That’s what the man who led New England to six Super Bowl victories and nine appearances in the NFL’s championship game said when he was inducted into the Patriots Hall of Fame in June 2024.
“I am a Patriot for life!”
That’s what the retired quarterback told the crowd at Gillette Stadium in September 2023 at the start of the first NFL season since the end of his 23-year career, which included three seasons and one more Super Bowl win with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
“I don’t have a dog in the fight in this one. May the best team win.”
That’s what Brady said on the “Let’s Go!” podcast earlier this week. The comment wouldn’t have been a big deal if he had been talking about this year’s Puppy Bowl, in which his clone dog Junie will not be a participant.
But alas, he was talking about Super Bowl XL, which pits the Seattle Seahawks against the team that has a 17-foot bronze statue of Brady outside its stadium (a.k.a. the Patriots).
Now, Brady is a minority owner of the Las Vegas Raiders, but they fell just a teensy bit short of making the playoffs after finishing the season at 3-14 and aren’t a factor at all in this weekend’s game in Santa Clara.
Former New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady speaks at the August 2025 unveiling of a bronze statue of himself at Patriot Place in Foxborough, Mass.
(Charles Krupa / Associated Press)
Brady actually did provide plenty of context along with his comment, and we’ll get to that shortly. But first, how about some reactions from Brady’s former Patriots teammates?
Retired linebacker Tedy Bruschi said he has no problem showing his support for New England and coach Mike Vrabel, who played for the Patriots teams that won Super Bowls XXXVI, XXXVII and XXXIX.
“That’s the way Tom feels. I got a big-a— dog in the race, I’m telling you that right now,” Bruschi said on Boston’s WEEI 93.7 FM. “That’s my boy right there, you know, Vrabel — eight-year teammate, like a brother of mine. I mean, all of us, really. It’s like, we’ve got a dog in the fight. My dog is big and I’m cheering for him.”
“Raiders ain’t in it,” Wilfork said on WEEI. “Say what it is, what you see.”
He added: “At the end of the day, if you’re a Patriot for life … don’t give me that political bullcrap. That’s just what it is. If you don’t think we’re gonna win, just pick Seattle then. Don’t straddle the fence.”
Retired cornerback Asante Samuel wrote on X: “Tom Brady I am highly I mean highly disappointed in you not rooting for your ex teammate, Mike Vrabel who is about to do something special.”
In a separate post, Samuel suggested that Brady wants to be “the only one winning super bowls.”
Retired tight end Rob Gronkowski said on the “Up & Adams” YouTube show that he hadn’t talked to Brady about the matter yet, but he did have a theory on why his good friend might not be rooting for the Patriots.
“He probably wants to be the quarterback. He’s that competitive,” Gronkowski said. “He wants to be the guy in the Super Bowl right now.”
Retired offensive linebacker Damien Woody said on ESPN’s “Unsportsmanlike” that Brady’s comment was “ludicrous,” then continued, “I don’t care if you’re the minority owner of the Raiders. Dammit, you have a statue in Foxborough. Make it known. Nobody wants to hear all this, ‘I don’t have a dog in the fight.’ The hell you do! If Robert Kraft put that damn statue outside of his stadium, oh, you better believe you got a dog in the fight.”
OK, now on to what Brady actually said on the podcast. Host Jim Gray asked what this Super Bowl is like for him as someone so closely associated with the Patriots and their past success. As part of his answer, Brady pointed out that there are “always different chapters in your life.”
“And now, in a different phase of my life, I really root for people and the people I care about, the people who I know the work that goes into what they’re trying to accomplish,” Brady said. “So I really want to sit back as a fan and enjoy the game, enjoy the moment. And I always think, may the best team win. You know, it’s not going to be who I’m cheering for, who I think is going to win. It’s going to be decided by the people out there on the field.”
Brady added: “I just want to see good football. I want to see good plays, good throws, good strategy, good decisions. And that’s the joy in the game for me. … So listen, I don’t have a dog in the fight in this one. May the best team win. And in terms of the Patriots, this is a new chapter in New England, and I’m glad everyone’s embraced the Mike Vrabel regime, all the amazing players that have worked so hard to get their club to this position.”
Gray brought up the “idiotic” perception that Brady and other members of the Patriots dynasty might not want this year’s team to succeed and somehow distract from their accomplishments. Brady agreed that such thoughts are “idiotic” and said that all the memories and relationships he built during that era will always mean something to him.
“No one can take those away from me,” Brady said. “So regardless of what anyone would say or think or want to add to the conversation, I’m just excited that the two best teams who have been consistently the best teams all year are playing for the Super Bowl.”
WASHINGTON — Senate Republican Leader John Thune warned Thursday that Congress is not close to an agreement to fund the Department of Homeland Security, signaling that another short-term extension may be the only way to avoid a shutdown as Democrats demand “nonnegotiable” ICE reforms ahead of the Feb. 13 deadline.
The Republicans are increasingly looking to punt the full funding package a second time if negotiations collapse. Speaking on the Senate floor Thursday, Thune said that such a move would not include any reforms lawmakers had previously negotiated, including body cameras for immigration agents.
“As of right now, we aren’t anywhere close to having any sort of an agreement that would enable us to fund the Department of Homeland Security,” he said. “If [Democrats] are coming to the table demanding a blank check or refusing to consider any measures but their own, they’re likely to end up with nothing.”
He spoke hours after House and Senate Democrats announced they were aligned behind a list of 10 demands they say must be passed before approving the Homeland Security funding package through September.
Democrats are pressing for statutory limits on immigration raids, new judicial warrant requirements, body-worn cameras, identification rules for agents and enhanced oversight of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection — reforms they say are necessary to rein in what House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called an agency “out of control.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Democrats are planning to propose the legislation as soon as possible.
“We want our Republican colleagues to finally get serious about this, because this is turning America inside out in a way we haven’t seen in a very long time,” Schumer said.
The coordinated demands signal unity among House and Senate Democrats after a rocky week on Capitol Hill. In a slim vote, 21 House Democrats joined Republicans on Tuesday to end a partial government shutdown by temporarily extending Homeland Security funding through Feb. 13.
The two-week stopgap, called a “continuing resolution,” was meant to leave time for the two parties to debate how to rein in ICE after the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis.
But that truce has quickly unraveled. Republican leaders have little appetite for the full slate of reforms. Some have indicated openness to narrower changes, such as expanding body camera programs and training, but reject mask bans and the removal of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has already ruled out warrant requirements, which would limit immigration agents from entering private property without a court order. In remarks to reporters Wednesday, he also hinted at some interest in attaching voter ID and anti-sanctuary city policies to negotiations.
“It will be part of the discussion over the next couple of weeks, and we’ll see how that shakes out. But I suspect that some of the changes — the procedural modifications with ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement — will be codified,” he said.
Johnson was confident the two sides could make a deal without further delays, adding that negotiations are largely between “the White House, Schumer and Senate Democrats.”
President Trump has privately supported the short-term extension to cool tensions while publicly defending immigration agents and expressing skepticism toward Democrats’ reform push, according to House leadership.
White House border policy advisor Tom Homan also announced a drawdown of 700 federal agents from Minneapolis this week as what officials framed as a goodwill gesture amid negotiations.
Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said Thursday that the administration is willing to consider some of the demands Democrats have made, but said some of their requests are not “grounded in any common sense and they are nonstarters for this administration.”
Leavitt did not specify which reforms the administration was willing to consider. She did, however, say the president is committed to keeping the government open and supporting “immigration enforcement efforts in this country.”
The White House did not respond when asked if the president would support a short-term spending measure should negotiations stall.
Republicans continue to warn that a failure to reach a deal would jeopardize disaster response funding, airport security operations, maritime patrols, and increased security assistance for major national events, including the upcoming World Cup in Los Angeles.
“If we don’t do it by the middle of next week, we should consider a continuing resolution for the rest of the year and just put this all behind us,” said Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), chair of the House Freedom Caucus.
Democrats, however, remain adamant that verbal assurances are no longer enough.
“These are just some of the commonsense proposals that the American people clearly would like to see in terms of the dramatic changes that are needed at the Department of Homeland Security before there is a full-year appropriations bill,” Jeffries said.
Times staff writer Ana Ceballos in Washington contributed to this report.
The statements are objectively true: The Timbisha Shoshone have lived in what’s now popularly known as Death Valley for thousands of years. And they still live there, in a small village inside the national park that has about 30 full-time inhabitants.
In 2000, Congress officially recognized these two facts in the text of the hard-fought Homeland Act, which transferred nearly 7,800 acres of land, including the village site, back to the Timbisha Shoshone.
You’re reading Boiling Point
The L.A. Times climate team gets you up to speed on climate change, energy and the environment. Sign up to get it in your inbox every week.
But federal officials have now taken issue with those seemingly innocuous sentences, according to Mandi Campbell, tribal historic preservation officer for the Timbisha Shoshone and a resident of the village.
The rationale? Orders from President Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum directing the National Park Service to review interpretive materials for content that the administration feels “inappropriately disparages Americans.”
