out what the expiration of the enhanced subsidies for insurance provided under the Affordable Care Act, often called Obamacare, means in the Golden State.

What expired?

In 2021, Congress voted to temporarily to boost the amount of subsidies Americans could receive for an ACA plan. The law also expanded the program to families who had more money. Before the vote, only Americans with incomes below 400% of the federal poverty level — currently $62,600 a year for a single person or $128,600 for a family of four — were eligible for ACA subsidies. The 2021 vote eliminated the income cap and limited the cost of premiums for those higher-earning families to no more than 8.5% of their income.

How could costs change this year for those enrolled in Covered California?

Anyone with income above 400% of the federal poverty level no longer receives subsidies. And many below that level won’t receive as much assistance as they had been receiving since 2021. At the same time, fast-rising health costs boosted the average Covered California premium this year by more than 10.3%, deepening the burden on families.

How much would the net monthly premium for a Los Angeles couple with two children and a household income of $90,000 rise?

The family’s net premium for the benchmark Silver plan would jump to $699 a month this year from $414 a month last year, according to Covered California. That’s an increase of 69%, costing the family an additional $3,420 this year.

Who else could face substantially higher health bills?

People who retired before the Medicare-qualifying age of 65, believing that the enhanced subsidies were permanent, will be especially hit hard. Those with incomes above 400% of the federal poverty level could now be facing thousands of dollars in additional health insurance costs.

How did enrollment in Covered California change after the enhanced subsidies expired on Dec. 31?

As of Jan. 17, 1,906,033 Californians had enrolled for 2026 insurance. That’s less than 1% lower than the 1,921,840 who had enrolled by this time last year.

Who depends on Covered California?

Enrollees are mostly those who don’t have access to an employer’s health insurance plan and don’t qualify for Medi-Cal, the government-paid insurance for lower-income people and those who are disabled.

An analysis by KFF, a nonprofit that provides health policy information, found that nearly half the adults enrolled in an ACA plan are small-business owners or their employees, or are self-employed. Occupations using the health insurance exchanges where they can buy an ACA plan include realtors, farmers, chiropractors and musicians, the analysis found.

What is the underlying problem?

Healthcare spending has been increasing faster than overall inflation for years. The nation now spends more than $15,000 per person on healthcare each year. Medical spending today represents about 18% of the U.S. economy, which means that almost one out of every five dollars spent in the U.S. goes toward healthcare. In 1960, health spending was just 5% of the economy.

What has California done to help people who are paying more?

The state government allocated $190 million this year to provide subsidies for those earning up to 165% of the federal poverty level. This money will help keep monthly premiums consistent with 2025 levels for those with an annual income of up to $23,475 for an individual or $48,225 for a family of four, according to Covered California.

Where can I sign up?

People can find out whether they qualify for financial help and see their coverage options at the website CoveredCA.com.

What if I decide to go without health insurance?

People without insurance could face medical bills of tens of thousands of dollars if they become sick or get injured. And under California state law, those without coverage face an annual penalty of at least $900 for each adult and $450 for each child.

Reporting from New York, NY — Media outlets are reporting that federal prosecutors have granted immunity to the executive in charge of the National Enquirer amid an investigation into hush-money payments made on behalf of President Trump.

Vanity Fair and the Wall Street Journal, citing anonymous sources, were first to report Wednesday’s development involving David Pecker, CEO of the tabloid’s publisher, American Media Inc., and a longtime friend of the president.

Court papers connected to ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen’s guilty plea Tuesday say Pecker offered to help Trump squash negative stories during the 2016 campaign.

The Journal said Pecker shared details with prosecutors about payments Cohen says Trump directed to buy the silence of two women alleging affairs with him.

Trump’s account has shifted. He said recently he knew about payments “later on.”

MINNEAPOLIS — A man sprayed an unknown substance on U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and was tackled to the ground Tuesday during a town hall in Minneapolis, where tensions over federal immigration enforcement have come to a head after agents fatally shot an intensive care nurse and a mother of three this month.

The audience cheered as the man was pinned down and his arms were tied behind his back. In video of the incident, someone in the crowd can be heard saying, “Oh my God, he sprayed something on her.”

