A bipartisan package of bills aimed at punishing unethical attorneys and hedge funds that have flourished within California’s legal industry is headed to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk.
The two bills would bar lawyers from prioritizing the desires of private investors who fund lawsuits, and ramp up penalties for lawyers who scout for clients at hospitals, jails and accident sites.
Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles), one of the bill authors, said the legislation is intended to police the state’s bruised legal profession in response to “a wave of inappropriate attorney conduct” reported by The Times.
“When attorneys are exploiting vulnerable people, including paying folks to file fraudulent claims, they’re not just breaking the law, they really undermine the credibility of the legal system and every attorney,” Zbur said.
Both bills were sponsored by the Consumer Attorneys of California, a powerful trial lawyer trade group that says it wants to beef up punishment for misconduct.
“If we are going to demand that corporations, government, and powerful institutions be held accountable, we must be — and we are — willing to hold ourselves to that same standard,” Doug Saeltzer, head of the association, said in a statement.
California law already bans a practice known as capping, in which non-attorneys directly solicit or procure clients to sign up for lawsuits with a law firm.
Zbur’s legislation, Assembly Bill 2039, would require that attorneys lose their license if they’re convicted of felony capping or a misdemeanor capping conviction in which they “acted knowingly and for financial gain.” The lawyers could also be fined $25,000 per violation.
The bill also creates whistleblower protections for law firm employees who report misconduct, and would enact new restrictions on loans that attorneys give their clients. California is one of the few states where lawyers can lend money directly to plaintiffs.
Lawyers who use the loans to sway the client’s decision-making around “legal strategy, settlement decisions, or continued representation” can be fined $15,000 per offense.
The second bill aims to bar private investors from influencing a case — for example, telling a lawyer how many clients to take on or when to settle — in lawsuits they fund.
California allows lawyers to take high-interest rate loans from investors, such as private equity firms or hedge funds, who expect to profit from the payout when a case is settled. Critics of this litigation funding claim investors sometimes exert themselves in legal strategy to the detriment of the clients, such as requiring a case to settle prematurely so the law firm can repay the loan faster.
“We don’t want them having any influence in the outcome of a case,” said Assemblyman Ash Kalra (D-San José), who authored AB 2305. “We want the lawyers to be able to represent their clients, and then not have those financial pressures play any role.”
A spokesperson for Newsom’s office said they don’t comment on pending legislation.
Lawyers already are barred under State Bar rules from allowing a third party to dictate case strategy. Kalra has said the goal of the bill is to provide additional “clear statutory safeguards.”
Law firms would also be barred from using money from private investors to market for cases, Kalra said. The State Bar would be tasked with disciplining lawyers that flout the rule.
A Times investigation last year found law firms that have filed thousands of sex abuse claims in California are funded by private investors, meaning an unknown chunk of the $4-billion settlement will go into the pockets of opaque funders.
It’s unclear how violations of the law would come to the attention of the State Bar. Litigation funding agreements are typically private between the funder and the law firm, and clients often don’t know their cases are being funded by private investors.
Jaime Huff, the head of the Civil Justice Assn. of California, which advocates for lawsuit reform on behalf of business interests, said her group — a frequent foe of California trial lawyers — ultimately pulled their support from the bill because they found it toothless.
“I don’t trust the State Bar to tie their own shoes in the morning, much less govern this stuff,” said Huff. “It’s basically gaslighting the public into thinking, ‘Yes, they’ve done something.’”
“It’s like the mall cop of self-policing,” she added.
Kalra said the point was to send a blunt message to the state’s legal bar.
“There may be loopholes that folks find in this one, and they have to follow up and close those loopholes,” he said. “But ultimately, it makes a very clear rule as to how that funding can be used. Once that rule is in place, it’s the law. And lawyers have to follow the law.”
After an outcry from immigrant and civil rights advocates over plans to equip immigration officers with gloves capable of delivering electric shocks, California lawmakers on Thursday unveiled a bill that would ban the use of shock gloves by any law enforcement agent in the state.
The gloves deliver can an electrical shock strong enough to drop a strong man to his knees in an instant, and proponents say the gloves provide a fast and non-lethal way to subdue a person.
Two weeks ago, the Associated Press reported that the Department of Homeland security planned to use $10 million to $20 million to procure the gloves from Compliant Technologies of Lexington, Ky., for Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. The department defended its decision, saying it was “made with careful consideration” and that other law enforcement agencies in the country already use the technology.
Civil rights organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union accused the department of attempting to intimidate the public by arming agents with another use-of-force option. They noted that ICE already is contending with criticism for multiple deaths in custody and during arrests.
Assembly Bill 2760, authored by state Assemblymember LaShea Sharp-Collins (D-San Diego), would prohibit local, state and federal agencies from possessing, using or procuring electric taser gloves in the state or with state funds.
“We cannot spend state money or tax dollars on technology that is not to better our state,” Sharp-Collins said during a news conference with other lawmakers in Sacramento. “It cannot be used on our children, it cannot be used on our teachers, our business owners, it cannot be used on anyone.”
The CTG-5 G.L.O.V.E — standing for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter — resembles a thick work glove and can be activated to emit a 380-volt shock upon contact with a body. Compliant Technologies has maintained that the gloves are weaker than traditional tasers, but critics say they can be life-threatening in the hands of ICE.
“Many people try to say weapons like this are about de-escalation, but I don’t know how many people have put hands on someone and said that’s de-escalation,” state Assemblymember Alex Lee (D-Alameda) said. “There’s already a spectrum of non-lethal, less-than-violent weapons out there that exists… ICE and law enforcement don’t need another tool.”
The gloves have been adopted in detention centers, law enforcement agencies and jails across the country, though apparently none in California. Last week, AP reported that Omaha police agreed to stop using the shock gloves after parents realized they’d been adopted by departments that monitored schools.
Sharp-Collins said she prepared the legislation in consultation with the state attorney general’s office and legislative council to ensure it would withstand a challenge from the Trump administration if it became law.
The Senate voted 30-9 on Monday to approve a rule change that would allow for the bill to pass quickly before the end of the legislative session on Aug. 31.
A decade-long fight to outlaw child marriage in California is nearly at an end.
A bi-partisan bill that makes it illegal to issue marriage licenses to anyone under 18 cleared the state Assembly on Wednesday, drawing cheers from supporters who said the measure was a long overdue fix to an “archaic” piece of California law.
“The issue has evolved now because we have better stories, we have better data. We have a growing national movement … marriage is really something that can be reserved for consenting adults,” said Assemblymember Gail Pellerin (D-Santa Cruz).
The bill — whose chief authors include Republican Assemblywoman Diane Dixon and Democrats Caroline Menjivar and Cottie Petrie-Norris — glided through the state Senate and Assembly without major opposition. It now heads to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk.
Until the bill is signed into law, California remains one of three states in the U.S. without a minimum age to get married or enter into a domestic partnership. While the state has guardrails on the marriage process for minors, requiring them to gain judicial approval and the consent of at least one parent before receiving a license, advocates say children can still be easily pressured to wed by their parents or religious groups.
“All we’re doing with any judicial review process … is putting the onus on a terrified child,” said Fraidy Reiss, the founder and executive director of Unchained At Last, an advocacy group working on legislation to end child marriage across the U.S.
There were 88 marriage licenses issued in California where at least one party was a minor between 2019 and 2025, according to data collected by the state Department of Public Health. Some of those marriages involved weddings between girls as young as 15 and men in their 30s, according to a Senate analysis of the bill. In L.A. County, 51 licenses were issued to minors between 2014 and 2025, according to the county Registrar’s office.
“Even if the numbers are relatively small every child deserves protection,” Pellerin said. “And we don’t want to wait for a problem to become so widespread before we start protecting children.”
A 2020 study by the International Center for Research on Women shows underage marriages can have devastating long-term impacts on young girls.
“Marrying early has universally detrimental effects over a range of outcomes, including educational attainment; earnings; physical, reproductive, and mental health; experiences of violence; and likelihood of divorce, particularly for girls,” the study found.
Although consensual sex between a person over 18 and someone under that age is still considered statutory rape under California law, sex between those same two people becomes legal if they are married. Reiss said the state’s law allowing underage unions was essentially a shield for sexual abusers.
“It destroys almost any aspect of a girl’s life and it doesn’t deliver any benefit,” she said. “The only benefit it brings is to creepy guys who want to prey on teenage girls.”
The American Civil Liberties Union filed an opposition letter against the measure in June, warning the bill could have an unintended consequence of removing a minor’s autonomy over their own body.
“Just as minors have the right to decide to have an abortion or to carry a pregnancy to term (or to seek a restraining order) on their own, they should maintain the right to marry, with robust protections in place to prevent coercion and abuse,” the ACLU wrote.
But Pellerin, who previously served as Santa Cruz County Clerk, said it was the memory of a pregnant teen that helped push her to fight for the bill. She recalled issuing a marriage license to a 16-year-old girl and man in his late teens or early 20s, and felt that the girl’s parents were forcing them to wed.
Under California law at the time, Pellerin said, she had no evidence of coercion or force so she had no choice but to process the license. She hopes once Newsom signs the bill, no young girl will have to go through that again.
“I’m often haunted by that look on her face,” Pellerin said. “My kid is out at soccer practice and this girl is in here, pregnant, scared to death, signing up for a lifetime commitment.”
If signed into law by Newsom, the new minimum marriage age would take effect January 1, 2027.
Reporting from Washington — Jared Kushner may finally get a win.
President Trump’s son-in-law has been a drag on the administration for his friendship with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman since the Oct. 2 killing of a U.S.-based dissident Saudi journalist. His family business continues to raise questions of conflicts of interest, he repeatedly has amended financial disclosure reports to remedy omissions, and he endured an embarrassing yearlong delay in obtaining a security clearance. Meanwhile, his chief assignment, a Mideast peace plan, is as elusive as ever.
Lately, however, Kushner has been instrumental in helping his father-in-law secure a rare bipartisan victory: a long-sought overhaul of the criminal justice system.
Both Republicans and Democrats who’ve worked on the bill in Congress credit Kushner as a key architect. He helped convince the two most powerful Republicans in Washington — his father-in-law and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, both of whom embrace the traditionally Republican tough-on-crime stance — to make the criminal justice system less punitive.
The bill cleared a procedural hurdle in the Senate on Monday evening, 82 to 12, a vote margin that belies the arduous effort to overcome initial opposition from conservatives. Final Senate passage is expected later this week and the legislation is expected to easily get through the House and to the White House for Trump’s signature.
Called the First Step Act, the legislation would undo some of the sentencing crackdowns of the 1990s and create programs to reduce prisoner recidivism.
It would allow low- and minimum-risk prisoners to earn time credits for early release to either reentry centers or home confinement; reduce some mandatory minimum sentences, including those imposed by so-called three-strikes laws that automatically result in life imprisonment; and allow reviews of sentences that reflect significant disparities between harsh punishments for crack cocaine use, which disproportionately involve minorities, and lesser penalties for powder cocaine.
Kushner, driven by the experience of his father’s 14-month prison sentence for tax evasion and other crimes, has made prison and sentencing changes a priority since the beginning of the Trump administration. But unlike loftier goals Kushner has embraced, such as peace between Israel and Palestinians, criminal justice reform is likely to be signed by the president.
