People who fled attacks by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces in Sudan are enduring tough conditions at a displacement camp in the north where funding cuts are making life harder for its new residents. Al Jazeera’s Hiba Morgan is there.
Published On 3 Feb 20263 Feb 2026
Share
SACRAMENTO — As massive federal cuts are upending the healthcare system in California, analysts and healthcare professionals are urging state lawmakers to soften the blow by creating new revenue streams and helping residents navigate through the newly-imposed red tape.
“It impacts not only uninsured but also Medicare and commercially insured patients who rely on the same system,” said Dolly Goel, a physician and chief officer for the Santa Clara Valley Healthcare Administration. “People will die.”
Goel was among more than a dozen speakers this week at a state Assembly Health Committee hearing held to collect input on how to address cuts enacted by a Republican-backed tax and spending bill signed last year by President Trump. The committee’s Republican members — Assemblymembers Phillip Chen of Yorba Linda, Natasha Johnson of Lake Elsinore, Joe Patterson of Rockin, and Kate Sanchez of Trabuco Canyon — did not attend.
The so-called “Big, Beautiful Bill” passed by Republicans shifts federal funding away from safety-net programs and toward tax cuts and immigration enforcement. A recent report from the Legislative Analyst’s Office, which advises the state Legislature on budgetary issues, estimated this will reduce funding for healthcare by “tens of billions of dollars” in California and warned about 1.2 million people could lose coverage through Medi-Cal, the state’s version of the federal Medicaid program providing healthcare coverage to low-income Americans.
Congress allowed enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies to expire, which is dramatically increasing the cost of privately-purchased health insurance. Covered California, the state’s Affordable Care Act health insurance marketplace, estimates hundreds of thousands of Californians will either be stripped of coverage or drop out due to increased cost.
Sandra Hernández, president of the California Health Care Foundation, said the federal legislation creates administrative hurdles, requiring Medicaid beneficiaries to meet new work or income requirements and to undergo the eligibility re-determination process every six months instead of annually.
“We are looking at a scenario where otherwise eligible working parents lose their coverage simply because they aren’t able to navigate a complex verification process in a timely way,” she said.
California should move aggressively to automate verification instead of putting the burden of proof on beneficiaries, Hernández said. She advised legislators to center new healthcare strategies around technology, like artificial intelligence and telehealth services, to improve efficiency and keep costs down.
“While the federal landscape has shifted, California has enormous power to mitigate the damage,” said Hernández. “California has had a long tradition of taking care of its own.”
Hannah Orbach-Mandel, an analyst with the California Budget and Policy Center, said legislators should establish new revenue sources.
“A common sense place to start is by eliminating corporate tax loopholes and ensuring that highly profitable corporations pay their fair share in state taxes,” she said, adding that California loses out on billions annually because of the “water’s edge” tax provision, which allows multinational corporations to exclude the income of their foreign subsidiaries from state taxation.
One proposal to raise money for state healthcare benefits already is raising controversy. Under the Billionaire Tax Act, Californians worth more than $1 billion would pay a one-time 5% tax on their total wealth. The Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, the union behind the act, said the measure would raise much-needed money for healthcare, education and food assistance programs. It is opposed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, among others.
During last week’s legislative hearing in Sacramento, other speakers stressed the importance of communicating clearly with the public, collaborating with nonprofits and county governments and bracing for an influx of hospital patients.
Those who lose health insurance will skip medications and primary care and subsequently get sicker and end up in the emergency room, explained Goel. She said this will strain hospital staff and lead to longer wait times and delayed care for all patients.
The federal cuts come at a time when California is struggling with its own budgetary woes. The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates the state will have an $18-billion budget shortfall in the upcoming fiscal year.
At the start of the hearing, Assemblymember Mia Bonta (D-Alameda) criticized the federal government for leaving states in the lurch and prioritizing immigration enforcement over healthcare.
The Republican-led Congress and the president provided a staggering funding increase to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE. The agency’s annual budget has ballooned to $85 billion.
“The federal dollars which once supported healthcare for working families are now being funneled into mass deportation operations,” said Bonta, who chairs the committee. “Operations that resulted in tragic murders — this is where our healthcare funding is going.”