Just before that, Omar had called for the abolishment of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and for Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to resign or face impeachment. Calls are mounting on Capitol Hill for Noem to step down after the shooting deaths in Minneapolis of two people who protested deportations. Few Republicans have risen to her defense.

“ICE cannot be reformed,” Omar said, seconds before the attack.

Minneapolis police said officers saw the man use a syringe to spray an unknown liquid at Omar. They immediately arrested him and booked him at the county jail for third-degree assault, spokesperson Trevor Folke said. Forensic scientists responded to the scene.

Police identified the man as 55-year-old Anthony Kazmierczak. It was not immediately clear if Kazmierczak had an attorney. The county public defenders’ office could not immediately be reached.

Omar continued the town hall for about 25 more minutes after the man was ushered out by security, saying she would not be intimidated.

There was a strong, vinegar-like smell after the man pushed on the syringe, according to an Associated Press journalist who was there. Photos of the device, which fell to the ground when he was tackled, showed what appeared to be a light brown liquid inside. There was no immediate word from officials on what it was.

Minneapolis City Council member LaTrisha Vetaw said some of the substance came into contact with her and State Sen. Bobby Joe Champion as well. She called it a deeply unsettling experience.

No one in the crowd of about 100 people had a noticeable physical reaction to the substance.

Omar says she is OK and ‘a survivor’

Walking out afterward, Omar said she felt a little flustered but was not hurt. She was going to be screened by a medical team.

She later posted on the social platform X: “I’m ok. I’m a survivor so this small agitator isn’t going to intimidate me from doing my work. I don’t let bullies win.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment Tuesday night.

President Trump has frequently criticized the congresswoman and has stepped up verbal attacks on her in recent months as he turned his focus on Minneapolis. During a Cabinet meeting in December, he called her “garbage.”

Hours earlier on Tuesday, the president criticized Omar as he spoke to a crowd in Iowa, saying his administration would only let in immigrants who “can show that they love our country.”

“They have to be proud, not like Ilhan Omar,” he said, drawing loud boos at the mention of her name.

He added: “She comes from a country that’s a disaster. So probably, it’s considered, I think — it’s not even a country.”

Omar is a U.S. citizen who fled her birthplace, Somalia, with her family at age 8 as a civil war tore apart the country.

The Minneapolis-St. Paul area is home to about 84,000 people of Somali descent — nearly a third of Somalis living in the U.S.

Officials condemn the attack

Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz expressed gratitude that Omar was safe, adding in a post on X: “Our state has been shattered by political violence in the last year. The cruel, inflammatory, dehumanizing rhetoric by our nation’s leaders needs to stop immediately.”

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican, also denounced the assault.

“I am deeply disturbed to learn that Rep. Ilhan Omar was attacked at a town hall today” Mace said. “Regardless of how vehemently I disagree with her rhetoric — and I do — no elected official should face physical attacks. This is not who we are.”

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, a Democrat, called the attack “unacceptable.” He said he was relieved that Omar “is OK” and thanked police for their quick response, concluding: “This kind of behavior will not be tolerated in our city.”

The city has been reeling from the fatal shootings of two residents by federal immigration agents this month during Trump’s massive immigration enforcement surge. Intensive care unit nurse Alex Pretti was killed Saturday, less than three weeks after Renee Good was fatally shot behind the wheel of her vehicle.

Lawmakers face rising threats

The attack came days after a man was arrested in Utah for allegedly punching U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost, a Democrat from Florida, in the face during the Sundance Film Festival and saying Trump was going to deport him.

Threats against members of Congress have increased in recent years, peaking in 2021 in the aftermath of that year’s Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, before dipping slightly only to climb again, according to the most recent figures from the U.S. Capitol Police.

Lawmakers have discussed the impact on their ability to hold town halls and public events, with some even citing the threat environment in their decisions not to seek reelection.

Omar has faced the most particular concern, long targeted with harsh language and personal attacks by Trump and other Republicans.

Following the assault on Omar, U.S. Capitol Police said in a statement that the agency was “working with our federal partners to see this man faces the most serious charges possible to deter this kind of violence in our society.”

It also released updated numbers detailing threats to members of Congress: 14,938 “concerning statements, behaviors, and communications directed against lawmakers, their families, staff and the Capitol Complex.”