Only certain types of Americans, as it turns out: The executive order also has been cited in a lawsuit by the city of Philadelphia as the presumptive reason the NPS removed an exhibit on enslaved people from Independence National Historical Park.
Participants take time out for a photo during a march organized by the Timbisha Shoshone to mark the 25th anniversary of the Homeland Act.
(Kim Stringfellow)
And it’s prompted Lowell National Historical Park in Massachusetts to stop showing films about women and immigrant textile mill workers, according to the New York Times, which also reported that plaques referencing climate change have been removed from Muir Woods National Monument in California and Fort Sumter and Fort Moultrie National Historical Park in South Carolina.
On top of that, Trump officials recently ordered the removal or editing of signs and other materials in at least 17 national parks in Arizona, Texas, Colorado, Utah, Montana and Wyoming, The Washington Post reports.
Back to Death Valley — a name that, by the way, members of the Timbisha Shoshone have never liked. Campbell told me that a celebration of the Homeland Act’s 25th anniversary that took place Friday at the national park’s Furnace Creek Visitor Center was supposed to include the unveiling of updates to its interpretive exhibit. The tribe had planned to place in a display case earrings and a medallion that members once gifted to former park Superintendent J.T. Reynolds to mark the passage of the act, along with some descriptive language, she said.
Ahead of the event, the Park Service submitted the additions to its parent agency, the Interior Department, for review. Campbell said that agency officials replied that not only could the new exhibit not include the new phrases “these are our homelands” or “we are still here,” but that similar language that’s been on display since 2012 would also be placed under review.
Interior Department spokesperson Elizabeth Peace said this is not true. “The Department has a long-standing history of working closely with tribal partners as part of exhibit development and review, and the park was never told they could not use that specific language or phrases,” she wrote in an email.
Peace went on to explain that although the new exhibit is under review pursuant to the executive and secretarial orders — both titled “restoring truth and sanity to American history” — the department hasn’t made any final decisions.
The review, according to Peace, is meant to ensure that parks tell “the full and accurate story of American history,” which includes addressing enslaved and Indigenous people, “informed by current scholarship and expert review, not through a narrow ideological lens.”
So, the 25th anniversary celebration went ahead without acknowledging the ongoing debate about the new exhibit.
There was a march from the village to the visitor center in which tribal members walked behind a banner that read, “We are still here,” which, Campbell said, was meant to echo a protest staged on Memorial Day in 1996 in which the Timbisha Shoshone demanded the restoration of their homelands after negotiations with the federal government broke down. That rally was widely credited with restarting the talks that eventually led to the passage of the Homeland Act.
Three decades later, the struggle continues. “Why do we still have to fight to be heard?” Campbell wondered earlier this week. “We weren’t even in history books. And we still can‘t tell our story. When do we get our chance?”
Despite the recent controversy, the tribe has a good relationship with the Death Valley-based NPS officials, Campbell said, and she’s confident they’ll be able to work through whatever happens next together.
After Friday’s march, tribal council members and park officials gave a series of speeches at the visitor center saluting their strong partnership and all the work that it’s taken to get to this point. Then they took pictures and ate cake.
More recent land news
If you’re a regular reader of this newsletter, you probably are aware of how lawmakers have been using the Congressional Review Act, which enables Congress to overturn recent federal rules with a majority vote, to revoke specific Bureau of Land Management plans that limit mining and drilling in specific places. This was unprecedented until last year but has since been used to throw out BLM plans in Alaska, Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming.
Now, a decision by the Government Accountability Office has cleared the way for Congress to throw out the BLM plan for Utah’s Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, which protects the land from mineral extraction, limits grazing and prioritizes conservation. Experts expect Republican Rep. Celeste Maloy or another Utah member of Congress to introduce a bill to do so this year, according to Caroline Llanes of Rocky Mountain Community Radio. If it passes, it would mark the first time the act has been used to roll back protections in a national monument.
Four former U.S. Forest Service chiefs are speaking out against the agency’s move to repeal the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The 2001 rule protecting 58 million acres of national forests from road building and logging was supported by both political parties, and is needed to protect sensitive wildlife and maintain clean drinking water, argues an op-ed published in the Hill.
The Forest Service has revised its oil and gas leasing rules to “streamline” the permitting process by replacing parcel-by-parcel environmental reviews with a broader review that can sometimes cover millions of acres, reports Jake Bolster of Inside Climate News. Environmental groups told Bolster that the move will increase the likelihood that the agency misses sensitive habitat when deciding where to allow drilling.
Some environmental advocates are concerned about a new order from Interior Secretary Burgum that seeks to expand hunting and fishing access on federal public lands. “It flips conservation on its head and treats wildlife protection as the exception,” said Michelle Lute, executive director of nonprofit Wildlife for All. Others say the directive is more of a statement of values than something that will result in drastic changes on the ground. “It’s a nice nod to the hunting and angling community that acknowledges ‘we know these areas mean a lot to you,’” said Ryan Callaghan, president and chief executive of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers.
A few last things in climate news
Much has been made of a record-setting rainy season that’s helped lift California out of drought. But an extraordinarily warm January has left the snowpack across the Sierra Nevada and much of the Western U.S. far smaller than usual, Times water and climate change reporter Ian James writes. That means more hard times for the snowmelt-fed Colorado River, which provides water for farms and cities across seven states.
Peninsular bighorn sheep seeking to migrate back and forth across the California-Mexico border, as they’ve long done, are now being hampered by razor wire installed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in the Jacumba Wilderness, according to our wildlife and outdoors reporter Lila Seidman. Similar scenarios are playing out across the Southwest, where the 1,954-mile border cuts through the habitat of more than 80 threatened and endangered species.
This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our Boiling Point podcast here.
Oakland civil rights attorney James Cook has been on the ground in Minnesota for months figuring out answers to these question as he goes.
A fast-talking Minneapolis native who still lives in the Twin Cities part time, Cook is one of a handful of attorneys who have dropped everything to aid (for free) those caught up in the federal crackdown — protesters, immigrants and detained citizens — too many of whom have found themselves facing deportation, arrest or even been disappeared, at least for a time.
Civil rights attorney James Cook in the rear view mirror as he makes phone calls in his car in Minneapolis.
(Caroline Yang/For The Times)
“They are leaders that are on the ground really helping people through this process,” Minnesota school board member Chauntyll Allen told me.
She’s one of the protesters arrested inside a local church, charged with conspiracy to deprive others of their constitutional rights by Pam Bondi’s politicized Department of Justice, which also Friday arrested journalist Don Lemon for the same incident. Cook is one of the lawyers now representing Allen.
“It shows us that the judicial arm, or some of the judicial arm of our democracy, is willing to step up and ensure that our democracy stands strong,” Allen said of Cook and others like him.
While it’s the images of clashes in the streets that captivate media and audiences, it’s lawyers like Cook who are fighting an existential battle in the background to preserve the rule of law in a place where it is increasing opaque, to put it gently.
The legal work behind detentions has largely been an overlooked battlefield that will likely rage on years after ICE departs the streets, leaving in its wake hundreds if not thousands of long-and-winding court cases.
Beyond the personal fates they will determine, the outcome of the civil litigation Cook and others are spearheading will likely force whatever transparency and accountability can be pulled from these chaotic and troubling times.
It’s time-consuming and complicated work vital not just to people, but history.
Or, as Cook puts it, “I’ll be 10 years older when all this s— resolves.”
Federal agents stand guard against a growing wall of protesters on Jan. 24 in Minneapolis, just hours after Alex Pretti was shot by federal agents.
(Caroline Yang/For The Times)
Cook told me this while on his way to the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building where some detainees are being held, maybe. It’s hard to find out. A few years ago, when immigration enforcement in Minnesota ramped up under the first Trump term, activists tried to get the name of the building changed, arguing Whipple, the first Protestant Episcopal bishop in the state, had been an advocate of the marginalized and wouldn’t want his name associated with what the feds were up to.
Cook is well aware that the guns carried by the federal agents are not for show, even without the Boss’ new ballad. Just a few days ago, one of the first times he drove his beat-up truck up to the gate, the federal guards at Whipple pointed their guns at him.
“I’m like, ‘Hey, I’m going to take my keys out of the ignition, drop them on the ground. So please don’t shoot,’” he said.
They lowered the guns, but Cook was scared, a feeling that doesn’t come easy.
Long before his law degree, when he was a punk-rock loving teen in the 1980s, fresh out of Southwest High, the public school not too far from Whipple, a former coach convinced him to give up college dreams and instead pursue a shot at making the first Muay Thai kickboxing team at the Olympics.
The martial art ended up not making it as an official Olympic sport, but the experience launched Cook into a professional boxing and kickboxing career that took him to competitions around the world, and taught him fear is not a reason to back down.
But, “Father Time is undefeated,” Cook said. “I got older and I started losing fights, and I was like, all right, time to get back to life.”
That eventually led him to obtaining a law degree in San Francisco, where after an intern stint as a public defender, he decided he wanted to be a trial attorney, fighting in court.
Civil rights attorney James Cook has been doing pro bono immigration work since the crackdown began in Minneapolis.