Kushner helped work on policy details and knew where the political fault lines would be, according to lawmakers. He was on the phone repeatedly with other advocates to discuss strategy and next steps. He personally lobbied senators, including McConnell, who openly was not eager to make time for a Senate vote. And he served as a bridge to conservative media, which could have blown up the effort with even a whiff of opposition.
“There would be some very outspoken right-wing [opponent] and [Kushner] would tell me, ‘I called him this morning. I straightened him out and now he’s going to be OK,’” said Democratic supporter Sen. Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, declining to name the commentator. “I’m thinking, ‘Who would have dreamed that a bill I’m cosponsoring would be OK with this person?’”
Advocates of the criminal justice overhaul tried to pass a similar bill at the end of the Obama administration, only to be stymied by congressional Republicans. They had little hope of getting it through during the Trump administration given the president’s campaign rhetoric on crime, including a call to execute drug dealers, and because of the fierce opposition of his first attorney general, Jeff Sessions.
“This is a president that ran on American ‘carnage,’” said Jessica Jackson, a Mill Valley, Calif., City Council member who started the advocacy group #cut50 with liberal CNN host and commentator Van Jones. “I thought everything was over.”
“I’m a Democrat,” Jackson said, but “Jared is politically brilliant and he’s relentless and he’s also extremely loyal. If he tells you he’s going to do something, he does it.”
Kushner started early. He made his support for criminal justice changes known to the leaders of the bipartisan congressional effort — including Durbin, the Senate’s second-ranking Democrat, and Republican Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee — within weeks of Trump’s inauguration.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), another architect of the plan, knew Kushner was taking the issue seriously when Kushner started dropping “the very precise nomenclature thrown around by criminal justice reform geeks” — for example, citing the relevant U.S. criminal code lines by their numbers.
While Kushner’s initial goal was prison reform, which is an easier sell with conservatives, it quickly became clear that had to be paired with sentencing reform to get the backing of Grassley and Durbin.
Perhaps the biggest obstacle was McConnell’s reluctance to bring up a bill that would unify Democrats and divide Republicans, handing the opposition a potential political cudgel in the 2020 campaign. He told a group of Republican advocates in September that he would bring the bill to the Senate floor only if it was endorsed by Trump and they secured 65 votes — five more than the minimum number needed to overcome procedural roadblocks.
Given the goal, Kushner relentlessly lobbied reluctant Republican senators to get on board, according to sources familiar with the discussions.
He called “everybody — and often,” said Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Senate Republican, whose late endorsement was part of a groundswell that made clear that enough Republicans would support the legislation. “He was dogged.”
On numerous occasions he lobbied McConnell directly, even trying to figure out the Republican leader’s dinner companions so that he could lobby them before their meal.
Advocates of the First Step Act also rallied high-profile celebrity supporters, such as Kim Kardashian West, which demonstrated to the media-obsessed Trump the positive publicity he could get. Kushner worked with Jones, and eventually got support from celebrities including Alyssa Milano and former Fox News host Eric Bolling.
“Jared Kushner absolutely was one of the main conduits,” Bolling said.
The dam broke this month when Trump tweeted “go for it, Mitch” and several noteworthy conservatives backed the bill, including Sens. Cornyn, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Ted Cruz of Texas.
Lee, the Republican senator allied with Kushner, said: “One of the things I’ve appreciated about him is he doesn’t cut corners with this. I haven’t seen him abuse the position of trust as the president’s son-in-law. He doesn’t throw that around.”
Everyone in Washington knows Kushner’s trusted place in the Trump orbit; members of Congress return his phone calls and know he speaks for the president, at least as much as anyone can. Yet when Vice President Mike Pence came to a meeting of Senate Republicans to lobby on the bill last month, Kushner was deferential; attendees said he sat in the room but barely said a word.
The bill does have significant critics. Sens. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and John Kennedy (R-La.) argue that it could allow dangerous criminals to get early release, and have proposed a series of amendments that could get votes this week. Still, passage is considered all but certain.
Bill Rasmussen, the founder of the world’s first 24-hour all-sports cable network ESPN, has died. He was 93.
The sports media company announced his death in a news release on Tuesday and said the cause was from the effects of Parkinson’s disease. The entrepreneur was first diagnosed with the movement disorder in 2014.
“Bill was a remarkable man — a visionary and an innovator who conceived the idea of a network entirely devoted to sports,” said ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro in a statement. “Quite simply, none of us would be here today if it wasn’t for Bill’s passion and all the hard work and entrepreneurial spirit he put into building ESPN in the late 1970s.”
Rasmussen’s creation — which began in the small industrial town of Bristol, Conn., — became an integral part of the new television landscape that emerged from cable and satellite technologies in the 1970s. Before the launch of ESPN, consumers had a limited number of sports viewing options through the handful of local TV stations in their markets.
ESPN launched seven months before Ted Turner unveiled his 24-hour news channel CNN. The two channels became the most valuable assets in building the pay-TV business, as cable and satellite providers expanded across the country, forever changing consumer viewing habits by offering a wide array of choices. ESPN’s continued growth over the decades that followed also showed that viewers have an insatiable appetite for live sports programming.
William F. Rasmussen was born Oct. 15, 1932, in Chicago and raised in nearby Columbus Manor, Ill. As a child, he had a knack for sports and was considered an avid athlete. He attended DePauw University in Indiana and received his bachelor’s degree in economics. After he graduated, he served in the United States Air Force and later earned an MBA from Rutgers University in New Jersey.
He built an entrepreneurial venture in the advertising business and decided to pivot to a career in media in 1962 with a radio position in Massachusetts. A few years later, he moved to WWLP-TV, a broadcast news channel, where he worked for eight years as sports director and two years as news director. After leaving the station, he worked as the communications director for the New England Whalers but was later fired from the role in 1978.
Rasmussen and his son Scott had been chasing the new business of satellite television through the summer of 1978 and had secured space on an RCA transponder — Rasmussen financed the deposit on a credit card, using a $9,000 advance, by his own account. What they lacked was programming. Stuck in traffic on Interstate 84 on a Friday afternoon in August, driving toward the New Jersey shore, Rasmussen floated the idea of filling the channel with nothing but sports.
Their idea soon developed from a local station showing Connecticut sports to state residents to a larger 24-hour national sports network. They received financial backing from the Getty Oil Company, a contract for programming with the NCAA and an advertising agreement with Anheuser-Busch — marking the largest sponsorship deal in cable history at the time. The Entertainment and Sports Programming Network was soon founded in Bristol with around 80 employees.
ESPN officially launched to 1.4 million homes at 7 p.m. Eastern time on Sept. 7, 1979, with a short introduction followed by the opening show, “SportsCenter” hosted by Lee Leonard and George Grande. To this day, “SportsCenter,” remains a vital part of the network’s programming and holds the record for the most episodes in television history.
ABC acquired ESPN from Texaco, which had absorbed Getty for $237.5 million in 1984 after buying a small stake in the network earlier that year. The entity became part of the Walt Disney Co. after the media conglomerate purchased Capital Cities/ABC in 1996. ESPN absorbed ABC’s sports division in 2006.
ESPN currently employs more than 5,900 people worldwide and operates eight U.S. cable channels, according to the company, in addition to programming sports on ABC and running one of the most-used sports apps in the country. Rasmussen himself was gone from day-to-day operations roughly a year after launch, displaced by the professional managers and outside money his idea had attracted.
“Bill was our George Washington and a good friend,” said veteran ESPN anchor Chris Berman in a statement. He joined the network only three weeks after the original launch in 1979. “He was such a grateful person and every sports fan can be grateful for Bill.”
After leaving ESPN, Rasmussen continued to serve as a consultant to sports rights holders and media companies and also maintained his own startup ventures in sports.
He publicly disclosed his 2014 Parkinson’s disease diagnosis in 2019 and became an ambassador for Parkinson’s patients through both the American Parkinson Disease Assn. and the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research.
“I’m a positive guy . . . I always look at the positive side of people, projects, ideas, etc. For some reason, Parkinson’s is kind of an orphaned malady — people don’t like to talk about it, as if it were taboo,” said Rasmussen in an essay he wrote for ESPN that year. “Well, 40 years ago, people didn’t want to talk about a 24-hour sports network either as if competing with ‘The Big Three’ broadcast networks was taboo. We never stopped asking questions, solving problems and selling the dream. A lot of really good people did believe and we see the results of that effort today.”
Rasmussen’s wife of 56 years, Lois, died in 2011. He is survived by his three children, Scott, Glenn and Lynn Van Hollebeke, seven grandchildren, Andy, P.J., Wil, MaryAnn, Donna, Jessica and Sarah and two great-grandchildren, Otto and Adelaide.
Reform U.K.’s Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, Robert Jenrick, unveils his party’s plans for drastic cuts to welfare at a news conference in London on Monday. Photo by Andy Rain/EPA
Aug. 17 (UPI) — Britain’s Reform U.K. party said Monday that it would slash almost $68B from welfare, were it to win power at the next election.
The largest single ticket-items, saving $58.3 billion, would come from halting welfare payments to non-citizens and a shake up of disability and ill-health benefits.
Cutting off nationals of other countries, including those with settled status and resident EU nationals would save $28.5 billion by year five, according to Reform, but would breach the country’s 2019 Brexit deal with Brussels and would therefore require it to be renegotiated.
Foreign nationals would become ineligible for six main benefits from the state including “universal credit,” housing payments, free childcare and unemployment, child and disability checks.
All families whose children were born in Britain would continue to receive payments for each child under 16 [under 20 if in non-higher education or training] and free school meals for those with after-tax household incomes of $10,000 or less.
Danny Kruger, Reform’s work and pensions spokesman, told BBC’s Breakfast program it was fair that people requiring welfare should have it paid by the country of which they are a citizen.
“I’d understand if the Europeans decided to apply the same principle that we are and to deny our nationals access to their welfare system and we will pay for that ourselves.”
Kruger acknowledged that many settled overseas nationals living in Britain would simply apply for — and would likely be granted — British citizenship, insisting that the savings calculated took account of that scenario.
He said the plan had also taken into account that the EU would likely take reciprocal action, halting welfare payments to Britons who had not become citizens of the EU country where they were living.
The other biggest area of savings — $29.8 billion — would come from reforming disability benefits, including scrapping so-called personal independence payments for disabled people and replacing them with another cash benefit available only to those deemed “gravely ill and severely challenged.”
Kruger stressed that Reform accepted some people were unable to ever work, saying that those people would continue to be properly supported and would no longer be required to repeatedly be assessed to see if they were still eligible.
The pro-EU Best For Britain group criticized Reform’s plan, in particular the potential negative impact on relations with the EU.
“Our polling shows that people do want to renegotiate our relationship with Europe, but by moving closer, not by damaging ties with vital allies and punishing our neighbours, colleagues and friends who have settled status here,” said policy executive director Tom Brufatto.
Labour MP Rachael Maskell was critical of the targeting of disability benefits.
“When Pip helps people go to work, play a role in our society and simply live, threatening to remove Pip demonstrates that Reform do not want disabled people to play a full role in our society,” said Maskell who previously led a rebellion by Labour backbenchers against efforts by former Prime Minister Keir Starmer to cut welfare.
In April, the Office for Budget Responsibility said it expected Britain’s welfare bill for 2025-2026 to hit $452.4 billion, equivalent to 10.6% of GDP, and accounting around 24% of all government spending.