Eva Longoria, John Leguizamo and Xochitl Gomez are among the 100-plus Latino actors, artists and creatives who have signed an open letter calling for accountability in Hollywood — citing longtime discrimination in casting and storytelling.
The public statement follows the controversy surrounding Odessa A’zion, who dropped her role as a Latina character in Sean Durkin’s “Deep Cuts,” following online backlash over the actor herself not being Latina.
“Recent casting decisions around the character Zoe Gutierrez in A24’s ‘Deep Cuts’ have exposed a troubling pattern,” the letter states. “We acknowledge and commend Odessa A’zion for listening, reflecting and deciding to exit the project and become an ally. Yet how did this happen?”
Earlier this week, the Wrap revealed that the “I Love L.A.” and “Marty Supreme” breakout star was cast as Zoe Gutierrez in the A24 film adaptation of Holly Brickley’s music-filled coming-of-age novel. The character’s identity plays an important role in the book, as she is written as a half-Mexican and half-Jewish lesbian.
Though the 25-year-old announced Wednesday night that she had dropped the role — admitting through her Instagram stories that she had not yet read the book, nor learned of all the character’s traits — the incident has unearthed questions about Latino representation in Hollywood.
“This isn’t about Odessa,” said Xochitl Gomez to The Times on Friday. “It’s about the executives, the producers and the whole system at the top. They thought it was OK to not even audition Latinas for the role in the first place. Latinas were pitched, including me, but we were told that there was an actress with an exclusive offer. This role never showed up on the casting grid because it was already gone.”
Xochitl Gomez attends “REBBECA” LA Premiere on November 30, 2025 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by JC Olivera/Getty Images for State of the Art)
(JC Olivera / Getty Images for State of the Art)
According to UCLA’s 2025 Hollywood Diversity Report, Latinos were cast in only 1% of the leading roles in the top 104 English-language films released theatrically in 2024, despite constituting roughly 20% of the total U.S. population.
In TV, representation is just as stark. Latinos are cast in only 6% of all roles across the top U.S. broadcast series, as per a recent study by ¡Pa’lante! — a Latino representation initiative from the USC Norman Lear Center — which also found that 1 in 4 Latino characters are depicted as career criminals.
“The absence of Latina audition opportunities, and the choice to replace a clearly Latina character with a non-Latina actress, signals a broader, ongoing erasure of our community from the stories that define our culture,” the letter continues. “This is not about any one actor or project. It is about a system that repeatedly overlooks qualified Latino talent even as our identities, histories, and experiences fuel the most enduring stories.”
The signatories request that Latino actors be hired for a diverse range of roles, including non-stereotypical leads. There is also a demand for more Latino executives to be involved in green-lighting projects and the inclusion of Latino consultants, writers and producers from the earliest stages of development. Finally, there is a call on Hollywood to create mentorship, scholarships and opportunities that expand access on all levels of the ecosystem.
This plea by marginalized creatives is not the first pushback — nor likely the last — against a stagnant Hollywood machine.
As early as the 1920s, the portrayal of Latinos was so negative that the Mexican government, and even Woodrow Wilson reportedly told Hollywood producers to “please be a little kinder to the Mexicans.”
In 1999, the National Hispanic Media Coalition (NHMC) and the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) called for the boycott of broadcast networks’ 26 new fall series because they did not feature a non-white lead, sparking dialogue over the diversity of Hollywood at the time.
Comedian Chris Rock blasted the industry in a 2014 essay for its omission of Mexicans in Los Angeles, where nearly half of the population is Latino: “You’re in L.A., you’ve got to try not to hire Mexicans.”
Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) — who in recent years has nominated several Latino-focused films to the Library of Congress National Film Registry — also penned a 2020 column in Variety, underscoring the dearth representation of Latinos in entertainment and the consequences of omission. “Prejudice has existed in the United States for generations, but the image of our community created by film and television has done little to counter bigoted views, and too often has amplified them.”
Another letter published in October 2020 with over 270 showrunners, creators, television and film writers signatures — including Lin-Manuel Miranda and “One Day at a Time” co-creator Gloria Calderón Kellett — called for systemic change in the industry. “We are tired,” they wrote.