That is a sharp increase from 2024, when the number of cases was 9,474, according to USCP. It is the third year in a row that the number of threats has increased.

Capitol Police have beefed up security measures across all fronts since Jan. 6, 2021, and the department has seen increased reporting after a new center was launched two years ago to process reports of threats.

Bargfeld and Schoenbaum write for the Associated Press. Schoenbaum reported from Salt Lake City. Associated Press writers Audrey McAvoy in Honolulu, Mike Balsamo, Lisa Mascaro and Michelle Price in Washington, and Farnoush Amiri in New York contributed.

WASHINGTON — When Rep. John D. Dingell was new to Congress, Buddy Holly ruled the charts, Rosa Parks refused to budge from her seat on a segregated bus and Dwight D. Eisenhower occupied the White House.

And on Capitol Hill, congressional committee chairmen ruled like feudal lords over federal policy, pursuing pet causes and waging vendettas with near impunity.

In time, Dingell became one of the most fearsome.

Now Dingell, the longest-serving member of the House, and other veteran Democrats are poised to take charge of the most powerful committees when Congress convenes in January.

In the four decades that Democrats were the dominant party, chairmen’s foibles, however egregious, did not threaten the party’s grip on power. But with narrower margins of control and an electorate willing to switch allegiances, there is no such assumption these days.

The question now is whether the “old bulls” like Dingell know it, and if they know it, whether they can adjust.

“This majority is not the kind of majority that we used to have, and it remains to be seen whether they understand that,” said one senior Democratic staffer, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

Building an empire

For 14 years, Dingell, a Michigan Democrat, presided over the Energy and Commerce Committee. Under his forceful and often uncompromising leadership, the panel expanded into an empire that famously claimed jurisdiction over “everything that moves, burns or is sold” in the United States.

It was in part because of the reputation of longtime chairmen like Dingell that former Speaker Newt Gingrich, who led the Republican insurgency that took control of Congress in 1995, imposed term limits for committee chairs, restricting them to three consecutive two-year terms.

But the Democrats have kept the tradition of assigning committee chairmanships by seniority. And that will elevate some of the most veteran — and oldest — members of Congress to committee leadership posts.

All but one of the new Senate chairmen are at least 60, and three are in their 80s. Three also have served for more than four decades.

The oldest is Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.), who is 89 and is about to retake the helm of the Senate Appropriations Committee. He sometimes tires, aides say, but he still has full command of his senses and the respect of his peers.

It is in the House, however, where the phenomenon has attracted more attention. That’s partly because Democrats have been shut out of power for 12 years, while their Senate colleagues have been in the minority for just four. And it’s partly because of the irascible personalities of some of the incoming chairmen, known collectively as the “old bulls.”

The three best-known are Dingell, Rep. John Conyers Jr. from a neighboring district in Michigan, and Rep. Charles B. Rangel of New York. They are 80, 77, and 76 years old, respectively.

No green bananas

About two-thirds of the incoming House chairmen are older than 60.

“I don’t buy green bananas,” Rangel quipped recently, referring to his age.

Conyers, who served on the panels that considered the impeachment of Presidents Nixon and Clinton and who has mused about the possibility of impeaching the current president, is expected to take the helm of the Judiciary Committee.

Rangel, one of the most outspoken members of Congress, is set to lead the Ways and Means Committee, which sets tax policy.

On Capitol Hill, staffers trade stories about the old bulls and their infirmities, shaking their heads over Dingell’s hearing problems or Conyers’ “senior moments.” But the same staffers insist that the incoming chairmen are not only capable of taking the reins, but of handling them better than anyone else.

“There is a lot to the concept of seniority,” said Jeremy Mayer, who studies Congress at George Mason University in Virginia.

“Should the people who have been in Congress the longest have the most power? The simple answer is yes, because they have more experience and they can’t be steamrolled by the administration. Dingell, for instance, knows all the intricacies of the funding of at least seven federal agencies.”

Another argument in favor of seniority is that it limits intraparty fighting.

The party leadership elections this month illustrated how divisive competition for leadership posts can be. A rigid, impersonal system for naming chairmen is one way to keep the peace.

“Seniority has always been a way to prevent bloodshed,” Mayer said.