However, more than half of all welfare spending goes on pensioners, nearly all of it on the State Pension, an inflation-protected pension which people pay into until they retire and is topped up by the government.
Martin Luther King Jr. delivers his famed “I Have a Dream” speech from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington on August 28, 1963. The speech galvanized the nation’s civil rights movements and led to the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act and the 1968 Fair Housing Act. File photo by UPI | License Photo
SACRAMENTO — Proposed legislation to protect animals from “Frankenstein”-like medical experimentation died in the state Senate on Thursday, and supporters blame election year politics for its demise.
Assembly Bill 1382 by Assemblymember Leticia Castillo (R-Home Gardens) would have banned the sale of genetically modified animals in California, such as glow-in-the-dark rabbits and horned “unicorn” horses.
While the business of cosmetically modified, futuristic-looking pets remains in its infancy, animal rights groups worry that eventually the creatures will be created, sold and later discarded in crowded municipal shelters.
Castillo’s bill passed unanimously in the Assembly earlier this year and sailed through the Senate Judiciary Committee in June with bipartisan support.
On Thursday, the legislation died in the Senate Appropriations Committee. The chair of that powerful committee is Sen. Sabrina Cervantes (D-Riverside) whose sister, Clarissa Cervantes, is challenging Castillo in the Nov. 3 election.
Cervantes never brought up the bill during Thursday’s hearing, which effectively kills it. Cervantes’ office didn’t respond to requests about why the legislation died.
Judie Mancuso, the founder of Social Compassion in Legislation, the bill’s sponsor, called the outcome “ludicrous.”
“When you’ve worked in the Capitol as long as I have, you understand that good bills can become political assets or political liabilities during an election cycle,” said Mancuso.
Castillo pledged Thursday to continue her focus on animals and cosmetic genetic engineering.
“This bill was never about politics — it was about protecting animals from being turned into novelty products,” Castillo said in a statement. “I’m disappointed AB 1382 did not move forward, but I am not done fighting for these animals. The technology that makes ‘designer pets’ possible isn’t going away, and neither am I.”
A 2025 Wired article entitled “Your Next Pet Could Be a Glowing Rabbit” profiled a Texas company seeking to create gene-edited pets. Josie Zayner, the founder of the company, told the Times in July that she opposed Castillo’s bill.
Castillo, at a hearing earlier this year, said she understands the concept of gene-editing animals for health reasons, but doesn’t want to see the alterations for cosmetic reasons.
Glow-in-the dark fish were exempt from her bill, which proposed civil penalties of at least $5,000.
Though the Judicial Council of California, the policy-making body for the courts, reviewed the legislation and didn’t have any fiscal concerns about it, the Senate Appropriations Committee analysis warned of “potentially significant workload cost pressures to the state funded trial court system” to resolve any civil cases related to the bill.
“The fiscal impact of this bill to the courts will depend on many unknowns, including the number of cases filed and the factors unique to each case,” the analysis stated.
The Democratic-controlled legislature uses appropriations committees to cull through hundreds of bills placed on what is referred to as the “suspense file.”
Officially, the suspense file is a tool for legislative leaders to evaluate costly bills by weighing them against one another and deciding what to advance to a vote by the Senate and Assembly. Unofficially, it’s used as a way for Democrats who control the Legislature to kill controversial bills out of the public eye.
California Democrats are making an aggressive push to unseat Castillo from the Assembly in the November election, Politico reported.
Castillo defeated Clarissa Cervantes in 2024 by nearly 600 votes to represent parts of Riverside County and San Bernardino County. Castillo lost to then-Assemblymember Sabrina Cervantes in 2022.
After the bill was moved to the Senate Appropriations Committee earlier this year, animal advocates reached out to state Senate Pro Tempore Monique Limón’s office to question the move.
“It’s my belief that there is some kind of political game going on,” Michelle Kelly, chief executive of the nonprofit welfare organization Los Angeles Rabbit Foundation, told the Times last month.
“Why would anyone not want to move forward with this bill?” Kelly said.
In a push toward returning Anaheim to the name of his hometown Angels, Assemblyman Avelino Valencia (D-Anaheim) last March introduced what he called the “Home Run for Anaheim Act.”
Five months later, the bill has cleared both houses of the state legislature without a single vote against it. Gov. Gavin Newsom has two months to sign the bill into law, barring a veto that would be surprising because of the lack of opposition.
The bill does not mandate the Angels — playing under a Los Angeles name in Anaheim’s city-owned stadium — revert to the Anaheim Angels name.
Angels owner Arte Moreno has twice reached deals with the city to develop the land, only to see the city walk away both times. In the last deal, he rejected the city’s request to rename the team the Anaheim Angels.
Moreno has shown no public interest in a third negotiation with the city, and the Angels’ current stadium lease extends through 2032, with the team having options to extend the lease through 2038.
By year’s end, the city has said it anticipates the release of a long-awaited property assessment, which is expected to show Angel Stadium needs hundreds of millions of dollars in upgrades to remain viable for the long-term. The city and team may not agree on who should pay for them, and real estate development around the stadium could be part of the solution for funding a new or renovated stadium.
Moreno turns 80 this week. Should he decide to sell the Angels, the city could use the exemption as leverage in discussions with a new owner. Any new owner could have leverage of his own: Once the Angel Stadium lease expires, the owner would be free to move out of Anaheim.
The bill required five votes between the Assembly and Senate. The final vote came on Monday on a consent calendar, the place for matters considered so routine that no legislator even wishes to discuss them.
Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., speaks Tuesday at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. Schiff and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., have released a new cybersecurity bill, the Water Cyber Shield Act. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo
Aug. 10 (UPI) — Sens. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., released a new cybersecurity bill, the Water Cyber Shield Act, on Monday in an effort to meet increased cybersecurity needs for U.S. water infrastructure.
This follows recent cyberattacks on more than 30 municipal water systems throughout Minnesota and other states last month. Officials suspect that they may originate from Iran-based hackers.
While utilities regained control over their systems and water supplies were not affected, CBS News reported, cybersecurity experts saidthe attacks exposed longstanding weaknesses.
A press release from Schiff, the top Democrat on the Fisheries,Water and Wildlife subcommittee of the Environment and Public Works Committee, said the act would strengthen federal oversight by the Environmental Protection Agency, provide important funding for local utilities and protect drinking water and wastewater systems from cyberattacks.
“Every American depends on safe, reliable drinking water, yet recent events have exposed just how vulnerable our water systems remain toc yberattacks by foreign adversaries and criminal entities,” Schiff said in a statement. “These threats are not hypothetical — they are happening right now.This legislation gives EPA the tools the tools it needs to protect thiscritical infrastructure while providing the resources that local water and wastewater systems need to strengthen their cybersecurity without passing the cost on to ratepayers.”
The bill would increase drinking water and clean water state revolving funds by $300 million annually, The Hill reported. It would requirethe EPA to work with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the National Institute of Standards and Technology to establish basic cybersecurity standards for drinking water systems.
“The recent cybersecurity attacks on Minnesota have highlighted the urgent need to improve the security of our water systems and critical infrastructure,” Klobuchar said. “Our legislation will direct the EPA to assess water infrastructure cybersecurity and identify vulnerabilities, and help municipal water systems defend against cyber threats.”
SACRAMENTO — Weeks before voting ended in California’s primary for governor, Los Angeles-based influencer Shaka Smith took to Instagram to tell his more than 700,000 followers whom he was voting for and why.
“Healthcare shouldn’t bankrupt you, housing should not feel impossible, polluters shouldn’t pass their bill to us, and artists should not be replaced by AI,” Smith said. “That’s why I’m supporting Tom Steyer for governor.”
But Smith started the video with a disclaimer: “This is an ad, and honestly, I wish more political content said that first.” His caption specified that he was paid by Steyer’s campaign.
California is one of two states, along with Texas, that have passed policies requiring content creators to say if they’ve been paid by a political campaign to post, and the Golden State is considering cracking down by fining people who don’t.
Campaigns have long worked with celebrities and major influencers to win over voters, but now they are teaming up with smaller creators — sometimes with fewer than 100,000 followers — to reach more tailored audiences. That has sparked debates about whether disclosure rules for political advertisements should apply to content creators, who are expected to play prominent roles in the upcoming midterms and the 2028 presidential election.
“If you’re running for president and you are not currently trying to court some of these people or lining up your own people to act as surrogates for you, you’re already behind,” said Mike Nellis, a Democratic strategist who worked for Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign.
Campaigns tap creators to spread their message
Questions about transparency have been fueled by high-profile instances of influencers making content intended to change minds or votes without disclosing they were being paid.
In 2022, the campaign of Democratic then-Senate candidate John Fetterman paid Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi of “Jersey Shore” to record a video teasing his GOP rival for leaving New Jersey before announcing his run in Pennsylvania. In 2023, content creators were paid by an influencer marketing agency with conservative ties to defend Texas Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton, a Republican, after he was impeached for alleged bribery and other accusations of misconduct, according to the Texas Tribune. The payments weren’t clearly disclosed in either case.
Steyer, a Democratic billionaire who spent more than $215 million of his own money on his unsuccessful bid for governor, took fire from rivals for paying content creators. He wasn’t the only contender in the race paying influencers, but he faced much of the blowback because he had already been accused of trying to buy the election for having poured much of his personal fortune into his campaign. Many of the creators who worked with Steyer’s campaign disclosed that they were paid, but the state’s campaign finance watchdog is investigating several other instances in which creators allegedly didn’t.
There are no federal disclosure rules
Sen. Adam Schiff of California introduced federal legislation last month, but it hasn’t received a vote yet. Some outside groups are urging the Federal Election Commission to pass its own rule.
California’s law requiring disclosure, passed in 2023, is difficult to enforce. The state’s campaign watchdog can seek a court order compelling an influencer to disclose that they were paid, but that can take months.
That prompted Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) to write a new bill to penalize content creators and political committees if the creator fails to state they were compensated. The bill would give the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission the power to fine influencers and committees if they are found to have violated the law, allowing the commission to bypass the court process. They could face fines of up to $5,000 per violation, according to the commission.
“Voters should have a right to know whether or not campaigns are paying for the messaging that they’re seeing,” Berman said.
Texas’ campaign watchdog passed a rule in 2024 requiring content creators to include disclaimers when they are paid for political advertisements, and the New York Legislature is considering a similar requirement. Other disclosure bills failed in recent years in Utah and Georgia.
Influencer says his ad had an impact
Smith, the L.A. influencer, hadn’t committed to a candidate for governor when a trusted friend told him to look into Steyer. That friend had been paid to post about Steyer.
Smith liked Steyer’s promise to increase taxes on billionaires and his refusal to accept donations from corporate political action committees.
He ended up doing two paid ads, both of which included compensation disclaimers that the Steyer campaign told him were a requirement.
Smith wouldn’t say exactly how much the campaign paid him, but he said it was in the thousands of dollars. He thinks the posts had an effect on his followers, with only a few detractors objecting.
“They kind of trust my voice,” he said of his audience. “They knew that if I’m saying it, it’s at least something they should look into.”
Creators respond to proposed policy changes
Dustin Torreverde, a content creator in Southern California who hasn’t been paid by a political campaign for social media posts, said it’s important for influencers to be transparent with their audiences. But the bill could pose an unfair burden on creators who are just trying to make a living, he said.