(Caroline Yang/For The Times)
He started cold-calling John Burris, another Bay Area lawyer who is an icon of civil rights and police misconduct cases. Burris, who has been called the “Godfather of Police Litigation,” was involved in the “Oakland Riders” case in 2000, when officers were discovered to have planted evidence. He also represented Rodney King, the family of Oscar Grant, and the family of Joseph Mann among many others.
But Burris, a boxing fan, didn’t respond to Cook’s calls until the young lawyer offered him free tickets to one of his fights, which he was still doing on the side.
“And then immediately I got a call back,” Cook said.
Burris said Cook’s history as a fighter intrigued him, but “I did say to James, you can’t be a fighter and lawyer. You can’t get punched in your head all the time.”
Cook did not take this advice.
Still, Burris said, “It was his persistence that I admired, because the type of work we’re involved in, you need people who are dedicated, who have some real commitment to the work, and he showed that kind of consistency and dedication.”
Cook’s been working with Burris more than 20 years now, but until recently, the labyrinth of the immigration system wasn’t his area of expertise. It’s been a crash course for him, he said, on the often arcane laws that govern who gets to stay in America and who doesn’t.
It’s also been a crash course on what a civil rights emergency looks like. Along with his work looking for locked-up immigrants, Cook spends a lot of time on the streets at protests, helping people understand their rights — and limitations — and seeing first hand what is happening.
“If you ever wondered what you would have done in Germany, now is the time,” he said. “Now is the time to do something. People are being interned.”
In the hours after Pretti was shot, Cook was at the location of the shooting, in the middle of the tear gas, offering legal help to anyone who needed it and bearing witness to conduct that will almost certainly face scrutiny one day, even if government leaders condone it now.
Law enforcement officers launch tear gas canisters as they work to push the crowd back and expand their perimeter in Minneapolis on Jan. 24.
(Caroline Yang/For The Times)
“The way the officers chase people down, protesters who were really just protesting lawfully and were beaten and pepper sprayed and gassed — all those are civil rights violations,” Burris said. “And so the law is the guardrails. So there has to be lawyers who are prepared to protect those guardrails and to stand as centurions, as I refer to us.”
Cook has tried to calm protesters, he told me, and prevent clashes. But people are mad, and resolute. His greatest fear is summer — when warm weather could bring even larger crowds if enforcement is still ongoing. He’s worried that the actions of the federal agents will spill over into anger at local cops enforcing local laws, leading to even more chaos.
“I’ve always supported cops as long as they do their job correctly,” Cook said.
For now, he’s taking it one day at a time, one case at a time, one name at a time.
Protesters raise an inverted American flag as law enforcement officers launch tear gas canisters in Minneapolis after Alex Pretti was killed by federal agents.
(Caroline Yang/For The Times)
Tuesday, Cook passed through the armed checkpoint at Whipple carrying a list of about seven people, folks who have been picked up by federal agents for one reason or another, or reasons unknown, and now cannot be located. They are not in the public online system that is meant to track detainees, and family and friends have not heard from them.
If he’s lucky, Cook will get information on one or two, that they are indeed inside, or maybe at a detention center in Texas, where many have been sent. But there will be more whose location remains unknown. He’ll make calls, fill out forms and come back tomorrow. And the tomorrow after that.
“This is what we do,” he said. “I’m always in it for the long run. I mean, you know, shoot, yeah, that’s kind of the way it works.”
WASHINGTON — President Trump moved quickly this week to negotiate with Democrats to avert a lengthy government shutdown over Department of Homeland Security funding, a sharp departure from last year’s record standoff, when he refused to budge for weeks.
Some Republicans are frustrated with the deal, raising the possibility of a prolonged shutdown fight when the House returns Monday to vote on the funding package. But Trump’s sway over the GOP remains considerable, and he has made his position clear at a moment of mounting political strain.
“The only thing that can slow our country down is another long and damaging government shutdown,” Trump wrote on social media late Thursday.
The urgency marked a clear shift from Trump’s posture during the 43-day shutdown late last year, when he publicly antagonized Democratic leaders and his team mocked them on social media. This time, with anger rising over shootings in Minneapolis and the GOP’s midterm messaging on tax cuts drowned out by controversy, Trump acted quickly to make a deal with Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York.
“Trump and the Republicans know that this is an issue where they’re on the wrong side of the American people and it really matters,” Schumer told reporters Friday after Senate passage of the government funding deal.
Crisis after Minneapolis killings
Senators returned to work this week dealing with the fallout from the fatal shooting of ICU nurse Alex Pretti in Minneapolis by federal immigration officers, as well as the killing of Renee Good in the city weeks earlier.
Republicans were far from unified in their response. A few called for the firing of top administration officials such as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller, the White House chief of staff for policy. Most GOP senators tried to strike a balance, calling for a thorough investigation into Pretti’s killing while backing the hard-line immigration approach that is central to Trump’s presidency.
But many agreed that the shootings threatened public support for Trump’s immigration agenda.
“I’ve never seen a political party take its best issue and turn it into its worst issue in the period of time that it has happened in the last few weeks,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said. “Some things have to change.”
Democrats quickly coalesced around their key demands.
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) said there “was unanimity” around core principles of enforcing a code of conduct for immigration officers and agents, ending “roving patrols” for immigration enforcement actions and coordinating with local law enforcement on immigration arrests.
It helped that Trump himself was looking for ways to de-escalate in Minneapolis.
“The world has seen the videos of those horrible abuses by DHS and rogue operations catching up innocent people, and there’s a revulsion about it,” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said.
“The White House is asking for a ladder off the ledge,” he added.
The painful politics of shutdown
Republicans are also trying to promote their accomplishments in office as they ready for the November midterms and the difficult task of retaining control of both chambers of Congress.
But the prospect of a prolonged shutdown shifted attention away from their $4.5-trillion tax and spending cuts law, the centerpiece of their agenda. Republicans had hoped the beginning of this year’s tax season on Monday would provide a political boost as voters begin to see larger tax refunds.
Republicans are also mindful of the political damage from last year’s shutdown, when they took a slightly larger portion of the blame from Americans than Democrats, according to polling from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
“The shutdown was a big factor, negative for the Republicans,” Trump told Republican senators at the White House in November.
On a practical level, this funding standoff threatened to destroy months of bipartisan work, including long hours over the holiday break, to craft the 12 spending bills that fund the government and many priorities back home.
“We saw what happened in the last government shutdown in regards to how it hurt real, hardworking Americans,” said Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. “I don’t want that to happen again.”
A two-week funding battle begins
The agreement reached this week, if passed by the House, would avoid a prolonged shutdown and fund nearly every federal department through the end of the budget year in September. But it would not resolve one of the most difficult issues for Congress and the White House: Homeland Security funding.
Instead of a full-year deal, funding for the department was extended for just two weeks, giving lawmakers little time to bridge the deep divides over immigration enforcement.
Democrats are pressing for changes they say are necessary to prevent future abuses, including requiring immigration agents to wear body cameras, carry clear identification, end roving patrols in cities and coordinate more closely with local law enforcement when making arrests. Many Democrats also want tighter rules around warrants and accountability mechanisms for officers in the field.
Those demands have met stiff resistance from Republicans. Some are opposed to negotiating with Democrats at all.
“Republicans control the White House, Senate and House. Why are we giving an inch to Democrats?” Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) wrote on social media.
Republican senators said they would take the fight to Democrats by introducing their own bills, including restrictions on “sanctuary cities,” to show their support for Trump’s policies. That term is generally applied to state and local governments that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
“We’ve let the issue get away. We’re not leading. We’re trying to avoid losing rather than winning,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who held up the spending bills until Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) agreed to give him a vote on his sanctuary cities bill at a later date.
Thune acknowledged the difficulty of the next two weeks, saying that there are “some pretty significant views and feelings.”
“We’ll stay hopeful,” Thune told reporters about the upcoming fight. “But there are some pretty significant differences of opinion.”
Cappelletti and Groves write for the Associated Press. AP writers Lisa Mascaro and Kevin Freking contributed to this report.
California Democrats have assumed leading roles in their party’s counter-offensive to the Trump administration’s massive immigration crackdown — seizing on a growing sense, shared by some Republicans, that the campaign has gotten so out of hand that the political winds have shifted heavily in their favor.
They stalled Department of Homeland Security funding in the Senate and pushed the impeachment of Secretary Kristi Noem in the House. They strategized against a threatened move by President Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act and challenged administration policies and street tactics in federal court. And they have shown up in Minneapolis to express outrage and demanded Department of Justice records following two fatal shootings of U.S. citizens there.
The push comes at an extremely tense moment, as Minneapolis and the nation reel from the fatal weekend shooting of Alex Pretti, and served as an impetus for a spending deal reached late Thursday between Senate Democrats and the White House to avert another partial government shutdown. The compromise would allow lawmakers to fund large parts of the federal government while giving them more time to negotiate new restrictions for immigration agents.
“This is probably one of the few windows on immigration specifically where Democrats find themselves on offense,” said Mike Madrid, a California Republican political consultant. “It is a rare and extraordinary moment.”