The downside is that it can foster autocratic behavior. In the past, Democratic leaders found the chairmen hard to control, in part because their positions did not depend on the party, and the chairmen tended to outlast the leadership.

Steven Smith, a social sciences professor who studies government and political parties at Washington University in St. Louis, says political parties have evolved since then.

“Before the 1980s, committee chairs pretty much went their own way. But since the 1980s, chairs are expected to look out for the party’s overall interest,” he said. “There will be some tension between committee chairs and party leaders on this.”

One potential point of tension is that many of today’s old bulls are old-fashioned liberals. Dingell introduces a proposal for nationalized healthcare in every session of Congress. Conyers has used his staff to pursue favorite concerns of left-wing bloggers, such as voting irregularities in the 2004 elections.

By contrast, the freshman class of Democrats includes a number of centrist or conservative Democrats, many of them uncomfortable with liberal positions on such issues as abortion, gun control and same-sex marriage.

Democratic leaders have already set their sights on 2008, with the goal of regaining the White House and expanding their margin of control in Congress.

“Democrats know that they won this election by appealing to the middle of the spectrum,” Smith said. “And they know that the first rule is to do no harm, to not alienate the folks who gave them the election.”

Doing that will require the incoming House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), herself a traditional liberal, to keep her chairmen focused on issues that promote the party’s broader agenda, not necessarily their own favorite issues.

“For some, it will take a little relearning,” said Smith. “They will have to make a choice: Do they want to start making a record for themselves and their party going into 2008? And what kind of record do they want it to be — a record of legislation, or a record of position-taking and rhetoric?”

Toeing the line

So far, the old bulls have stayed on message — mostly.

Conyers has stopped talking about impeaching President Bush.

Dingell has lauded the benefits of bipartisanship while promising tougher oversight of the administration.

And Rangel has remained coy about the fate of the tax cuts passed by Republicans in recent years, though he caused some heartburn when he brought up his desire to bring back the draft.

Democratic insiders say the old bulls won’t overreach. They say they know better than most what it’s like to gain and then lose a majority. And they haven’t been in a deep freeze for the last 12 years; rather, they’ve been strategizing with their colleagues about how to return to power.

Steve Elmendorf, who served as senior advisor to former Rep. Richard Gephardt, who led the Democrats in both the majority and the minority, says there are two big reasons why no one in the party even whispers about challenging the old bulls, no matter how old or intemperate.

“One, a lot of these chairman worked hard to help win. And when you win, the people who helped are going to move up,” Elmendorf said. “Two, they have a tremendous amount of institutional knowledge. They served in the majority, and they can hit the ground running.”

maura.reynolds@latimes.com

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Likely chairmen

Democratic veterans in line to run key House committees:

John Conyers Jr.

Committee: Judiciary

Age: 77

First elected: 1964

District: Detroit area

Highlights: Conyers is the only Judiciary Committee member to serve during the impeachment hearings of Presidents Nixon and Clinton. He recently dropped calls for an investigation into whether President Bush should be impeached.

Quote: “The American people sent a clear message that they do not want a rubber-stamp Congress that simply signs off the president’s agenda.”

—

John D. Dingell

Committee: Energy and Commerce

Age: 80

First elected: 1955

District: southeastern Michigan

Highlights: The longest-serving congressman, Dingell ran Energy and Commerce for 14 years, expanding its reach to include two-fifths of all House bills. He oversaw the breakup of AT&T; and cable deregulation.

Quote: “We’re not after anybody,” Dingell said of his new power to subpoena Bush administration officials, but added that they will be “invited to come forward.”

—

Charles B. Rangel

Committee: Ways and Means

Age: 76

First elected: 1970

District: northern Manhattan

Highlights: As a member of Ways and Means, Rangel has worked for targeted federal tax credits to benefit impoverished urban communities, including New York City’s Harlem, his political power base for four decades.

Quote: “Since it appeared there would be a Democratic majority, I can’t tell you the number of pharmaceutical companies and health plans that have come to me and said we can work together to put together a plan to cover the 47 million uninsured.”

TOKYO — There is in George Bush, as in many successful politicians, an element that is always on stage, an element of the eternal campaigner who responds with the instinctive gesture, sometimes incongruous and sometimes just right.