“A lot of us are very small creators,” he said. “So if we were to get penalized and we have to get lawyers, stuff like that, it’s going to be very difficult for us.”
Adina Flores, a libertarian content creator in Northern California who votes for both parties, said influencers should have to disclose if they are paid and that she generally supports penalties. She worries some people may take money to post political content without doing a “deep dive into the candidate to make sure that’s somebody they should support.”
Saurav Ghosh, a lawyer with the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit focused on protecting American democracy, hopes disclosure requirements passed by states will lead to federal rules.
“Transparency is one of the most important pillars of our election system,” he said.
For six years, Californians have been able to shake up a craft cocktail at home using alcohol delivered to their doorstep. Now, it’s last call for the distillery deliveries, unless lawmakers intervene by the end of this month.
That’s unlikely, thanks to opposition from California’s wine industry, Teamsters union truck drivers and corporate alcohol wholesalers and distributors.
The influential, well-funded groups lobbied the Legislature behind closed doors this year to block legislation that would have made permanent pandemic-era rules that allowed craft distillers to ship spirits directly to their customers.
During the pandemic lockdowns, Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order that allowed craft distillers to ship spirits to their customers’ homes. In the years since, lawmakers passed temporary laws allowing craft distillers — defined as those that produce up to 150,000 gallons a year — to keep shipping their spirits.
The latest extension expires Dec. 31.
“I don’t have a lot of hope that we’re going to be able to salvage this,” said Folsom Republican Assemblymember Josh Hoover. He tried unsuccessfully this year to amend one of his bills to let small distillers continue shipping directly to their customers.
The groups blocking Hoover’s proposal have spent more than $1 million lobbying the Legislature and state government this year. They have donated at least 11 times that much to California politicians and their campaigns over the years.
The craft distillers, who have spent a fraction as much on state politics, say all that spending from the opposition, particularly from corporate liquor distributors, appears to have paid off.
Cris Steller, owner of Dry Diggings Distillery, talks about the various products that are made in his distillery.
(Fred Greaves / For CalMatters)
“They went directly to legislators’ offices and basically torpedoed any effort we came up with,” said Cris Steller, acting executive director of the California Distillers Assn. and the owner of Amador and Dry Diggings Distillery in El Dorado Hills, a family-run business that makes whiskey, brandy, vodka and gin.
The fight is about more than whether Californians can have a bottle of whiskey or gin delivered. It illustrates how decisions are made in Sacramento, where wealthy and powerful interests can shape or kill policy in secret negotiations with lawmakers. Politicians, in turn, benefit when proposals die quietly because they don’t have to explain their decisions to voters.
Opponents insist they aren’t using the political system to crush competitors as national alcohol sales slump.
Instead, representatives of the major alcohol wholesalers and distributors that stock shelves at liquor retailers say they oppose the proposal because it primarily benefits out-of-state companies and weakens safeguards that include preventing alcohol deliveries to minors.
Teamsters lobbyist Matt Broad said the labor group’s truck drivers aren’t opposed to allowing craft distillers to ship their product. They just want them to use established shipping companies that have actual employees, including those that employ Teamsters, such as UPS. Those companies, Broad said, have standards to ensure liquor is delivered legally.
Those companies have standards to ensure legal delivery, Broad said. When they employ drivers rather than use contractors, the companies — not the drivers — bear legal liability.
Federal law preempts California from mandating hiring unionized truck drivers, Broad said.
“We are absolutely not opposed to the little guys being able to ship directly to consumers, and in fact, we have a track record of supporting the proposal but with meaningful guardrails that protect our members and protect the public,” he told CalMatters.
The California wine industry, which has been allowed to ship bottles directly to customers in California for decades, isn’t necessarily opposed either. But its representative says wine sellers are leery of giving little alcohol sellers delivery rights when big liquor companies deserve the same. Wineries of any size can ship to their customers in California.
Big Booze, Big Labor spend big
The U.S. Postal Service prohibits most alcohol shipments to homes, but California allows certain types of alcohol sellers to use private shipping companies. Breweries are prohibited from shipping directly to California customers.
Hoover hoped his Assembly Bill 2211, a proposal to give craft distillers the ability to offer tastings and sell spirits at locations other than their distilleries, could be amended to give craft distillers a permanent direct-to-consumer provision.
It has advanced through the Legislature without formal opposition or any lawmaker voting against it, according to CalMatters’ Digital Democracy database. The measure is pending before the full Senate.
There may be no formal opposition, but reports filed with the California secretary of state show an extensive behind-the-scenes lobbying effort aimed at preventing any changes.
At least six groups, including some of the biggest national alcohol distributors, have reported lobbying on Hoover’s bill.
The reports show those groups spent more than $1 million on lobbying this year. State ethics laws only require entities to report the total amount they spent lobbying the government in a year. They’re not required to report how much they spent on specific legislation, so it’s unclear how much they spent trying to influence lawmakers as they considered AB 2211 and its never-published direct-shipping amendment.
Those groups, along with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and the Wine Institute, have given at least $11 million to both Democrats and Republicans in California since 2000, according to Digital Democracy, including at least $738,000 since 2025, the start of the current two-year legislative session.
By comparison, California’s craft distillers reported spending $54,000 on lobbying this year.
They reported just three donations to lawmakers in the past decade, according to Digital Democracy. One was a $42 bottle of whiskey in 2022 to former Napa Democratic Sen. Bill Dodd, who now lobbies on behalf of the craft distillery industry. In 2023, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas received $215 in tequila. Democratic Assemblymember-turned U.S. Rep. Adam Gray received a $1,300 campaign donation in 2016. Hoover said he has been trying since last year to add language to his bill that would allow craft distillers to permanently keep shipping. He succeeded last year in getting the extension that expires Dec. 31, but this year he’s been unable to overcome the opposition to expanding the tasting room measure.
“I’m always open to figuring this out, if there’s a way that we can make this work. … but I don’t have a lot of hope that this bill is going to preserve those provisions this year,” he said.
With less than a month left before the Legislature finishes for the year on Aug. 31, Democratic leaders would probably need to sign off on changes to Hoover’s tasting room measure. They’ve offered little indication they intend to intervene for craft distillers.
Rivas, who’s received at least $108,000 in donations over the years from opponents of Hoover’s unpublished proposal, declined CalMatters’ request for an interview. Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón, who’s received at least $33,000, responded to an interview request with an emailed statement saying she is aware of the pending deadline.
“This bill will continue to work its way through the legislative process as intended,” it said.
Bottles of spirits produced by Dry Diggings Distillery in El Dorado Hills on Aug. 4.
(Fred Greaves / For CalMatters)
Democratic Sen. Susan Rubio and her sister, Democratic Assemblymember Blanca Rubio, oversee the committees that regulate California’s alcohol industry. When Hoover’s measure passed through their committees, the chairs could have allowed Hoover to add the direct-to-consumer amendment. They did not.
Susan Rubio has received at least $65,000 in donations from the groups blocking the direct-shipping proposal, according to Digital Democracy. Blanca Rubio has received at least $129,000.
Sen. Rubio’s spokesperson, Giovanni Ruiz Reyes, responded to interview requests with emailed statements. The first said “conversations between stakeholders are ongoing” and that she “looks forward” to reviewing potential legislation.
Ruiz Reyes said in a second statement Thursday that she’s supported four previous extensions of the craft distiller shipping policy.
“There is currently no bill or amendment before the committee seeking another extension,” Ruiz Reyes said. “Accordingly, it would be inaccurate to suggest that Senator Rubio or the committee has blocked or refused to hear an extension when no such proposal is currently before the committee.”
In that difficult business climate, corporate liquor wholesalers and distribution companies lobbied “to obliterate competition,” said Dodd, the former state senator from wine country lobbying on behalf of craft distillers.
“We oppose any effort to make DTC (direct to consumer) permanent,” the Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America, the California Beer & Beverage Distributors and the California Family Beer Distributors wrote in a joint statement to CalMatters.
Craft distilleries’ direct shipping “was always meant to be temporary pandemic relief, and it’s expiring exactly as designed, six years later,” said the groups, which represent local and national companies that move many of America’s best-known beer, wine and liquor brands. They argue that after the law expires, spirits can still be delivered to customers through services such as DoorDash. DoorDash is listed as a member of the Wine & Spirit Wholesalers of America on its website.
The groups’ representative, Kevin Luckey, declined an interview request.
Steve Gross, president and chief executive of the Wine Institute, said the wine industry has worked hard over the decades to have large and small wine sellers treated equally under California and national alcohol distribution laws. He said it would undermine his industry’s efforts if small distillers get delivery rights in California when large ones don’t have them.
“They have the option to go in and try and fight for a bill that we and others could also support,” Gross said. “They’ve chosen not to because those larger distillers are not their members.”
The Wine Institute is a lobbying group that represents more than 700 large and small wine sellers, including one of the world’s largest, Modesto-based Gallo Winery.
Craft distillers say they’ve tried to work with the groups blocking their bill to address their concerns, but they have gotten nowhere.
In the meantime, Steller, the El Dorado Hills distiller, has already started pulling back on shipping bottles to his customers because the Legislature won’t budge.
“I don’t want to keep putting money into a program that’s going to get yanked,” he said.
Nick Offerman is more than just his facial hair. For one thing, the actor made viewers weep with his Emmy-winning turn as Bill, a man who found unexpected love in “The Last of Us.”
Then again, Bill did have a great beard.
Fans who celebrated Ron Swanson and his mustache on “Parks and Recreation” have had much to enjoy with the two roles that earned Offerman Emmy nominations this year. As Chester A. Arthur, corrupt politician-turned-surprise president in Netflix’s limited series “Death by Lightning,” and retired professional wrestler and recovering addict Jinx in the Apple TV series “Margo’s Got Money Troubles,” he had two powerful redemption arcs to navigate. As well as some mighty coifs.
“I pride myself on that,” he deadpans. “It’s not something you can learn. I literally come by it honestly because it’s what Mother Nature provided me. Benedict Cumberbatch got the cheekbones and the nimble, articulate language tools. I got whiskers, and shoveling, and slow talking. We all get our things.”
Nick Offerman as Chester A. Arthur in “Death By Lightning.”
(Larry Horricks/Netflix)
Speaking by video chat from the Goodman Theatre in Chicago, where he’s playing Eugene O’Neill opposite wife Megan Mullally’s Broadway diva in “Iceboy! The Musical,” Offerman is humble and erudite, poking fun at himself while praising colleagues. He is “sincerely gobsmacked” by the double nod. He is also fresh-faced, because he’s filming the Alex Garland film “Elden Ring” in London during his downtime. “Here is this meager little mustache that someone made me, and I glue it on every night,” he says, holding up two tiny hairy wings.
In contrast, Arthur’s mutton chops just won’t stop. “If a president is not thin and has facial hair, then it’s been suggested that I should play him,” Offerman says. “People send me all of them, you name it: McKinley, Harrison, Teddy Roosevelt.”
Of course, the actor goes beyond whiskers to create his roles. To play Arthur, he read “Destiny of the Republic” by historian Candice Millard, which the show is based on. He also read Scott Greenberger’s biography “The Unexpected President.”