Both of the state’s Democratic senators, Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, came out in staunch opposition to the latest Homeland Security funding measure in Congress, vowing to block it unless the administration scales back its street operations and reins in masked agents who have killed Americans in multiple shootings, clashed with protestors and provoked communities with aggressive tactics.
Under the agreement reached Thursday, the Department of Homeland Security will be funded for two weeks — a period of time that in theory will allow lawmakers to negotiate guardrails for the federal agency. The measure still will need to be approved by the House, though it is not clear when they will hold a vote — meaning a short shutdown still could occur even if the Senate deal is accepted.
Padilla negotiated with the White House to separate the controversial measures in question — to provide $64.4 billion for Homeland Security and $10 billion specifically for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — from a broader spending package that also funds the Pentagon, the State Department and health, education and transportation agencies.
Senate Democrats vowed to not give more money to federal immigration agencies, including ICE and Customs and Border Protection, unless Republicans agree to require agents to wear body cameras, take off masks during operations and stop making arrests and searching homes without judicial warrants. All Senate Democrats and seven Senate Republicans blocked passage of the broader spending package earlier Thursday.
“Anything short of meaningful, enforceable reforms for Trump’s out-of-control ICE and CBP is a non-starter,” Padilla said in a statement after the earlier vote. “We need real oversight, accountability and enforcement for both the agents on the ground and the leaders giving them their orders. I will not vote for anything less.”
Neither Padilla nor Schiff immediately responded to requests for comment on the deal late Thursday.
Even if Democrats block Homeland Security funding after the two-week deal expires, immigration operations would not stop. That’s because ICE received $75 billion under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year — part of an unprecedented $178 billion provided to Homeland Security through the mega-bill.
Trump said Thursday he was working “in a very bipartisan way” to reach a compromise on the funding package. “Hopefully we won’t have a shutdown, we are working on that right now,” he said. “I think we are getting close. I don’t think Democrats want to see it either.”
The administration has eased its tone and admitted mistakes in its immigration enforcement campaign since Pretti’s killing, but hasn’t backed down completely or paused operations in Minneapolis, as critics demanded.
This week Padilla and Schiff joined other Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee in calling on the Justice Department to open a civil rights investigation into the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by immigration agents in Minneapolis. In a letter addressed to Assistant Atty. Gen. for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon, they questioned her office’s decision to forgo an investigation, saying it reflected a trend of “ignoring the enforcement of civil rights laws in favor of carrying out President Trump’s political agenda.”
Dhillon did not respond to a request for comment. Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche said there is “currently no basis” for such an investigation.
Schiff also has been busy preparing his party for any move by Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act, which would give the president broad authority to deploy military troops into American cities. Trump has threatened to take that move, which would mark a dramatic escalation of his immigration campaign.
A spokesperson confirmed to The Times that Schiff briefed fellow Democrats during a caucus lunch Wednesday on potential strategies for combating such a move.
“President Trump and his allies have been clear and intentional in laying the groundwork to invoke the Insurrection Act without justification and could exploit the very chaos that he has fueled in places like Minneapolis as the pretext to do so,” Schiff said in a statement. “Whether he does so in connection with immigration enforcement or to intimidate voters during the midterm elections, we must not be caught flat-footed if he takes such an extreme step to deploy troops to police our streets.”
Meanwhile, Rep. Robert Garcia of Long Beach, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, announced he will serve as one of three Democrats leading an impeachment inquiry into Noem, whom Democrats have blasted for allowing and excusing violence by agents in Minneapolis and other cities.
Garcia called the shootings of Good and Pretti “horrific and shocking,” so much so that even some Republicans are acknowledging the “severity of what happened” — creating an opening for Noem’s impeachment.
“It’s unacceptable what’s happening right now, and Noem is at the top of this agency that’s completely rogue,” he said Thursday. “People are being killed on the streets.”
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) went to Minneapolis this week to talk to residents and protesters about the administration’s presence in their city, which he denounced as unconstitutional and violent.
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta has gone after a slew of Trump immigration policies both in California and across the country — including by backing a lawsuit challenging immigration deployments in the Twin Cities, and joining in a letter to U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi denouncing the administration’s attempts to “exploit the situation in Minnesota” by demanding local leaders turn over state voter data in exchange for federal agents leaving.
California’s leaders are far from alone in pressing hard for big changes.
Cardinal Joseph Tobin, the head of the Archdiocese of Newark (N.J.) and a top ally of Pope Leo XIV, sharply criticized immigration enforcement this week, calling ICE a “lawless organization” and backing the interruption of funding to the agency. On Thursday the NAACP and other prominent civil rights organizations sent a letter to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) arguing that ICE should be “fully dissolved” and that Homeland Security funding should be blocked until a slate of “immediate and enforceable restrictions” are placed on its operations.
Madrid, the Republican consultant, said California’s leaders have a clear reason to push for policies that protect immigrants, given the state is home to 1 in 4 foreign-born Americans and immigration is “tied into the fabric of California.”
And at a moment when Trump and other administration officials clearly realize “how far out of touch and how damaging” their immigration policies have become politically, he said, California’s leaders have a real opportunity to push their own agenda forward — especially if it includes clear, concrete solutions to end the recent “egregious, extra-constitutional violation of rights” that many Americans find so objectionable.
However, Madrid warned that Democrats wasted a similar opportunity after the unrest around the killing of George Floyd by calling to “defund the police,” which was politically unpopular, and could fall into a similar pitfall if they push for abolishing ICE.
“You’ve got a moment here where you can either fix [ICE], or lean into the political moment and say ‘abolish it,’” he said. “The question becomes, can Democrats run offense? Or will they do what they too often have done with this issue, which is snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?”
A year ago, Colorado firefighters Rick Balentine and Tim Cottrell were driving trucks carrying donations from Aspen to Los Angeles for victims of the Eaton and Palisades fires.
As they headed west, they planned to stop in Las Vegas and, while there, made a spontaneous decision to see the Eagles’ residency at the Sphere. Balentine and Cottrell bought resale tickets on StubHub for around $400 each. Cottrell used his credit card and received a confirmation email. But once they arrived to the venue, they weren’t allowed in. The seller failed to send the tickets.
All Cottrell could find was an email that said his tickets had been canceled, moments before the concert was to start. Other than getting their money back, there was no further explanation.
“We knew they were aftermarket tickets,” Balentine said, “but never in a million years did I think that tickets could get canceled.”
“I was very disappointed. There needs to be more protection out there, both for consumers and for artists, so people aren’t getting ripped off all the time.”
The rising demand for tickets has spurred a growing marketplace for all kinds of high-profile live events, including music tours and sports series like the upcoming World Cup. Whenever fans are unable to secure tickets on the primary market, through sellers like Ticketmaster or AXS, many will turn to the secondary market for resale tickets. Those tickets are typically sold through platforms like StubHub, SeatGeek and Vivid Seats. Customers who bought their passes directly from Ticketmaster can also resell them on that platform.
The majority of secondary-market transactions can be easy, leaving both the reseller and the customer satisfied. But with the rise of speculative or fake tickets, like the ones Balentine and Cottrell bought, securing valid tickets from the resale market has become more challenging.
What are speculative tickets?
Speculative tickets are offered by resellers who list concert passes they don’t yet have in their possession, with the intention that they will ultimately acquire the tickets and deliver them to the buyer. According to 2025 data from Live Nation, one in three Americans has fallen victim to a ticketing scam. But under California’s bill, AB 1349, selling speculative tickets could be banned on all resale platforms in the state. On Monday, the bill passed in an assembly vote and is headed to the state Senate for review.
Thousands of fans enjoy Shakira’s performance at SoFi Stadium in August.
(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)
Speculative tickets usually pop up as soon as a major artist announces a tour. Most recently, K-pop boy band BTS announced a world tour that includes four stops at SoFi Stadium. Before the general sale began Jan. 24, some sellers on Vivid Seats had already started listing tickets for over $6,000. Listings like these usually create a greater sense of scarcity, which can drive up ticket prices even more.
If enacted, the proposed legislation in California would require sellers to have event tickets in their possession before offering them for sale. The listing must include the location of the seat and specific refund rights. It prohibits a person from using software that automatically purchases more tickets than the specified limit, and it would raise the maximum civil penalty for each violation from $2,500 to $10,000.
The live music industry is a vital part of the state’s economy, contributing over $51 billion to California’s GDP and supporting over 460,000 jobs, according to the database 50 States of Music.
Ticketing fraud tends to affect more than just the consumer. Whenever an unknowing fan shows up to a venue with a fake ticket, it often falls on the venue and its staff to deal with the situation. Stephen Parker, the executive director of the National Independent Venue Association, said that if speculative tickets are banned in California, venues could save up to $50,000 in staffing expenses.
Los Angeles’ SoFi Stadium, where many concerts and ticketed live events are held.
(Icon Sportswire/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)
“They have to deal with fans who are crying, who are angry, who are upset because they thought they were going to go see their favorite artists that night, and they paid [over the] ticket’s face value only to not get a ticket that works or to not get a ticket at all,” said Parker.