The pushback continued in 2022, when actor Leguizamo penned an open letter in The Times about the history of Latino representation and the co-option of Latino stories — including that of Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata, who was portrayed by a brownface Marlon Brando in the 1952 film “Viva Zapata!,” and Al Pacino, who played the fictional Cuban character Tony Montana in the 1983 film “Scarface.”
Wrote Leguizamo, “There’s a fix for this: Cast more Latinos!”
Read the full open letter below.
Dear Casting Directors, Creative Executives, Writers, Producers, and Hollywood Leaders,
We write to you with urgency, because storytelling is humanity’s compass and Hollywood wields all the power. The stories you choose to tell, and how you tell them, shape public perception, cultural understanding, and who gets to see themselves reflected on screen. In these challenging moments that power comes with real responsibility.
Recent casting decisions around the character Zoe Gutierrez in A 24’s Deep Cuts have exposed a troubling pattern. We acknowledge and commend Odessa A’zion for listening, reflecting and deciding to exit the project and become an ally. Yet how did this happen? The absence of Latina audition opportunities, and the choice to replace a clearly Latina character with a non-Latina actress, signals a broader, ongoing erasure of our community from the stories that define our culture. This is not about any one actor or project. It is about a system that repeatedly overlooks qualified Latino talent even as our identities, histories, and experiences fuel the most enduring stories.
Latino communities are already underrepresented and misrepresented in ways that distort reality and harm real people. Casting decisions carry real weight: they influence who is seen as worthy of authentic storytelling and who gets to tell those stories with care, nuance, and authority.
We are calling for accountability, intentionality, and equity in casting and storytelling. Authentic representation means more than casting a performer who looks like the character; it means involving the communities being portrayed not just in front of the camera, but in the decisions that shape these stories from their inception. Our stories deserve to be shaped with the input, guidance, and leadership of Latino creators, consultants, writers, and performers at every stage.
We implore you to join us in concrete action:
The world is watching.
Aaron Dominguez
Aitch Alberto
Alex Lora
Alma Martinez
Amanda Diaz
Ana Navarro Cardenas
Andrea Chignoli
Angel Manuel Soto
Angelique Cabral
Anna Terrazas
Annie Gonzalez
Antonio Negret
Becky G
Benjamin Odell
Brandon Guzman
Brandon Perea
Bricia Lopez
Camila Baquero
Carla Gutierrez
Carla Hool
Carlo Siliotto
Carlos Eric Lopez
Carlos Gutierrez
Carlos Lopez Estrada
Chrissie Fit
Christian Serratos
Cierra Ramirez
Cristina Rodlo
Cyria Fiallo
Daniella Pineda
Danny Ramirez
David Castenada
Desi Perkins
Diego Boneta
Edgar Ramirez
Edher Campos
Eiza Gonzalez
Elisa Capai
Elsa Collins
Emilie Lesclaux
Ennio Torresan
Enrique Melendez
Eva Longoria
Fabrizio Guido
Felipe Vargas
Fernando Garcia
Flavia Amon
Flavia De Sousa
Francia Raisa
Gabriela Maire
Gina Rodriguez
Gloria Calderon Kellett
Gregory Diaz IV
Ilda Santiago
Isabella Gomez
Isabela Merced
Isabella Ferria
Isis Mussenden
Ismael Cruz Cordova
Ivette Rodriguez
Jacob Scipio
Javier Munoz
Jazmin Aguilar
Jesse Garcia
Jessica Alba
Jesus Pimental-Melo
Jillian Mercado
John Leguizamo
Jose Velazquez
Juan Pa Zurita
Julio Macias
Justina Machado
Karrie Martin Lachney
Kate Del Castillo
Klaudia Reynicke
Kylie Cantrall
Leo Gonzalez
Lisette Olivera
Lorenza Munoz
Luca Castellani
Lucila Moctezuma
Lucy Barreto
Lynette Coll
Maia Reficco
Marcel Ruiz
Maria Legarda
Mariana Oliva
Mariem Perez Riera
Marvin Lemus
Mauro Mueller
Mayan Lopez
Melissa Barrera
Melissa Fumero
Melissa Martinez
Michael Cimino
Michael Pena
Miguel Mora
Mishel Prada
Monica Villarreal
Natalia Boneta
Natalie Chaidez
Natalie Morales
Nava Mau
Naz Perez
Nezza (Vanessa Hernandez)
Neysa Bove
Nicolas Celis
Nicole Betancur
Orlando Pineda
Patricia Cardosa
Patricia Riggen
Patty Rodriguez
Paulina Garcia
Petra Costa
Rafael Agustin
Rafael Cebrian
Ramon Rodriguez
Rene G. Boscio
Robin De Jesus
Rodrigo Teixeira
Rudy Mancuso
Ruy Garcia
Sierra Ornellas
Stephanie Beatriz
Tonatiuh Elizarrarz
Tony Revolori
Victoria Alonso
Xochitl Gomez
Xolo Mariduena
Yareli Arizmendri
Wednesday’s cuts are the second mass layoffs in three months at the e-commerce giant.