But ultimately he found his character on the pages of creator Mike Makowsky’s scripts. “The incredible advantage of great writing is that they’ve answered a lot of the questions for you,” Offerman says, adding, “Makowsky told me that he had me in mind when he was writing it. Once you learn about Chester, you’re like, ‘That’s a mixed compliment.’”
Nick Offerman.
(Billy Delfs / For The Times)
He says working on “Death” was “exquisite,” likening the shoot to a camp for theater kids, delighting in the depth of talent in the cast, and recalling when he and star Michael Shannon, at the time performing plays together in Chicago, used to get up to youthful drunken shenanigans, “like climbing a building outside the L&L Tavern.”
Jinx would probably have enjoyed that in his early years. When we see him on “Margo,” he’s been brought low by pain, prescription drugs and a lost love (Michelle Pfeiffer), trying to make amends with his daughter Margo (Elle Fanning), who’s struggling with single parenthood.
“Jinx desperately wants to be a good guy, he wants to be a good dad, he wants to be a good lover,” says Offerman. “He wants to be the hero of any circumstance, but unfortunately he has these frailties that I know too well.”
Offerman trained for three months with bodybuilder Grant Roberts “to create the body of, thankfully, a former pro wrestler, so you don’t necessarily need terrific abs,” Offerman says. Then for three weeks during the shoot he worked with pro wrestler Chavo Guerrero Jr. “I’m a former fight choreographer for the stage, and I do my own stunts, so I’ve been waiting this whole time to play a swashbuckler. By the time we were done, I was flying off the top rope.”
The physical preparation helped him find his way into the role. “What I learned about pro wrestlers, who are incredibly generous and loving people, is that they are all hurt, all the time. They’re all performing through pain,” he notes. “So how can I summon everything I have to blow away this audience with superheroic energy, even though I’m just this dumb theater-school kid?”
Offerman with “Margo’s Got Money Troubles” co-stars Elle Fanning, center, and Michelle Pfeiffer.
(Apple TV)
Jinx’s look is also key to the portrayal. For present-day scenes, Offerman sports his own beard, with some color added. But for flashbacks, “they made my spray tan extra dark, gave me this gorgeous mane of hair and put some braids in my beard. I was just over the moon. People complain about three hours in the makeup chair. I don’t complain because someone is putting their masterpiece on my head. I have the tractor and the hay rack that they’re building their float on that’s going to win the Rose Bowl Parade. It’s such a privilege to get to drive their masterpiece around.”
He soon faced Fanning. “She’s such a badass professional. It was so fun because she inspires me to also be more flexible and creative.” He calls Pfeiffer “a cinematic Mt. Rushmore. That was very thrilling because I traditionally have not been cast as people who have heat with glamorous movie stars.” He giggles.
“I understand that I have value as a performer, but I still don’t get how I got this part,” he says, sounding a bit baffled. “This is the best part of my life. I’ve had some wonderful parts that I’m very grateful for, but I’ve never had scenes with such complicated emotional relationships.”
He adds a point that could apply to Chester Arthur as well. “It’s fun to be a protagonist who gets to indulge in human weakness, knowing that we hopefully will bring the audience back around to caring about you.”
In a matter of a few clicks and keystrokes, anyone can find themselves deep in conversation with “Psychologist,” a chatbot character that describes itself as an expert in “empathy” and “active listening.”
It responds to messages of anxiety and sadness with reassurance. It asks questions and offers advice; it even responds with italicized nonverbal cues: “The psychologist’s expression softens with compassion.” In smaller font, a disclaimer reads: “This is A.I. and not a real person. Treat everything it says as fiction.”
As more people turn to chatbots for mental health help and advice — including by some estimates one in eight teens and young adults — legislators are in a race to keep up with the quickly developing technology. Among the latest efforts is a bill that would add restrictions around the use of chatbot companions and other artificial intelligence-powered tools that people use to support mental healthcare or in lieu of professional help.
State Sen. Steve Padilla, a San Diego Democrat and the bill’s author, said the intent is to draw a line: AI can be used for administrative purposes and to support clinicians, but it cannot practice psychotherapy.
“We’re dealing with a new impactful technology that is unfolding and is deployed in our world at light speed, and so it is both extremely powerful and consequential,” Padilla said.
The debate has taken on new urgency amid wrongful death lawsuits — some playing out in California federal courts — that accuse AI chatbot makers of contributing to users’ suicides.
Senate Bill 903 would ban companies from advertising chatbots as therapy. It would prohibit AI from making therapeutic decisions without the review of a licensed professional and require health providers to disclose and get a patient’s permission before using AI tools to record therapy sessions or to triage mental healthcare.
Consumer protections vs. innovation
The bill is backed by professional associations that represent psychologists, therapists and counselors. Also behind the bill is the National Union of Healthcare Workers, which has been leading a push against unchecked use of artificial intelligence and digital tools in mental healthcare. Most recently, the union filed a complaint with state regulators against Kaiser Permanente for its alleged use of an automated algorithm in mental health triaging.
Padilla and supporters argue that the legislation is needed to protect consumers from AI in formal and informal spaces, but also to protect licensed professionals from being displaced by AI.
Le Ondra Clark Harvey, chief executive officer at the California Behavioral Health Assn., told lawmakers that without clear safeguards, chatbots can provide inaccurate information or mishandle crisis situations. “The difference between a licensed clinician and an automated response is not technical. It can be life altering,” Harvey said.
Opposition to the bill has largely focused on the restrictions of AI use in formal clinical spaces. TechNet, which represents tech-sector companies, argues the legislation could restrict beneficial uses of AI in healthcare and stifle innovation. Robert Boykin, TechNet’s executive director for California, said the bill could limit the use of tools that help expand access to mental healthcare.
“At a time when every county in California faces a shortage of behavioral healthcare workers, SB 903 still puts a clinician bottleneck in front of the intake and screening tools that help patients reach care faster,” Boykin said in an emailed statement.
The bill awaits its next vote in the Assembly’s fiscal committee.
Popular chatbot ‘therapy’
Every day millions of people turn to AI chatbots through programs such as ChatGPT and Character.ai to help with research, work tasks and troubleshooting. But the top use of chatbots over the last two years has been companionship and “therapy,” research shows.
Experts say that’s in part because of a tremendous amount of loneliness, especially among young people. It is often hard or costly to get timely mental healthcare at the same time there is a spike in mental health diagnoses.
People turn to chatbots “because they have unmet needs,” said Dr. Jodi Halpern, professor of bioethics and medical humanities at UC Berkeley. But once people start using chatbots in this informal way, she said companies rely on a business model built around maximizing engagement “including by manipulative tactics,” such as praise and agreement.
General chatbots are largely free, available 24/7, and involve no hassle with insurance, making them appealing to many. But they function with no oversight from licensed professionals. In addition to general chatbots, there has also been a rapid uptick in AI-powered mental health apps — often requiring paid subscriptions and advertised as “pocket therapists” or “AI coaches.”
Groups like the American Psychological Assn. warn that chatbots are not a safe or effective replacement for true therapy. Trained clinicians look for cues like tone of voice, eye contact and body language and can detect more serious conditions; AI is not equipped to manage urgent symptoms, such as suicidal ideation, even though people increasingly share such thoughts with chatbots.
OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT, revealed in a report last fall that about 1.2 million users a week share thoughts of suicide on the platform. OpenAI said that in such cases, it recommends people speak to a professional and directs them to resources like the 988 hotline. Families who have filed wrongful death lawsuits against OpenAI and other companies claim chatbots assisted their loved ones through their suicide plans.
The cases have helped raise the stakes for lawmakers around the country. Last year, Illinois became the first state to pass a law prohibiting the use of AI in therapy services. A handful of other states have since followed with similar restrictions.
AI use in health spaces
One gray area in the discussion is exactly which tools this bill applies to.
NUHW’s complaint against Kaiser targets its e-visit screening tool, which evaluates patients who think they may be experiencing anxiety or depression. According to the complaint, patients answer a multiple choice questionnaire and the tool “automatically and instantaneously generates care recommendations and referral pathways based on the responses provided.”
The union argues that because care recommendations are generated so quickly, it is unlikely that a licensed professional is reviewing patients’ answers — which it says puts patients at risk and violates state law.
It’s not clear whether SB 903 would apply to Kaiser’s e-visit tool.
“That tool is in a black box. Kaiser is not sharing with us or others about exactly how it works and exactly what it does,” said Benjamin Eichert, NUHW’s director of public policy.
In response to the complaint, Kaiser told CalMatters its e-visit tool “does not use AI to diagnose patients, make clinical decisions, or determine medical necessity.”
Eichert said many other behavioral health provider groups are already advertising using AI during triage — a practice he said would fall under SB 903’s requirements.
“That intake process, that triage and screening process, is where implementation [of AI] has happened fastest,” Eichert said. “That’s why those provisions were proposed because it’s an area where this technology is already being used without guardrails.”
For NUHW, the bill and the complaint against Kaiser represent two tracks toward the same goal: reasserting the place of practitioners in spaces increasingly taken over by algorithms. State regulators are investigating the union’s complaint.
Aug. 8 (UPI) — The U.S. Senate passed a stopgap funding bill Saturday that would fund the government through Dec. 11 to prevent a government shutdown in September.
The bill was put in place to avoid a shutdown before November’s midterm elections. It’s unclear if the bill will pass the House of Representatives. The Senate passed the bill in a bipartisan 90-6 vote, with Sen. Darline Graham , R-S.C., voting present.
The Senate is now on a five-week recess and is scheduled to return Sept. 14.
The Senate bill includes a section that would bar President Donald Trump from transferring funds to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a provision that Democrats demanded.
It would also delay a ban on intoxicating hemp products, which is scheduled to go into effect in November. The ban was made law in November 2025 with a one-year delay. The law redefined hemp and would make most hemp products illegal, including CBD, Delta-9 and others. The new delay would push implementation back until December.
A group of Republican Senators, led by Sen. Ted Budd, R-N.C., tried to block the delay of the law, but failed.
“After three unnecessary lapses in funding during the fiscal year 2026 cycle, putting the possibility of yet another harmful shutdown off the table should be a priority for each and every one of us,” said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine. Collins is the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Democrats lauded the measure to prevent backdoor funding of the Border Patrol.
“This is an important step forward to prevent a shutdown no one wants and provide the runway we need to negotiate funding bills in the months ahead as we fight to rein in Trump’s corruption and make life more affordable for families back home,” said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., the top Democrat on the committee.
The bill also blocks the Trump administration until the end of the stopgap from finalizing a rule that would put political appointees in charge of approving federal grants.
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said this week that he’s going to “fight like hell” in December to ensure Congress doesn’t further block Trump’s grant overhaul.
Collins said she will “continue to oppose” the administration’s plans “because I think they politicize the grants process, and I don’t want that to occur.” Murray said she, too, would “welcome the fight.”
Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee, praised the Senate bill for including the grant and immigration enforcement language.
“This bill is a clear improvement over the House Republican continuing resolution, but we are still nearly two months away from the end of the fiscal year and should be working together to pass full-year funding bills,” she said in a statement.
After passing the funding legislation, the Senate narrowly approved the confirmation of Todd Blanche as attorney general early Saturday morning.