Fighting ticket fraud and reining in a ticketing giant
There are currently dozens of legislative bills throughout the U.S. focused on event ticketing issues. Some states like Maryland, Minnesota and Maine have already passed restrictions on speculative tickets.
The action comes after both the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission sued Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation Entertainment, in 2024 and 2025. The DOJ’s lawsuit suggests breaking up the company, which it accuses of engaging in monopolistic practices. The complaint also alleges the company forces venues into exclusive ticketing contracts and influences artists to use only its services.
Founded in 1976, Ticketmaster has been the industry’s largest ticket distributor since 1995, with around 80% of live concerts sold through the site. The company merged with Live Nation in 2010.
Ticketmaster has also acquired a growing share of the resale market, under the platform Ticketmaster Resale. The site allows consumers to list, sell or find tickets to live events. The business functions similarly to other resale sites, but Ticketmaster does not allow speculative ticket sales on its platform.
The Federal Trade Commission is currently suing the company on accusations that it engaged in illegal ticket vendor practices for its resale business, like misleading artists and consumers with so-called “bait-and-switch pricing,” where advertised prices are lower than the actual total. Following the FTC’s complaint, the ticket seller made changes to its policies.
Additionally, Ticketmaster is no longer allowing users to have multiple accounts, which made it easier to purchase more tickets than the specified limit, and it is shutting down Trade Desk, the controversial software that helps resellers track and price tickets across several marketplaces.
Hundreds enjoy a performance by Banda Los Lagos during Jalisco Fest at the 2025 Santa Fe Springs Swap Meet.
(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)
“The FTC case against us is very frustrating because we think they’re sort of blaming the victim here. We’re the ones that are dealing with millions and millions of bots attacking us every day,” said Dan Wall, Live Nation’s vice president of corporate and regulatory affairs. “We’re trying to convince the federal government and state governments to get on the same page of recognizing where the problem is, which is overwhelmingly in the resale industry, and trying to do something about it.”
“We’re a much more artist and consumer-focused company, and so we don’t engage in the different kinds of business practices that are sketchy and unfair to the fans. We try to be a much more honest, legitimate outlet for getting resale tickets,” said Wall.
Critics find that the surge of anti-speculative ticketing bills around the country is a way for Ticketmaster to divert attention from its own legal troubles and shift attention onto the resale market. Live Nation is a key supporter of the California bill. Diana Moss, the director of competition policy at the Progressive Policy Institute, called AB 1349 “overkill” when it comes to the provisions and restrictions it places on the secondary market.
Fans cheer Sexyy Red at the Rolling Loud concert at Hollywood Park in March.
(Michael Owen Baker/For The Times)
“A lot of these bills in the states are a vehicle to disable the resale markets and hinder how they operate. Resale markets are important to consumers,” said Moss. “If you disable the resale market, then fans have no place to go — but back to Ticketmaster. That’s the whole game, disable the resale markets with legislation and regulation, and then everybody has to go back and deal with Ticketmaster and pay their monopoly ticket fees.”
Provisions in AB 1349 deem a ticket a license. The question of whether a ticket is a right or a license is an ongoing controversy in the ticketing world. Opponents of the bill are fearful that this change would give more power to Live Nation, as they could impose restrictions on how the ticket can be used, such as whether you’re allowed to sell your ticket on other platforms or if you can transfer it at all. Meghan Callahan, from the Empower Fans Coalition, a group that opposes the bill, equates this licensing change to taking a lease out on the ticket.
“Ticketmaster’s goal is to create less competition. This bill imposes restrictions on everybody else but themselves,” said Callahan. “They are trying to use consumer-friendly concepts and sneak in these other provisions to embolden their monopoly.”
Wall at Ticketmaster said that nothing on the consumers’ end would change if this bill were to pass, adding that tickets are already licenses “from the venue for you to come on the property during the time of the show and sit in that seat.”
“Honesty doesn’t favor one person or another. That’s what this [bill] is about,” said Wall.
Tom Brady has no ‘dog in the fight’? Patriots teammates fuming
“I am Tom Brady, and I am a Patriot.”
That’s what the man who led New England to six Super Bowl victories and nine appearances in the NFL’s championship game said when he was inducted into the Patriots Hall of Fame in June 2024.
“I am a Patriot for life!”
That’s what the retired quarterback told the crowd at Gillette Stadium in September 2023 at the start of the first NFL season since the end of his 23-year career, which included three seasons and one more Super Bowl win with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
“I don’t have a dog in the fight in this one. May the best team win.”
That’s what Brady said on the “Let’s Go!” podcast earlier this week. The comment wouldn’t have been a big deal if he had been talking about this year’s Puppy Bowl, in which his clone dog Junie will not be a participant.
But alas, he was talking about Super Bowl XL, which pits the Seattle Seahawks against the team that has a 17-foot bronze statue of Brady outside its stadium (a.k.a. the Patriots).
Now, Brady is a minority owner of the Las Vegas Raiders, but they fell just a teensy bit short of making the playoffs after finishing the season at 3-14 and aren’t a factor at all in this weekend’s game in Santa Clara.
Also, as a color commentator for NFL games on Fox Sports, he might feel compelled to remain neutral — but the Super Bowl is on NBC this year, so Brady won’t be calling that game.
Former New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady speaks at the August 2025 unveiling of a bronze statue of himself at Patriot Place in Foxborough, Mass.
(Charles Krupa / Associated Press)
Brady actually did provide plenty of context along with his comment, and we’ll get to that shortly. But first, how about some reactions from Brady’s former Patriots teammates?
Retired linebacker Tedy Bruschi said he has no problem showing his support for New England and coach Mike Vrabel, who played for the Patriots teams that won Super Bowls XXXVI, XXXVII and XXXIX.
“That’s the way Tom feels. I got a big-a— dog in the race, I’m telling you that right now,” Bruschi said on Boston’s WEEI 93.7 FM. “That’s my boy right there, you know, Vrabel — eight-year teammate, like a brother of mine. I mean, all of us, really. It’s like, we’ve got a dog in the fight. My dog is big and I’m cheering for him.”
Retired defensive lineman Vince Wilfork called Brady’s neutral stance “political bullcrap.”
“Raiders ain’t in it,” Wilfork said on WEEI. “Say what it is, what you see.”
He added: “At the end of the day, if you’re a Patriot for life … don’t give me that political bullcrap. That’s just what it is. If you don’t think we’re gonna win, just pick Seattle then. Don’t straddle the fence.”
Retired cornerback Asante Samuel wrote on X: “Tom Brady I am highly I mean highly disappointed in you not rooting for your ex teammate, Mike Vrabel who is about to do something special.”
In a separate post, Samuel suggested that Brady wants to be “the only one winning super bowls.”
Retired tight end Rob Gronkowski said on the “Up & Adams” YouTube show that he hadn’t talked to Brady about the matter yet, but he did have a theory on why his good friend might not be rooting for the Patriots.
“He probably wants to be the quarterback. He’s that competitive,” Gronkowski said. “He wants to be the guy in the Super Bowl right now.”
Retired offensive linebacker Damien Woody said on ESPN’s “Unsportsmanlike” that Brady’s comment was “ludicrous,” then continued, “I don’t care if you’re the minority owner of the Raiders. Dammit, you have a statue in Foxborough. Make it known. Nobody wants to hear all this, ‘I don’t have a dog in the fight.’ The hell you do! If Robert Kraft put that damn statue outside of his stadium, oh, you better believe you got a dog in the fight.”
OK, now on to what Brady actually said on the podcast. Host Jim Gray asked what this Super Bowl is like for him as someone so closely associated with the Patriots and their past success. As part of his answer, Brady pointed out that there are “always different chapters in your life.”
“And now, in a different phase of my life, I really root for people and the people I care about, the people who I know the work that goes into what they’re trying to accomplish,” Brady said. “So I really want to sit back as a fan and enjoy the game, enjoy the moment. And I always think, may the best team win. You know, it’s not going to be who I’m cheering for, who I think is going to win. It’s going to be decided by the people out there on the field.”
Brady added: “I just want to see good football. I want to see good plays, good throws, good strategy, good decisions. And that’s the joy in the game for me. … So listen, I don’t have a dog in the fight in this one. May the best team win. And in terms of the Patriots, this is a new chapter in New England, and I’m glad everyone’s embraced the Mike Vrabel regime, all the amazing players that have worked so hard to get their club to this position.”
Gray brought up the “idiotic” perception that Brady and other members of the Patriots dynasty might not want this year’s team to succeed and somehow distract from their accomplishments. Brady agreed that such thoughts are “idiotic” and said that all the memories and relationships he built during that era will always mean something to him.
“No one can take those away from me,” Brady said. “So regardless of what anyone would say or think or want to add to the conversation, I’m just excited that the two best teams who have been consistently the best teams all year are playing for the Super Bowl.”