Published On 28 Jan 202628 Jan 2026
Share
Amazon is slashing 16,000 jobs in a second wave of layoffs at the e-commerce giant in three months, as the company restructures and leans on artificial intelligence.
Wednesday’s cuts follow the 14,000 redundancies that the Seattle, Washington–based company made in October. The layoffs are expected to affect employees working in Prime Video, Amazon Web Services, and the company’s human resources department, according to the Reuters news agency, which first reported the cuts.
list of 4 itemsend of list
Amazon confirmed to Al Jazeera that all the cuts to the company will affect corporate-level employees.
In a memo to the employees, shared with Al Jazeera, Amazon said workers in the United States impacted by the cuts will have a 90-day window to find a new role in the company.
“Teammates who are unable to find a new role at Amazon or who choose not to look for one, we’ll provide transition support including severance pay, outplacement services, health insurance benefits [as applicable], and more,” Beth Galetti, senior vice president of People Experience and Technology at Amazon, said in the note provided to Al Jazeera.
The announced reductions come amid a broader restructuring effort at the company. Earlier this week, Amazon announced it would close its brick-and-mortar Amazon Go and Amazon Fresh grocery stores, accounting for more than 70 locations across the US.
Some of those physical stores will be converted into Whole Foods Market locations. Amazon acquired the Austin, Texas–based grocery chain in 2017, and it has since grown by 40 percent.
The cuts come alongside increased investment in AI. In June, CEO Andy Jassy touted investment in generative AI and floated the possibility of redundancies.
“We expect that this will reduce our total corporate workforce as we get efficiency gains from using AI extensively across the company,” Jassy said in a blog post at the time.
According to the AFL-CIO CEO PayWatch tracker, Jassy made 43 times more than the median employee at the company.
Amazon’s stock tumbled in midday trading and was down 0.7 percent. Overall, however, the stock is up 7 percent year to date.
Amazon is the latest company in a wave of redundancies hitting the tech sector at the start of the year. Earlier this week, Pinterest announced it would cut 780 jobs as the social media company reallocated resources amid increased investment in AI. Last week, Autodesk said it would cut about 1,000 jobs, also tied to AI.
Layoffs.fyi, a website that tracks redundancies in the tech sector, shows that more than 123,000 tech workers lost their jobs in 2025 as companies, including Salesforce and Duolingo, doubled down on AI investments.
But it is not just the tech sector facing redundancies. On Tuesday, UPS also announced job cuts. The shipping giant said it would eliminate 30,000 jobs and close 24 facilities as it reduces deliveries with Amazon.
UPS stock was down more than 1.2 percent in midday trading.
Many in Hollywood fear Warner Bros. Discovery’s sale will trigger steep job losses — at a time when the industry already has been ravaged by dramatic downsizing and the flight of productions from Los Angeles.
David Ellison‘s Paramount Skydance is seeking to allay some of those concerns by detailing its plans to save $6 billion, including job cuts, should Paramount succeed in its bid to buy the larger Warner Bros. Discovery.
Leaders of the combined company would search for savings by focusing on “duplicative operations across all aspects of the business — specifically back office, finance, corporate, legal, technology, infrastructure and real estate,” Paramount said in documents filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission.