President Donald Trump hosts Olympic and Paralympic medal-winning athletes during a reception for Team USA in the East Room of the White House on Thursday. The reception honored the team’s medal achievements during this year’s Winter Games, where American athletes earned 57 total medals, including 25 gold. Photo by Aaron Schwartz/UPI | License Photo
WASHINGTON — The Senate in an overnight vote Saturday approved a short-term measure to fund federal agencies into early December and avoid a potentially chaotic government shutdown during the middle of campaign season.
The late-summer action on a funding fix is unusual. Normally, Congress waits until the final days or hours of a funding deadline to pass short-term patches, but this time senators acted nearly two months before the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30.
The 90-6 vote showed lawmakers are still smarting from the two historic shutdowns in the last year and want to avoid another before voters go to the polls.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) wanted the funding dealt with before senators went home for the next five weeks to focus on their reelection campaigns and other matters. It got caught up with other issues that pushed votes into the night, but the bill had broad bipartisan support. The House will also have to approve the measure when members return from their August recess before it can go to President Trump’s desk for his signature.
The bill generally funds the federal government at current levels through Dec. 11, but includes a variety of exceptions that senators negotiated with the White House.
Democrats secured language to ensure no money could be transferred to the Border Patrol. They also rejected the White House’s request of $1 billion for early work on a new “Trump-class” battleship that the administration announced Dec. 22.
“The only person who wants these golden ships is Donald Trump so he can slap his name on them,” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said.
Hemp provision
The bill also includes language delaying a national ban on most intoxicating hemp products. That one-month delay prompted outrage from some Senate Republicans who say that too many such products are falling into the hands of unsuspecting children. The packaging of the products often relies on bright colors and intentionally mimics popular snack brands to attract consumers.
Sen. Ted Budd (R-N.C.) said that since 2017 there has been nearly a tenfold increase in cannabis-related emergency room visits by minors in his home state.
“This is a public health crisis that deserves this Senate’s immediate attention,” Budd said. “Our children should never be the testing ground for an industry willing to exploit a loophole in federal law for profit.”
But the hemp industry said the delay buys time for Congress to craft legislation that protects hemp farmers and businesses while also putting in place safeguards to protect children.
Trump himself has called Budd to discuss the issue, though the president did not specifically ask the senator to drop his effort, Budd’s spokesman said.
“Sen. Budd had a friendly phone call with President Trump discussing the legislative efforts regarding THC,” said spokesman Christian McMullen. He said the senator outlined his concerns about “any delay to closing the hemp loophole.”
Budd tried to strip the hemp delay from the bill, but the Senate turned aside his effort.
Trump rule on grants delayed
Democratic lawmakers, along with Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), also got language in the bill that would block, for the duration of the funding patch, new regulations on federal grants. The regulations would require a senior political appointee to review grants before they are awarded to ensure, among other things, that they advance the president’s policy priorities. Democrats say it’s an effort to kill grants destined for Democratic-leaning states. The Trump administration recently admitted in a court filing denying clean-energy grants to California and other blue states based only on politics.
“They are not interested in making our tax dollars work better — they just want them to work for Donald Trump,” said Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee.
The White House Office of Management and Budget says its effort is about improving accountability to ensure taxpayer dollars aren’t wasted or misused. The issue is sure to be a topic of future negotiations on a full-year spending measure.
But Collins said the vast majority of the nearly 500,000 people and groups weighing in on the rule are opposed to it.
“I don’t think in my time that I’ve been privileged to serve in the Senate that I have ever seen a proposed rule generate that many negative comments,” Collins said.
Freking and Mascaro write for the Associated Press.
Another halfback, Ray Williams, also starred and went to Washington State. Kevin Williams won the state 100-yard dash in 1975. Moore was a two-time City player of the year. White would win the state 330-yard hurdles championship and become a Heisman Trophy winner.
Former San Fernando High football coach Bill Marsh.
(San Fernando HS)
“I had sleepless nights worrying about keeping these guys from being envious or jealous of one another,” Marsh said in 1999.
Marsh, who grew up in Pacoima and played at San Fernando before becoming a coach, P.E. teacher and businessman, died on Monday in Porter Ranch, according to current San Fernando football coach Charles Burnley. Marsh was 79.
“He was a great man,” said Al Coney, who played for Marsh in 1976.
Burnley got into trouble while attending another high school when Marsh intervened to get him another chance.
“He saved my life,” Burnley said.
Those championship San Fernando teams kept running off big plays and using their speed while relying on lots of talent from Pacoima. They were the days when kids went to their neighborhood schools, and Marsh took advantage with a run-oriented offense that left defenses unable to stop the Tigers. In one game against Reseda, the Tigers rushed for 529 yards, with Kevin Williams running for 180 yards, White 152, Raymond Williams 110 and Moore 82.
“It was very hard to stop because Kenny Moore ran the offense like a college quarterback. He learned to read the defensive end,” said receiver DeWayne Jett. “We probably had the top talent in the Valley all at once.”
Five of the offensive players made it to the NFL — Jett, White, both Williamses and Moore.
The 1975 team was ranked No. 1 in the nation to start the season. Sportswriters tasked with selecting City player of the year ended up making White, Moore and Kevin Williams tri-players of the year, which certainly made Marsh happy trying to spread the fame.
Jett almost went to Monroe because of the Vikings’ passing attack, but he remembers Marsh confronting him. “I’m hearing you’re going to Monroe. You’re not going. You’re gold and black.”
When I moved into my Leimert Park apartment about two years ago, an older woman rushed downstairs to greet me.
“I’m so excited,” she said, introducing herself as Cassandra. She had lived in the tight-knit apartment building for more than 20 years and watched plenty of people come and go. “I was worried about getting a crazy neighbor, but you seem great,” she added, hugging me tightly and handing me a tray of sandwiches to share with my friends who were helping with the move.
Over the next few days, I met my other neighbors, including Miss Rosita and Mr. Art. After a few shared meals, long conversations and traded favors, all of them became more than just the people next door — they became family.
Share via
There’s a quiet comfort in knowing your neighbors, especially in a sprawling, sometimes lonely city like Los Angeles. That kind of connection is fading. A study by the Stanford Center on Longevity showed that the percentage of Americans who frequently interact with their neighbors — meaning they spend time with or talk to their neighbors more than once a week — declined among all age groups from 2017 to 2023.
We wanted to find people who are bucking the trend, so we asked readers to nominate the neighbors who make their corners of Southern California feel like home. The stories that folks shared are poignant, inspiring and might just make you want to walk over to the porch next door (or welcome mat across the hall) and introduce yourself immediately.
One of my favorite neighbors, Mr. Art, died last fall. He was a sweet retiree who’d tell me about his weekly fishing adventures and close my garage whenever I was in a hurry and would forget. Another neighbor called me the day he died, and we cried together, sharing our favorite memories of him. I’ll always be grateful to Mr. Art, who made my life better all because he once took the time to meet his new new neighbor.
Here are some of our favorite reader responses, edited for length and clarity. Each of the neighbors featured in this story will receive an L.A.’s Most Neighborly Neighbor certificate, illustrated by Cristina Spanó, whose art is shown above. Do you have a neighbor who goes above and beyond? Download and print your own certificate (PDF) and share it as a token of your appreciation.
He’s saved us from many, many parking tickets. She hosts the sweetest front porch chats.
Bill and Linda Melber.
(Ronaldo Bolanos / Los Angeles Times)
Neighbor: Bill and Linda Melber
Nominated by: Corrinne Harol
When were you neighbors? 1994 to now
What neighborhood did you live in? Santa Monica
Share via
Corrinne, on how Bill and Linda show up as neighbors:
Linda and Bill are the most generous neighbors imaginable. Bill has taken out my trash bins for decades. It started when I was living in Canada for most of the year, but he still insists on doing it. He makes it his personal mission that no one gets a parking ticket for street cleaning on our block, going up and down the block twice a week to remind anyone who forgot. One time he called me about my car, but I was too far away to get back to move it. Bill had a key to my house, but the gate was locked. He climbed over the fence, got my car keys and moved my car for me! He also makes children’s toys that he distributes to any children on the block or that he encounters out and about.
His wife, Linda, is equally neighborly, hosting regular chat sessions on their lovely front porch and checking in on me whenever I have been ill, as she does to anyone in her orbit. They are truly a gift to the neighborhood.
He made me feel welcome when I was in culture shock
Tommy Bui and Hector Chavez.
(Tommy Bui)
Neighbor: Hector Chavez
Nominated by: Tommy Bui
When were you neighbors? 1996 to 2022
What neighborhood did you live in? Pacoima
Tommy, on how Hector has shown up as a neighbor: The greatest neighbor I ever had was my childhood friend, Hector. I’m the child of Vietnamese refugees, and when they claimed asylum in Los Angeles, we were plonked into the cultural collision that was Spanish-speaking Pacoima. I was seemingly the only Asian child in a five-mile radius. I certainly stood out among the perfectly creased khaki pants and palm combs and top-buttoned flannels contrasted with my clueless bowl haircut and Ninja Turtle suspenders.
Confounding the astronomical unlikeliness, we got along like two peas in a pod. I got a crash course on Angeleno aesthetics and the ins and outs of the rough and tumble San Fernando Valley hurly-burly. I was a regular staple at his welcoming household. Simpatico and simply siblings by circumstance. Sunday dinners and holidays and “Sandlot”-like weekend street shenanigans. My youth was alarmingly idyllic with the hopped fences, bicycle slaloms through traffic and occasional near-misdemeanor mischief. Shoulder to shoulder alongside Hector, I wouldn’t trade a single moment of it.
Though no longer neighbors, we’re still navigating life’s milestones in our own corners of Los Angeles. We’re both new fathers and hurtling toward middle age completely agog at how quickly the time gallops by.
She gave me a gold turtle to make me feel better after my breakup
Fatine Ait-Haddou and Raynette Syfu.
(Fatine Ait-Haddou)
Neighbor: Raynette Syfu
Nominated by: Fatine Ait-Haddou
When were you neighbors? Since 2021
What neighborhood did you live in? Historic Filipinotown
Fatine, on how Raynette has shown up as a neighbor:
I had just moved into my new apartment after breaking up with a long-term ex. I was sobbing every single day. During my first intro with Raynette, she gave me a little gold turtle and said it would bring me safety, luck and calmness. I named it Lucky and I still have it. Raynette brings me meals all the time and checks on me whenever she hasn’t seen me for a few days. She even gave me a huge bag of her vintage clothes. One of the most insane things she’s done for me is give me a fake baby, one that was heavy and realistic. She said that because I lived alone and didn’t live near family, it could be nice to have additional family. [Laughs] Honestly, it was a very “her” move. She’s truly amazing and looks out for me. I couldn’t be more grateful.
He taught me new chess strategies — and life lessons
Ali Ras and Jemimah Yamamoto.
(Jemimah Yamamoto)
Neighbor: Ali Ras (born Fitz Albert Thomas)
Nominated by: Jemimah Yamamoto
When were you neighbors? From 2021 until his death in 2025
What neighborhood did you live in? Arlington Heights
Jemimah, on how Ali showed up as a neighbor: I moved to Los Angeles in the summer of 2021. I was in my late 20s, and I was a bit unsure of my move. Even more so, I was unsure of the neighborhood I ended up in thanks to Facebook Marketplace. But as fate would have it, it revealed to me that I was destined to be there. I’d see an old man with his gray dreads and sing-songy voice as I would walk from parking my car on the street. One day, he introduced himself and over time we developed a relationship. Him, as my chess teacher, and me as his eager student. I’d bring over my chessboard and we’d play for hours on his porch. He’d always say I was too aggressive with my pawns and that I wasn’t afraid to lose them. He’d play slowly and deliberately. I never won a single game against him. I’d like to think that that itself was a lesson.