Source link
Senate not ‘anywhere close’ to a funding deal as ICE fight intensifies
WASHINGTON — Senate Republican Leader John Thune warned Thursday that Congress is not close to an agreement to fund the Department of Homeland Security, signaling that another short-term extension may be the only way to avoid a shutdown as Democrats demand “nonnegotiable” ICE reforms ahead of the Feb. 13 deadline.
The Republicans are increasingly looking to punt the full funding package a second time if negotiations collapse. Speaking on the Senate floor Thursday, Thune said that such a move would not include any reforms lawmakers had previously negotiated, including body cameras for immigration agents.
“As of right now, we aren’t anywhere close to having any sort of an agreement that would enable us to fund the Department of Homeland Security,” he said. “If [Democrats] are coming to the table demanding a blank check or refusing to consider any measures but their own, they’re likely to end up with nothing.”
He spoke hours after House and Senate Democrats announced they were aligned behind a list of 10 demands they say must be passed before approving the Homeland Security funding package through September.
Democrats are pressing for statutory limits on immigration raids, new judicial warrant requirements, body-worn cameras, identification rules for agents and enhanced oversight of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection — reforms they say are necessary to rein in what House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called an agency “out of control.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Democrats are planning to propose the legislation as soon as possible.
“We want our Republican colleagues to finally get serious about this, because this is turning America inside out in a way we haven’t seen in a very long time,” Schumer said.
The coordinated demands signal unity among House and Senate Democrats after a rocky week on Capitol Hill. In a slim vote, 21 House Democrats joined Republicans on Tuesday to end a partial government shutdown by temporarily extending Homeland Security funding through Feb. 13.
The two-week stopgap, called a “continuing resolution,” was meant to leave time for the two parties to debate how to rein in ICE after the fatal shootings of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis.
But that truce has quickly unraveled. Republican leaders have little appetite for the full slate of reforms. Some have indicated openness to narrower changes, such as expanding body camera programs and training, but reject mask bans and the removal of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) has already ruled out warrant requirements, which would limit immigration agents from entering private property without a court order. In remarks to reporters Wednesday, he also hinted at some interest in attaching voter ID and anti-sanctuary city policies to negotiations.
“It will be part of the discussion over the next couple of weeks, and we’ll see how that shakes out. But I suspect that some of the changes — the procedural modifications with ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement — will be codified,” he said.
Johnson was confident the two sides could make a deal without further delays, adding that negotiations are largely between “the White House, Schumer and Senate Democrats.”
President Trump has privately supported the short-term extension to cool tensions while publicly defending immigration agents and expressing skepticism toward Democrats’ reform push, according to House leadership.
White House border policy advisor Tom Homan also announced a drawdown of 700 federal agents from Minneapolis this week as what officials framed as a goodwill gesture amid negotiations.
Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said Thursday that the administration is willing to consider some of the demands Democrats have made, but said some of their requests are not “grounded in any common sense and they are nonstarters for this administration.”
Leavitt did not specify which reforms the administration was willing to consider. She did, however, say the president is committed to keeping the government open and supporting “immigration enforcement efforts in this country.”
The White House did not respond when asked if the president would support a short-term spending measure should negotiations stall.
Republicans continue to warn that a failure to reach a deal would jeopardize disaster response funding, airport security operations, maritime patrols, and increased security assistance for major national events, including the upcoming World Cup in Los Angeles.
“If we don’t do it by the middle of next week, we should consider a continuing resolution for the rest of the year and just put this all behind us,” said Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), chair of the House Freedom Caucus.
Democrats, however, remain adamant that verbal assurances are no longer enough.
“These are just some of the commonsense proposals that the American people clearly would like to see in terms of the dramatic changes that are needed at the Department of Homeland Security before there is a full-year appropriations bill,” Jeffries said.
Times staff writer Ana Ceballos in Washington contributed to this report.
Source link
Death Valley is the latest battleground in fight over national park signage
“These are our homelands.”
“We are still here.”
The statements are objectively true: The Timbisha Shoshone have lived in what’s now popularly known as Death Valley for thousands of years. And they still live there, in a small village inside the national park that has about 30 full-time inhabitants.
In 2000, Congress officially recognized these two facts in the text of the hard-fought Homeland Act, which transferred nearly 7,800 acres of land, including the village site, back to the Timbisha Shoshone.
You’re reading Boiling Point
The L.A. Times climate team gets you up to speed on climate change, energy and the environment. Sign up to get it in your inbox every week.
By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service and our Privacy Policy.
But federal officials have now taken issue with those seemingly innocuous sentences, according to Mandi Campbell, tribal historic preservation officer for the Timbisha Shoshone and a resident of the village.
The rationale? Orders from President Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum directing the National Park Service to review interpretive materials for content that the administration feels “inappropriately disparages Americans.”
Only certain types of Americans, as it turns out: The executive order also has been cited in a lawsuit by the city of Philadelphia as the presumptive reason the NPS removed an exhibit on enslaved people from Independence National Historical Park.
Participants take time out for a photo during a march organized by the Timbisha Shoshone to mark the 25th anniversary of the Homeland Act.
(Kim Stringfellow)
And it’s prompted Lowell National Historical Park in Massachusetts to stop showing films about women and immigrant textile mill workers, according to the New York Times, which also reported that plaques referencing climate change have been removed from Muir Woods National Monument in California and Fort Sumter and Fort Moultrie National Historical Park in South Carolina.
On top of that, Trump officials recently ordered the removal or editing of signs and other materials in at least 17 national parks in Arizona, Texas, Colorado, Utah, Montana and Wyoming, The Washington Post reports.
Back to Death Valley — a name that, by the way, members of the Timbisha Shoshone have never liked. Campbell told me that a celebration of the Homeland Act’s 25th anniversary that took place Friday at the national park’s Furnace Creek Visitor Center was supposed to include the unveiling of updates to its interpretive exhibit. The tribe had planned to place in a display case earrings and a medallion that members once gifted to former park Superintendent J.T. Reynolds to mark the passage of the act, along with some descriptive language, she said.
Ahead of the event, the Park Service submitted the additions to its parent agency, the Interior Department, for review. Campbell said that agency officials replied that not only could the new exhibit not include the new phrases “these are our homelands” or “we are still here,” but that similar language that’s been on display since 2012 would also be placed under review.
Interior Department spokesperson Elizabeth Peace said this is not true. “The Department has a long-standing history of working closely with tribal partners as part of exhibit development and review, and the park was never told they could not use that specific language or phrases,” she wrote in an email.
Peace went on to explain that although the new exhibit is under review pursuant to the executive and secretarial orders — both titled “restoring truth and sanity to American history” — the department hasn’t made any final decisions.
The review, according to Peace, is meant to ensure that parks tell “the full and accurate story of American history,” which includes addressing enslaved and Indigenous people, “informed by current scholarship and expert review, not through a narrow ideological lens.”
So, the 25th anniversary celebration went ahead without acknowledging the ongoing debate about the new exhibit.
There was a march from the village to the visitor center in which tribal members walked behind a banner that read, “We are still here,” which, Campbell said, was meant to echo a protest staged on Memorial Day in 1996 in which the Timbisha Shoshone demanded the restoration of their homelands after negotiations with the federal government broke down. That rally was widely credited with restarting the talks that eventually led to the passage of the Homeland Act.
Three decades later, the struggle continues. “Why do we still have to fight to be heard?” Campbell wondered earlier this week. “We weren’t even in history books. And we still can‘t tell our story. When do we get our chance?”
Despite the recent controversy, the tribe has a good relationship with the Death Valley-based NPS officials, Campbell said, and she’s confident they’ll be able to work through whatever happens next together.
After Friday’s march, tribal council members and park officials gave a series of speeches at the visitor center saluting their strong partnership and all the work that it’s taken to get to this point. Then they took pictures and ate cake.
More recent land news
If you’re a regular reader of this newsletter, you probably are aware of how lawmakers have been using the Congressional Review Act, which enables Congress to overturn recent federal rules with a majority vote, to revoke specific Bureau of Land Management plans that limit mining and drilling in specific places. This was unprecedented until last year but has since been used to throw out BLM plans in Alaska, Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming.
Now, a decision by the Government Accountability Office has cleared the way for Congress to throw out the BLM plan for Utah’s Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, which protects the land from mineral extraction, limits grazing and prioritizes conservation. Experts expect Republican Rep. Celeste Maloy or another Utah member of Congress to introduce a bill to do so this year, according to Caroline Llanes of Rocky Mountain Community Radio. If it passes, it would mark the first time the act has been used to roll back protections in a national monument.
Four former U.S. Forest Service chiefs are speaking out against the agency’s move to repeal the Roadless Area Conservation Rule. The 2001 rule protecting 58 million acres of national forests from road building and logging was supported by both political parties, and is needed to protect sensitive wildlife and maintain clean drinking water, argues an op-ed published in the Hill.
The Forest Service has revised its oil and gas leasing rules to “streamline” the permitting process by replacing parcel-by-parcel environmental reviews with a broader review that can sometimes cover millions of acres, reports Jake Bolster of Inside Climate News. Environmental groups told Bolster that the move will increase the likelihood that the agency misses sensitive habitat when deciding where to allow drilling.