And so it was in Tokyo, notwithstanding the dreary mood of a rainy February afternoon, the solemnity of the state funeral of Emperor Hirohito and, on top of all that, the worrisome political problems posed by his troubled nomination of John Tower to be secretary of defense. Incongruity and the perfect touch, moments apart.

The funeral for the emperor who had reigned in wartime Japan was not a simple rite. It was a precisely staged ceremony of official mourning. The name of the man it memorialized brought back from fading memory the atrocities of World War II.

Arriving at the U.S. Embassy after this affair of state, the formally attired President flashed a thumbs-up sign–the simple gesture in incongruous contrast to the somber tenor of the occasion.

Moments later, he tossed aside a prepared address, delivered an off-the-cuff speech to a crowd of Americans at the embassy, and then spied a cluster of youngsters in the group. That gave him an idea.

Singling out the personal aide who accompanies him throughout his day, whether in Washington, Tokyo, or points in between, Bush said, “Tim McBride’s a good photographer.” With that, the President invited the children to hand McBride their cameras. They obliged, and he posed with each of them for pictures, McBride snapping away as the brief visit was stretched out by 15 minutes.

“It was like a campaign stop,” said the senior White House official who recounted the story, satisfied with his boss’ spontaneous, crowd-pleasing gesture.

Bush’s presidential campaign was marked in its final months by its careful control of each week’s agenda. No matter how Michael S. Dukakis would attack, Bush steadfastly kept to his script, making sure that the focus remained wherever he shined his light. Thus, Willie Horton and the American flag became the enduring symbols of the autumn.

In the opening days of the Bush Administration, however, the light has occasionally flickered. Its beam has been cast with less certainty, as outside events have distracted public attention from the President’s message. And nowhere has that become more evident than here in Tokyo.

Bush was invited to Japan to attend the Hirohito funeral. He took advantage of the ceremony to schedule individual meetings with nearly two dozen other leaders from countries large and small, squeezing 17 into a 30-hour period.

Much as Bush threw open the doors of the White House on the morning after his inauguration to a symbolic sampling of the American populace, he opened the Spanish-style residence of the U.S. ambassador to a representation of the world leadership–prime ministers and presidents and even a king (Baudouin I of Belgium).

One after another, they arrived in the same room in which Gen. Douglas MacArthur received Hirohito in September, 1945, a month after the end of World War II.

And with time running out, the President arranged a dinner Friday with one more visitor to Tokyo–meeting King Juan Carlos I of Spain, in a hotel restaurant.

But it was the Tower- mondai , as the Tower problem is called here, that riveted the attention of the White House staff and most of the 80 or so American reporters who accompanied Bush to Tokyo when they woke up Friday morning to the news that the Senate Armed Services Committee was about to reject the nomination.

Those who struggled to keep track of the funeral on large television screens in the White House press room at the Okura Hotel were swimming upstream: The tide Friday was swelled by a torrent of stories bearing Tokyo datelines and they were all about Tower.

And what about the President’s daylong effort to review the issues of the day with such foreign leaders as Presidents Richard von Weizsaecker of West Germany, Corazon Aquino of the Philippines and Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan?

What about evolving East-West relations, Afghanistan and Iran, U.S. support for President Aquino? All became afterthoughts.

The White House took particular pains not to offend Japanese sensitivities on a day of mourning.

Tokyo had instructed dignitaries on proper funeral attire, down to the black handkerchief in the pocket of the rented morning coat Bush brought from Washington.

Communications went back and forth between Tokyo and Washington, for example, on one particular point of concern: Barbara Bush’s request to wear her trademark triple string of fake pearls.

(Mrs. Bush’s identification with fake pearls has become so well known that it came as a surprise to some aides when she made a quick shopping stop after the funeral and purchased real Japanese pearls–a double-strand bracelet, with a silver clasp. Mrs. Bush herself was surprised when the jeweler refused to take a personal check. So she cashed her check–about $200–with U.S. Embassy personnel and paid in cash.)

The Japanese said pearls would not be suitable at the funeral. But after a time, this difficult decision was reversed. It seems that the pearls–artificial or otherwise–would be permissible, because pearls are, in the Japanese view, “the tears of the oyster.”

Times staff writer Betty Cuniberti contributed to this story.