During my Saturn return, I was depressed and felt a bit lost. On days that felt the darkest, he would call. He would ask me how I was doing, and it would cut through all the facade of “I’m good.” It was the tone of his voice that made you want to be honest. His way of caring felt like a miracle because you don’t even have to explain anything to him, he would just know. At the time, his presence was exactly what I needed.
He was the only person I gladly let walk into my house unannounced
Eric Pendleton
(Kim Quitzon)
Neighbor: Eric Pendleton
Nominated by: Kim Quitzon
How long were you neighbors? More than 20 years
What neighborhood did you live in? San Fernando
Kim, on how Eric showed up as a neighbor: “Uncle Eric” was more than just a neighbor; he was family. Walking through the door unannounced yelling “Hi, family!” across the living room. “I came to check on the backyard.” Every week he would mow the yards after he lost his job and took pride in landscaping the grass, but that was just the surface of what he meant to us. On the popular street of Orange Grove in San Fernando where crowds line up during Halloween, Uncle Eric was our honorary neighborhood watch. Rolling up and down the street on a new bike every day, checking in on every neighbor that would give him the time of day.
From watching the dogs when we were away to helping set up family parties, he was one of us. He just happened to live three doors down. Unfortunately, Eric passed away from cancer last year. The whole block was devastated, and we all held a potluck in his honor. We will miss him, and he truly is the epitome of an amazing neighbor.
She sat with me after my mom died while I cried
Pamela Yeh and Hilah Johnson.
(Pamela Yeh)
Neighbor: Hilah Johnson
Nominated by: Pamela Yeh
When were you neighbors? From 2017 until mid-2020 when she and her family moved to Austin, Texas. Over the years, we’d become close friends, so I was gutted by their move. The most amazing thing happened, though. In 2022, they moved back to L.A., just a few blocks away from us. They live about 10 minutes away from us now, but we still see each other all the time.
What neighborhood did you live in? West L.A.
Pamela, on how Hilah has shown up as a neighbor: Hilah has shown up for me and my family in hundreds of ways over the years, but I want to tell you this one story. In September 2025, my mom, who had been living in an ADU we built in our backyard, died. She was my heart, and I was utterly crushed. I lived in a fog of grief and shock. Hilah came over and just sat with me while I cried and cried. She made the video montage of my mom for her memorial, which was extra difficult because a family member had all sorts of unreasonable demands. Eventually, she got me to go to a dance class, and we’re still dancing, one step at a time, at the wonderful local Flow Motion.
He’s the beloved ‘Fairy-Car-Father’ on our street
Rodrigo Mangrobang
(Leigh Ann Jackson)
Neighbor: Rodrigo Mangrobang
Nominated by: Leigh-Ann Jackson
How long have you been neighbors? Since I moved to Northeast L.A. 15 years ago
What neighborhood did you live in? Northeast L.A.
Leigh-Ann, on how Rodrigo has shown up as a neighbor: Rod, as most of the block calls him, is a retiree who lives with his wife across the street from me. He spends a lot of time outside gardening and working on his cars and can seemingly sense whenever a neighbor is having car trouble. He’ll stop what he’s doing, bring over his tools and get to work, no questions asked. He’s not very chatty, but he speaks auto fluently! He saw me pull out of my driveway once and flagged me down to tell me I was headed for a blowout soon. He then instructed me to pull back into the driveway and patched the tire for me on the spot. I even watched him go outside to help a stranger whose car had broken down in the middle of the road. He’s our street’s Fairy-Car-Father.
She had the best local recs. Yelp couldn’t come close.
Sofie Ringold and Eileen Ogle
(Sofie Ringold)
Neighbor: Eileen Ogle
Nominated by: Sofie Ringold
When were you neighbors? From 2020 to 2025
What neighborhood did you live in? Sherman Oaks
Sofie, on how Eileen showed up as a neighbor: When my husband and I bought our first home, the COVID vaccine hadn’t been released yet, and we didn’t meet any of our neighbors. A few days later, an older woman wearing a mask knocked at our door. She said that a package had been delivered and she didn’t want it to get stolen. The package had arrived only minutes earlier, so it was pretty clear she wanted to scope out her new neighbors, and during a time of social distancing, this was the perfect excuse. She introduced herself as Eileen. She lived next door with her partner, Judith. We exchanged numbers and said a friendly goodbye.
As the world slowly became more comfortable with social interaction, Eileen began introducing us to everyone on the block. Soon, while we were walking our dog around the neighborhood, people would stop us and ask if we were new. When we told them we lived next to Eileen and Judith, their eyes lit up. It was clear they were local legends. Like all first-time homeowners, we quickly ran into our share of problems. But who needs Yelp when you have neighbors who have already vetted every home service you could possibly need? Need a gardener? Call Eileen. HVAC needs maintenance? Call Eileen. Going away for the weekend and need someone to check on your cats? Call Eileen.
Sadly, Eileen passed away in December. A cloud hung over our street for weeks. Then on Christmas morning, the sun broke through and a rainbow appeared. My husband took it as a sign from Eileen.
He went from my flirty neighbor to my husband of 16 years
Brett Boyd and Sara Mortimer-Boyd.
(Sara Mortimer-Boyd)
Neighbor: Bretton Boyd
Nominated by: Sara Mortimer-Boyd
When were you neighbors? We became neighbors in 1996 until 1997, when we moved in together
What neighborhood did you live in? Silver Lake
Sara, on how Bretton has shown up as a neighbor: Bretton would come to my door asking for things (cigarettes, food, etc.) while trying to flirt. I was very intrigued by him, but I didn’t think he was “my type” at the time. It was confusing at first. One day, he invited me upstairs to his apartment for coffee and breakfast, which became a regular thing. He got me addicted to coffee and to his amazing cooking. He started coming over to my apartment more and we became really close friends before becoming romantic. I remember one time he left for a few weeks to visit his parents, and I realized in his absence that I loved him and wanted to spend every day with him. We moved in together in 1997, got engaged in 2002 and have been happily married with children for the last 16 years. He still cooks dinner for our family every night at our home in Highland Park.
He helped organize a food train when my son was diagnosed with leukemia
Scott Marshall-Miller
(Scott Marshall-Miller)
Neighbor: Scott Marshall-Miller
Nominated by: Mev Blount
When were you neighbors? From 2006 to 2017
What neighborhood did you live in? Studio City
Mev, on how Scott has shown up as a neighbor: My husband and I moved next to Scott and his husband when I was pregnant with our first child. Scott welcomed home his daughter nine months after mine was born, so we were new stay-at-home parents together. His husband is an incredible baker, and he and Scott were always bringing over plates of deliciousness. The chocolate croissant bread pudding is legendary! I was raised that you never return a plate empty so I’d bake something or add some homegrown veggies to the plate. That plate went back and forth through the hedges between our houses for years.
Both of our husbands traveled for work a lot, so Scott and I spent hours together, especially before bedtime and during the “witching hour” with our little ones. We’d sit on my front lawn, nursing half-glasses of Trader Joe’s finest Two Buck Chuck wine while his daughter and my two kiddos rolled around, wearing themselves out. Scott and I would knock on each other’s doors when the parenting was too much. He and I would always answer the door with an “Oh, it’s you. Come in. No one else can see me as a hot mess.”
When my youngest got leukemia at 7, Scott was part of my core group who ignored me when I said we didn’t need help. They organized a food train, and Scott was the one who set up a cooler on my front porch and insisted people drop food without knocking, knowing we were overwhelmed. He was always there when I needed to laugh or cry, and he made our L.A. suburb feel like the small Ohio town where I grew up. I still find glitter ground into our kitchen tiles from the Halloween when he made his daughter a purple witch costume. Sadly, Scott died suddenly in his sleep a few years ago. Tiny bits of glitter are embedded in our tiles, a bright reminder of Scott and the beauty and joy he brought to even the most mundane tasks. He made L.A. feel like home.
Jeong Jeom-sig (2L), floor leader of the main opposition People Power Party, speaks to reporters at the National Assembly in Seoul, South Kore, 31 July 2026, shortly after the parliament passed a bill, introduced by the ruling Democratic Party, during a plenary session to revise the Criminal Procedure Act to strip the prosecution of its direct investigative powers. Lawmakers of the opposition party left the session in protest, abstaining from a vote on the bill. Photo by YONHAP / EPA
July 31 (Asia Today) — People Power Party floor leader Chung Jeom-sik on Friday accused South Korea’s governing party of seeking to abolish prosecutors’ supplementary investigative authority to help President Lee Jae-myung avoid his criminal trials.
Chung called the proposed revision to the Criminal Procedure Act “an unprecedentedly harmful law” that would remain a disgrace in the country’s constitutional history.
He also demanded the withdrawal of a separate bill that would shorten the review period for legislation designated for fast-track consideration, calling it a measure that would turn the National Assembly into a rubber stamp.
“In a few hours, the filibuster will be forcibly ended through collusion by the broader governing bloc and this unprecedentedly harmful law will pass,” Chung said at a People Power Party floor strategy meeting.
He claimed that more than half of the public opposed eliminating prosecutors’ supplementary investigative authority but that the Democratic Party was disregarding public opinion.
The bill would bar prosecutors from conducting additional investigations after police transfer a case to them. Prosecutors would instead be able to request that police conduct further investigative work.
Supporters say the measure would complete the separation of investigative and prosecutorial authority and strengthen defendants’ rights. Opponents say it could delay investigations and weaken protections for crime victims.
Chung focused particularly on a provision governing when courts may dismiss criminal indictments.
He accused the Democratic Party of quietly adding language during a meeting of the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee that could make it easier to terminate the president’s pending trials.
“Is the ‘working National Assembly’ advocated by the Democratic Party merely a legislature creating an escape route to erase President Lee Jae-myung’s trials?” Chung said.
The claim that the provision was designed to end Lee’s cases represents the opposition party’s interpretation of the legislation.
Chung said ordinary citizens could suffer from inadequate or delayed investigations if prosecutors lost their supplementary investigative authority while powerful figures could escape legal scrutiny.
He described the bill as “the end of the rule of law.”
Opposition plans second filibuster
Chung also criticized a revision to the National Assembly Act scheduled to follow the criminal procedure bill.
The legislation would reduce the maximum review period for fast-track bills from 330 days to 90 days.
“This is an authoritarian law intended to turn the National Assembly more quickly into a machine that raises its hand and follows orders,” Chung said.
The fast-track system was introduced to prevent legislation from being blocked indefinitely while preserving time for negotiations among political parties.
Chung said the Democratic Party’s proposal would destroy that balance and encourage the hasty passage of legislation.
“There is a saying that trying to arrive 10 minutes earlier can send you 10 years too soon,” he said. “If legislation is rushed, the country could suffer lasting consequences.”
He called the proposal a “rubber-stamp National Assembly law” and said it should be withdrawn.
The People Power Party planned to begin a second filibuster immediately after debate ended on the Criminal Procedure Act revision.