Some environmental advocates are concerned about a new order from Interior Secretary Burgum that seeks to expand hunting and fishing access on federal public lands. “It flips conservation on its head and treats wildlife protection as the exception,” said Michelle Lute, executive director of nonprofit Wildlife for All. Others say the directive is more of a statement of values than something that will result in drastic changes on the ground. “It’s a nice nod to the hunting and angling community that acknowledges ‘we know these areas mean a lot to you,’” said Ryan Callaghan, president and chief executive of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers.
A few last things in climate news
Much has been made of a record-setting rainy season that’s helped lift California out of drought. But an extraordinarily warm January has left the snowpack across the Sierra Nevada and much of the Western U.S. far smaller than usual, Times water and climate change reporter Ian James writes. That means more hard times for the snowmelt-fed Colorado River, which provides water for farms and cities across seven states.
A federal judge recently ruled that a wind project off the coast of New York state can go forward — the fifth time a court has ruled against the Trump administration’s efforts to halt major offshore wind projects, write Jennifer McDermott and Alexa St. John of the Associated Press. Meanwhile, the administration has also been stymieing solar and wind energy projects on land by halting or delaying once-routine federal approvals, find Brad Plumer and Rebecca F. Elliott of the New York Times.
Peninsular bighorn sheep seeking to migrate back and forth across the California-Mexico border, as they’ve long done, are now being hampered by razor wire installed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in the Jacumba Wilderness, according to our wildlife and outdoors reporter Lila Seidman. Similar scenarios are playing out across the Southwest, where the 1,954-mile border cuts through the habitat of more than 80 threatened and endangered species.
This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our Boiling Point podcast here.
For more land news, follow @phila_lex on X and alex-wigglesworth.bsky.socialon Bluesky.
Source link
A California lawyer returns home to Minneapolis to fight for civil rights
How do you find the missing?
If you do find them, how can you help?
Oakland civil rights attorney James Cook has been on the ground in Minnesota for months figuring out answers to these question as he goes.
A fast-talking Minneapolis native who still lives in the Twin Cities part time, Cook is one of a handful of attorneys who have dropped everything to aid (for free) those caught up in the federal crackdown — protesters, immigrants and detained citizens — too many of whom have found themselves facing deportation, arrest or even been disappeared, at least for a time.
Civil rights attorney James Cook in the rear view mirror as he makes phone calls in his car in Minneapolis.
(Caroline Yang/For The Times)
“They are leaders that are on the ground really helping people through this process,” Minnesota school board member Chauntyll Allen told me.
She’s one of the protesters arrested inside a local church, charged with conspiracy to deprive others of their constitutional rights by Pam Bondi’s politicized Department of Justice, which also Friday arrested journalist Don Lemon for the same incident. Cook is one of the lawyers now representing Allen.
“It shows us that the judicial arm, or some of the judicial arm of our democracy, is willing to step up and ensure that our democracy stands strong,” Allen said of Cook and others like him.
While it’s the images of clashes in the streets that captivate media and audiences, it’s lawyers like Cook who are fighting an existential battle in the background to preserve the rule of law in a place where it is increasing opaque, to put it gently.
The legal work behind detentions has largely been an overlooked battlefield that will likely rage on years after ICE departs the streets, leaving in its wake hundreds if not thousands of long-and-winding court cases.
Beyond the personal fates they will determine, the outcome of the civil litigation Cook and others are spearheading will likely force whatever transparency and accountability can be pulled from these chaotic and troubling times.
It’s time-consuming and complicated work vital not just to people, but history.
Or, as Cook puts it, “I’ll be 10 years older when all this s— resolves.”
Federal agents stand guard against a growing wall of protesters on Jan. 24 in Minneapolis, just hours after Alex Pretti was shot by federal agents.
(Caroline Yang/For The Times)
Cook told me this while on his way to the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building where some detainees are being held, maybe. It’s hard to find out. A few years ago, when immigration enforcement in Minnesota ramped up under the first Trump term, activists tried to get the name of the building changed, arguing Whipple, the first Protestant Episcopal bishop in the state, had been an advocate of the marginalized and wouldn’t want his name associated with what the feds were up to.
It didn’t work, but the movement’s slogan, “What would Whipple do?” still has resonance in this town, where two American citizens, Alex Pretti and Renee Good, have been fatally shot while protesting — incidents ugly enough that Bruce Springsteen wrote a song about them.
Cook is well aware that the guns carried by the federal agents are not for show, even without the Boss’ new ballad. Just a few days ago, one of the first times he drove his beat-up truck up to the gate, the federal guards at Whipple pointed their guns at him.
“I’m like, ‘Hey, I’m going to take my keys out of the ignition, drop them on the ground. So please don’t shoot,’” he said.
They lowered the guns, but Cook was scared, a feeling that doesn’t come easy.
Long before his law degree, when he was a punk-rock loving teen in the 1980s, fresh out of Southwest High, the public school not too far from Whipple, a former coach convinced him to give up college dreams and instead pursue a shot at making the first Muay Thai kickboxing team at the Olympics.
The martial art ended up not making it as an official Olympic sport, but the experience launched Cook into a professional boxing and kickboxing career that took him to competitions around the world, and taught him fear is not a reason to back down.
But, “Father Time is undefeated,” Cook said. “I got older and I started losing fights, and I was like, all right, time to get back to life.”
That eventually led him to obtaining a law degree in San Francisco, where after an intern stint as a public defender, he decided he wanted to be a trial attorney, fighting in court.
Civil rights attorney James Cook has been doing pro bono immigration work since the crackdown began in Minneapolis.
(Caroline Yang/For The Times)
He started cold-calling John Burris, another Bay Area lawyer who is an icon of civil rights and police misconduct cases. Burris, who has been called the “Godfather of Police Litigation,” was involved in the “Oakland Riders” case in 2000, when officers were discovered to have planted evidence. He also represented Rodney King, the family of Oscar Grant, and the family of Joseph Mann among many others.
But Burris, a boxing fan, didn’t respond to Cook’s calls until the young lawyer offered him free tickets to one of his fights, which he was still doing on the side.
“And then immediately I got a call back,” Cook said.
Burris said Cook’s history as a fighter intrigued him, but “I did say to James, you can’t be a fighter and lawyer. You can’t get punched in your head all the time.”
Cook did not take this advice.
Still, Burris said, “It was his persistence that I admired, because the type of work we’re involved in, you need people who are dedicated, who have some real commitment to the work, and he showed that kind of consistency and dedication.”
Cook’s been working with Burris more than 20 years now, but until recently, the labyrinth of the immigration system wasn’t his area of expertise. It’s been a crash course for him, he said, on the often arcane laws that govern who gets to stay in America and who doesn’t.
It’s also been a crash course on what a civil rights emergency looks like. Along with his work looking for locked-up immigrants, Cook spends a lot of time on the streets at protests, helping people understand their rights — and limitations — and seeing first hand what is happening.
“If you ever wondered what you would have done in Germany, now is the time,” he said. “Now is the time to do something. People are being interned.”
In the hours after Pretti was shot, Cook was at the location of the shooting, in the middle of the tear gas, offering legal help to anyone who needed it and bearing witness to conduct that will almost certainly face scrutiny one day, even if government leaders condone it now.
Law enforcement officers launch tear gas canisters as they work to push the crowd back and expand their perimeter in Minneapolis on Jan. 24.
(Caroline Yang/For The Times)
“The way the officers chase people down, protesters who were really just protesting lawfully and were beaten and pepper sprayed and gassed — all those are civil rights violations,” Burris said. “And so the law is the guardrails. So there has to be lawyers who are prepared to protect those guardrails and to stand as centurions, as I refer to us.”
Cook has tried to calm protesters, he told me, and prevent clashes. But people are mad, and resolute. His greatest fear is summer — when warm weather could bring even larger crowds if enforcement is still ongoing. He’s worried that the actions of the federal agents will spill over into anger at local cops enforcing local laws, leading to even more chaos.
“I’ve always supported cops as long as they do their job correctly,” Cook said.
For now, he’s taking it one day at a time, one case at a time, one name at a time.
Protesters raise an inverted American flag as law enforcement officers launch tear gas canisters in Minneapolis after Alex Pretti was killed by federal agents.
(Caroline Yang/For The Times)
Tuesday, Cook passed through the armed checkpoint at Whipple carrying a list of about seven people, folks who have been picked up by federal agents for one reason or another, or reasons unknown, and now cannot be located. They are not in the public online system that is meant to track detainees, and family and friends have not heard from them.
If he’s lucky, Cook will get information on one or two, that they are indeed inside, or maybe at a detention center in Texas, where many have been sent. But there will be more whose location remains unknown. He’ll make calls, fill out forms and come back tomorrow. And the tomorrow after that.
“This is what we do,” he said. “I’m always in it for the long run. I mean, you know, shoot, yeah, that’s kind of the way it works.”
Source link
Trump moved fast to cut a funding deal. It’s a striking change from the last shutdown fight
WASHINGTON — President Trump moved quickly this week to negotiate with Democrats to avert a lengthy government shutdown over Department of Homeland Security funding, a sharp departure from last year’s record standoff, when he refused to budge for weeks.