Paramount is locked in an uphill battle to buy the storied studio behind Batman, Harry Potter, Scooby-Doo and “The Big Bang Theory.” The firm’s proposed $108.4-billion deal would include swallowing HBO, HBO Max, CNN, TBS, Food Network and other Warner cable channels.
Warner’s board prefers Netflix’s proposed $82.7-billion deal, and has repeatedly rebuffed the Ellison family’s proposals. That prompted Paramount to turn hostile last month and make its case directly to Warner investors on its website and in regulatory filings.
Shareholders may ultimately decide the winner.
Paramount previously disclosed that it would target $6 billion in synergies. And it has stressed the proposed merger would make Hollywood stronger — not weaker. The firm, however, recently acknowledged that it would shave about 10% from program spending should it succeed in combining Paramount and Warner Bros.
Paramount said the cuts would come from areas other than film and television studio operations.
A film enthusiast and longtime producer, David Ellison has long expressed a desire to grow the combined Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros. slate to more than 30 movies a year. His goal is to keep Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros. stand-alone studios.
This year, Warner Bros. plans to release 17 films. Paramount has said it wants to nearly double its output to 15 movies, which would bring the two-studio total to 32.
“We are very focused on maintaining the creative engines of the combined company,” Paramount said in its marketing materials for investors, which were submitted to the SEC on Monday.
“Our priority is to build a vibrant, healthy business and industry — one that supports Hollywood and creative, benefits consumers, encourages competition, and strengthens the overall job market,” Paramount said.
If the deal goes through, Paramount said that it would become Hollywood’s biggest spender — shelling out about $30 billion a year on programming.
In comparison, Walt Disney Co. has said it plans to spend $24 billion in the current fiscal year.
Paramount also added a dig at Warner management, saying: “We expect to make smarter decisions about licensing across linear networks and streaming.”
Some analysts have wondered whether Paramount would sell one of its most valuable assets — the historic Melrose Avenue movie lot — to raise money to pay down debt that a Warner acquisition would bring.
Paramount is the only major studio to be physically located in Hollywood and its studio lot is one of the company’s crown jewels. That’s where “Sunset Boulevard,” several “Star Trek” movies and parts of “Chinatown” were filmed.
A Paramount spokesperson declined to comment.
Sources close to the company said Paramount would scrutinize the numerous real estate leases in an effort to bring together far-flung teams into a more centralized space.
For example, CBS has much of its administrative offices on Gower in Hollywood, blocks away from the Paramount lot. And HBO maintains its operations in Culver City — miles from Warner’s Burbank lot.
Paramount pushed its deadline to Feb. 20 for Warner investors to tender their shares at $30 a piece.
The tender offer was set to expire last week, but Paramount extended the window after failing to solicit sufficient interest among Warner shareholders.
Some analysts believe Paramount may have to raise its bid to closer to $34 a share to turn heads. Paramount last raised its bid Dec. 4 — hours before the auction closed and Netflix was declared the winner.
Paramount also has filed proxy materials to ask Warner shareholders to reject the Netflix deal at an upcoming stockholder meeting.
Earlier this month, Netflix amended its bid, converting its $27.75-a-share offer to all-cash to defuse some of Paramount’s arguments that it had a stronger bid.
Should Paramount win Warner Bros., it would need to line up $94.65 billion in debt and equity.
Billionaire Larry Ellison has pledged to backstop $40.4 billion for the equity required. Paramount’s proposed financing relies on $24 billion from royal families in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Abu Dhabi.
The deal would saddle Paramount with more than $60 billion of debt — which Warner board members have argued may be untenable.
“The extraordinary amount of debt financing as well as other terms of the PSKY offer heighten the risk of failure to close,” Warner board members said in a filing earlier this month.
Paramount would also have to absorb Warner’s debt load, which currently tops $30 billion.
Netflix is seeking to buy the Warner Bros. television and movie studios, HBO and HBO Max. It is not interested in Warner’s cable channels, including CNN. Warner wants to spin off its basic cable channels to facilitate the Netflix deal.
Analysts say both deals could face regulatory hurdles.