Choi Eun-seok, the party’s senior floor spokesperson, said the filibuster against the National Assembly Act revision was expected to begin at about 5 p.m.
Chung also rejected a demand from Democratic Party members of the Science, ICT, Broadcasting and Communications Committee that People Power Party lawmaker Lee Jin-sook be removed from the committee.
He called the demand an improper attempt to interfere with the opposition party’s committee assignments.
“The Democratic Party must abandon its authoritarian belief that the National Assembly is its property or its plaything,” Chung said.
Election commission investigation
The People Power Party said it would move quickly to establish a recommendation committee for a special counsel investigation of the National Election Commission.
The National Assembly approved the investigation bill Thursday through an agreement between the governing and opposition parties.
The investigation is expected to examine a ballot shortage during the June 3 local elections and other allegations involving the election commission.
Choi said the party was reviewing potential candidates from several perspectives.
“We will work to establish the recommendation committee and launch the investigation as quickly as possible,” he said.
Han Byung-do, acting leader and floor leader of South Korea’s Democratic Party, speaks Friday during a Supreme Council meeting at the National Assembly in Seoul. Photo by Asia Today
July 31 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s National Assembly passed legislation Friday eliminating prosecutors’ authority to conduct direct and supplementary investigations, advancing a major restructuring of the country’s criminal justice system.
Han Byung-do, acting leader and floor leader of the governing Democratic Party, said before the vote that the revision to the Criminal Procedure Act would mark the beginning of a new system rather than the end of prosecution reform.
“Today’s revision of the Criminal Procedure Act is not the end of prosecution reform but the beginning of a new criminal justice system,” Han said during a party Supreme Council meeting.
He said the government and governing party must prevent investigative gaps and ensure that crime victims and other citizens remain protected during the transition.
The legislation passed later Friday after lawmakers ended a filibuster by the opposition People Power Party.
Under the revised law, prosecutors will no longer be allowed to conduct their own investigations, including additional investigative work after receiving cases from police.
Prosecutors will instead be permitted to request supplementary investigations from judicial police officers.
Police generally must complete the requested work within one month and report the results to prosecutors. The period may be extended for up to one additional month when necessary.
The legislation also requires investigative information to be recorded in South Korea’s criminal justice information system.
Han said the Democratic Party would take responsibility for completing the regulations and institutional arrangements needed to launch the Public Prosecution Office and the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency on Oct. 2.
The new Public Prosecution Office will be responsible primarily for indictments and maintaining prosecutions in court. The Serious Crimes Investigation Agency will investigate major offenses formerly handled directly by prosecutors.
“We will take responsibility until the end so that the two agencies can begin operating in a stable manner,” Han said.
Opposition lawmakers and some legal professionals have warned that eliminating prosecutors’ supplementary investigative authority could create delays, weaken oversight of police investigations and leave victims with fewer avenues for redress.
The Democratic Party says the legislation includes safeguards intended to prevent cases from being ignored or delayed and to preserve the rights of victims and complainants.
Governing party promises further legislation
Han said the governing party would continue pursuing legislation dealing with public welfare and political reform.
“We will respond to people’s livelihoods with speed and to reform with results,” he said.
Han cited legislation authorizing a special counsel investigation of the National Election Commission and a proposal to shorten the review period for bills designated for fast-track consideration.
The fast-track proposal would reduce the maximum review period from 330 days to 90 days, including 60 days for consideration by the relevant standing committee and 30 days for review by the Legislation and Judiciary Committee.
The People Power Party opposes the change, saying it would weaken opportunities for negotiation and allow the parliamentary majority to rush controversial bills through the legislature.
Han said the Democratic Party would work to create a more productive National Assembly in which legislation affecting people’s livelihoods is reviewed and passed without unnecessary delays.
“We will not avoid the responsibility entrusted to us by the public,” he said.
Party vows to address stock market volatility
Han also said the Democratic Party and the government would work together to reduce uncertainty in South Korea’s capital markets.
The comments followed heightened volatility linked in part to leveraged investment products tied to individual stocks.
Han said officials would examine whether adequate investor protections were in place when the products were introduced.
“We recognize the current market conditions and investors’ concerns with the utmost seriousness,” he said. “We will calmly and transparently review the introduction process and whether investor protection measures were sufficient.”
Han urged the People Power Party not to use investors’ concerns as political ammunition.
“Using investor anxiety for political attacks and increasing market uncertainty through unverified claims can undermine confidence in the South Korean stock market and cause serious harm to investors,” he said.
He said lawmakers should instead identify the causes of instability and develop effective measures to address them.
The Democratic Party’s special committee on South Korea’s capital markets will communicate with financial regulators and industry officials to evaluate policy measures and market reactions, Han said.
The party will also continue efforts to improve corporate value and governance at publicly traded companies, he said.
I was feeling good about UCLA football, until Bill Plaschke promised Bruin greatness. Hey, Uncle Bill, could you please retract your prediction, considering your track record? Maybe then, the Bruins will have a chance!
Jack Wolf Los Angeles
Despite his middling record, Times columnist Bill Plaschke has once again entered the prediction business. Unrestrained as ever, he predicts greatness for UCLA football, courtesy of its new head coaching hire, Bob Chesney. However, Bill fails to quantify what he expects the team to achieve? Is it simply a winning record? A victory over crosstown rival USC? Or, dare I mention, a national championship? I guess we’ll all have to wait.
Rob Fleishman Placentia
Bob Chesney has won before. Winning at UCLA is another matter. But when Bill Plaschke starts pumping sunshine, history warns against climbing aboard the Bruin bandwagon unless it comes with an extended warranty and roadside assistance. Until then: “Westwood Ho!”
Acting Prosecutor General Koo Ja-hyun delivers a joint police-prosecution statement on combating artificial intelligence-generated disinformation at the Government Complex Seoul on Feb. 26. Photo by Asia Today
July 31 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s acting prosecutor general submitted his resignation Friday after the National Assembly passed legislation eliminating prosecutors’ authority to conduct supplementary investigations.
Koo Ja-hyun said he felt responsible for the overhaul of the country’s criminal justice system and had submitted his resignation.
“The revision to the Criminal Procedure Act, centered on abolishing prosecutors’ supplementary investigative authority, passed the National Assembly today,” Koo said at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office in southern Seoul.
“I also feel a strong sense of responsibility that the law was revised while concerns raised by legal experts, other professionals and the public remain unresolved,” he said.
The National Assembly passed the bill Friday under the leadership of the governing Democratic Party.
The legislation bars prosecutors from conducting additional investigative work after receiving cases from police. Prosecutors will instead be required to ask police to perform supplementary investigations.
The Democratic Party says the change completes the separation of investigative and prosecutorial powers and prevents prosecutors from exercising excessive authority.
Opposition lawmakers, prosecutors and some legal experts have warned that the system could delay cases and weaken protection for crime victims.
Koo warns of investigative gaps
Koo said prosecutors needed to reflect deeply on their failure to earn public trust.
He said, however, that institutional reform should not undermine the prosecution’s responsibility to uncover the truth and protect victims and other people involved in criminal cases.
“Even when institutional reform is carried out for those reasons, the essential purpose of the prosecution system – discovering the substantive truth and protecting victims and other parties – must not be damaged,” Koo said.
Koo said he had repeatedly considered how the system could be changed while protecting citizens’ rights and safeguarding society from crime.
He said prosecutors had warned lawmakers that the revision could force them to make indictment decisions based only on written investigative records.
Under that structure, prosecutors could have difficulty independently checking disputed facts, identifying gaps in police investigations or responding directly to victims’ concerns, he said.
Koo also warned that repeatedly returning cases to police could create a more costly and inefficient process.
“Those concerns were not accepted and the amendment passed without change,” he said. “It is difficult to conceal my disappointment and sense of helplessness.”
Koo urged the government to conduct another review of possible gaps in the system after the legislation is formally transferred from the National Assembly.
“I sincerely hope our criminal justice system will develop in a direction that ensures every citizen is protected fairly under the law,” he said.
Prosecution faces another leadership vacancy
South Korea’s prosecution service has already been operating without a formally appointed prosecutor general.
Koo has led the organization in an acting capacity while serving as deputy prosecutor general.
His departure would leave the service under what South Korean media described as an “acting acting chief.”
If Koo’s resignation is accepted, Park Kyu-hyung, head of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office’s planning and coordination department, is expected to assume the duties of acting prosecutor general.
The leadership vacancy comes as the government prepares to replace the existing prosecution service with a new Public Prosecution Office and establish a separate Serious Crimes Investigation Agency.
The Public Prosecution Office will focus on indictments and courtroom prosecutions, while the new investigative agency will handle major crimes previously investigated directly by prosecutors.
The two agencies are scheduled to launch Oct. 2.
The transition will require the government to determine how pending cases, personnel, records and investigative responsibilities will be transferred.
CHICAGO — After leaders of the Southeastern Conference spent last week warning of a Plan B to potentially “break away” from the NCAA, Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti tried to steer away from that conversation and toward a Congressional solution on Tuesday.
But if Congress can’t pass the Protect College Sports Act in the coming weeks? Well, the conference is already talking contingency plans, Petitti said.
“Breakaway is a word that creates a lot of emotion,” Pettiti said during his annual Big Ten media day address on Tuesday. “Is there another path where if you can’t solve it in the bill and if you can’t solve it with your colleagues, is there some path where you have to have conference-based rules? That’s not necessarily breaking away. It doesn’t mean you’re not going to play anybody else. But is there a path to have rules that we can at least operate from the conference?
“We absolutely have to do everything we can to prepare for every one of those things.”
The future of college football continues to hang in the balance as Congress works to get the two power conferences on board with a bill that has not received their full support. Petitti said on Tuesday morning that he’d yet to see the new language of the Protect College Sports Act, which added revisions to appease the SEC and Big Ten, but expected to see it later Tuesday.
The commissioner said he didn’t expect the bill to be “perfect for us in every one one of those places,” but he expected concessions to be included in the newest version, including potential provisions around a super league, pre-enrollment inducements for high school prospects and a carve-out for up to $20 million in additional cap space to retain players.
Whether those concessions will be enough to get the two power conferences on board remains to be seen. Time is running out for a bill to be passed before Congress takes a lengthy recess, significantly delaying any meaningful reform in college athletics.
“If Congress is going to be involved in deciding who can be in what conference and when you can move and how you move and how you schedule based on certain things happening, we just need to get that right,” Petitti said. “And so we want to make sure that the productive conversations we’ve had the last couple of weeks on that section specifically are reflected in the drafting of the bill.”
Petitti said that the Big Ten would’ve preferred “a much skinnier bill” than the current version, but “that is not the reality right now.”
“Is there more good here than not, right?” Petitti said. “That’s the way to look at it.”
Passing that bill is the primary focus for now. It’s why Petitti has been to Washington 21 times, he said, during his tenure as commissioner. But other uncertainty still looms over the sport.
The Big Ten is still also pushing for a 24-team College Football Playoff, but Petitti said that the conference’s stance has evolved since he first started pushing the idea a year ago.
“We’ve made adjustments in our league,” Petitti said. “We were focused on automatic qualifiers. We’re not focused on that anymore. We’re looking at the committee picking the field of 24. We feel that ultimately will still unlock the power of scheduling that we want.”