Some Republicans are frustrated with the deal, raising the possibility of a prolonged shutdown fight when the House returns Monday to vote on the funding package. But Trump’s sway over the GOP remains considerable, and he has made his position clear at a moment of mounting political strain.
“The only thing that can slow our country down is another long and damaging government shutdown,” Trump wrote on social media late Thursday.
The urgency marked a clear shift from Trump’s posture during the 43-day shutdown late last year, when he publicly antagonized Democratic leaders and his team mocked them on social media. This time, with anger rising over shootings in Minneapolis and the GOP’s midterm messaging on tax cuts drowned out by controversy, Trump acted quickly to make a deal with Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York.
“Trump and the Republicans know that this is an issue where they’re on the wrong side of the American people and it really matters,” Schumer told reporters Friday after Senate passage of the government funding deal.
Crisis after Minneapolis killings
Senators returned to work this week dealing with the fallout from the fatal shooting of ICU nurse Alex Pretti in Minneapolis by federal immigration officers, as well as the killing of Renee Good in the city weeks earlier.
Republicans were far from unified in their response. A few called for the firing of top administration officials such as Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller, the White House chief of staff for policy. Most GOP senators tried to strike a balance, calling for a thorough investigation into Pretti’s killing while backing the hard-line immigration approach that is central to Trump’s presidency.
But many agreed that the shootings threatened public support for Trump’s immigration agenda.
“I’ve never seen a political party take its best issue and turn it into its worst issue in the period of time that it has happened in the last few weeks,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said. “Some things have to change.”
Democrats quickly coalesced around their key demands.
Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) said there “was unanimity” around core principles of enforcing a code of conduct for immigration officers and agents, ending “roving patrols” for immigration enforcement actions and coordinating with local law enforcement on immigration arrests.
It helped that Trump himself was looking for ways to de-escalate in Minneapolis.
“The world has seen the videos of those horrible abuses by DHS and rogue operations catching up innocent people, and there’s a revulsion about it,” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said.
“The White House is asking for a ladder off the ledge,” he added.
The painful politics of shutdown
Republicans are also trying to promote their accomplishments in office as they ready for the November midterms and the difficult task of retaining control of both chambers of Congress.
But the prospect of a prolonged shutdown shifted attention away from their $4.5-trillion tax and spending cuts law, the centerpiece of their agenda. Republicans had hoped the beginning of this year’s tax season on Monday would provide a political boost as voters begin to see larger tax refunds.
Republicans are also mindful of the political damage from last year’s shutdown, when they took a slightly larger portion of the blame from Americans than Democrats, according to polling from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research.
“The shutdown was a big factor, negative for the Republicans,” Trump told Republican senators at the White House in November.
On a practical level, this funding standoff threatened to destroy months of bipartisan work, including long hours over the holiday break, to craft the 12 spending bills that fund the government and many priorities back home.
“We saw what happened in the last government shutdown in regards to how it hurt real, hardworking Americans,” said Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.), a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. “I don’t want that to happen again.”
A two-week funding battle begins
The agreement reached this week, if passed by the House, would avoid a prolonged shutdown and fund nearly every federal department through the end of the budget year in September. But it would not resolve one of the most difficult issues for Congress and the White House: Homeland Security funding.
Instead of a full-year deal, funding for the department was extended for just two weeks, giving lawmakers little time to bridge the deep divides over immigration enforcement.
Democrats are pressing for changes they say are necessary to prevent future abuses, including requiring immigration agents to wear body cameras, carry clear identification, end roving patrols in cities and coordinate more closely with local law enforcement when making arrests. Many Democrats also want tighter rules around warrants and accountability mechanisms for officers in the field.
Those demands have met stiff resistance from Republicans. Some are opposed to negotiating with Democrats at all.
“Republicans control the White House, Senate and House. Why are we giving an inch to Democrats?” Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) wrote on social media.
Republican senators said they would take the fight to Democrats by introducing their own bills, including restrictions on “sanctuary cities,” to show their support for Trump’s policies. That term is generally applied to state and local governments that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
“We’ve let the issue get away. We’re not leading. We’re trying to avoid losing rather than winning,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who held up the spending bills until Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) agreed to give him a vote on his sanctuary cities bill at a later date.
Thune acknowledged the difficulty of the next two weeks, saying that there are “some pretty significant views and feelings.”
“We’ll stay hopeful,” Thune told reporters about the upcoming fight. “But there are some pretty significant differences of opinion.”
Cappelletti and Groves write for the Associated Press. AP writers Lisa Mascaro and Kevin Freking contributed to this report.
Source link
California Democrats help lead fight vs. Trump immigration crackdown
California Democrats have assumed leading roles in their party’s counter-offensive to the Trump administration’s massive immigration crackdown — seizing on a growing sense, shared by some Republicans, that the campaign has gotten so out of hand that the political winds have shifted heavily in their favor.
They stalled Department of Homeland Security funding in the Senate and pushed the impeachment of Secretary Kristi Noem in the House. They strategized against a threatened move by President Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act and challenged administration policies and street tactics in federal court. And they have shown up in Minneapolis to express outrage and demanded Department of Justice records following two fatal shootings of U.S. citizens there.
The push comes at an extremely tense moment, as Minneapolis and the nation reel from the fatal weekend shooting of Alex Pretti, and served as an impetus for a spending deal reached late Thursday between Senate Democrats and the White House to avert another partial government shutdown. The compromise would allow lawmakers to fund large parts of the federal government while giving them more time to negotiate new restrictions for immigration agents.
“This is probably one of the few windows on immigration specifically where Democrats find themselves on offense,” said Mike Madrid, a California Republican political consultant. “It is a rare and extraordinary moment.”
Both of the state’s Democratic senators, Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, came out in staunch opposition to the latest Homeland Security funding measure in Congress, vowing to block it unless the administration scales back its street operations and reins in masked agents who have killed Americans in multiple shootings, clashed with protestors and provoked communities with aggressive tactics.
Under the agreement reached Thursday, the Department of Homeland Security will be funded for two weeks — a period of time that in theory will allow lawmakers to negotiate guardrails for the federal agency. The measure still will need to be approved by the House, though it is not clear when they will hold a vote — meaning a short shutdown still could occur even if the Senate deal is accepted.
Padilla negotiated with the White House to separate the controversial measures in question — to provide $64.4 billion for Homeland Security and $10 billion specifically for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — from a broader spending package that also funds the Pentagon, the State Department and health, education and transportation agencies.
Senate Democrats vowed to not give more money to federal immigration agencies, including ICE and Customs and Border Protection, unless Republicans agree to require agents to wear body cameras, take off masks during operations and stop making arrests and searching homes without judicial warrants. All Senate Democrats and seven Senate Republicans blocked passage of the broader spending package earlier Thursday.
“Anything short of meaningful, enforceable reforms for Trump’s out-of-control ICE and CBP is a non-starter,” Padilla said in a statement after the earlier vote. “We need real oversight, accountability and enforcement for both the agents on the ground and the leaders giving them their orders. I will not vote for anything less.”
Neither Padilla nor Schiff immediately responded to requests for comment on the deal late Thursday.
Even if Democrats block Homeland Security funding after the two-week deal expires, immigration operations would not stop. That’s because ICE received $75 billion under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year — part of an unprecedented $178 billion provided to Homeland Security through the mega-bill.
Trump said Thursday he was working “in a very bipartisan way” to reach a compromise on the funding package. “Hopefully we won’t have a shutdown, we are working on that right now,” he said. “I think we are getting close. I don’t think Democrats want to see it either.”
The administration has eased its tone and admitted mistakes in its immigration enforcement campaign since Pretti’s killing, but hasn’t backed down completely or paused operations in Minneapolis, as critics demanded.
This week Padilla and Schiff joined other Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee in calling on the Justice Department to open a civil rights investigation into the fatal shooting of Renee Nicole Good by immigration agents in Minneapolis. In a letter addressed to Assistant Atty. Gen. for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon, they questioned her office’s decision to forgo an investigation, saying it reflected a trend of “ignoring the enforcement of civil rights laws in favor of carrying out President Trump’s political agenda.”
Dhillon did not respond to a request for comment. Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche said there is “currently no basis” for such an investigation.
Schiff also has been busy preparing his party for any move by Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act, which would give the president broad authority to deploy military troops into American cities. Trump has threatened to take that move, which would mark a dramatic escalation of his immigration campaign.
A spokesperson confirmed to The Times that Schiff briefed fellow Democrats during a caucus lunch Wednesday on potential strategies for combating such a move.
“President Trump and his allies have been clear and intentional in laying the groundwork to invoke the Insurrection Act without justification and could exploit the very chaos that he has fueled in places like Minneapolis as the pretext to do so,” Schiff said in a statement. “Whether he does so in connection with immigration enforcement or to intimidate voters during the midterm elections, we must not be caught flat-footed if he takes such an extreme step to deploy troops to police our streets.”
Meanwhile, Rep. Robert Garcia of Long Beach, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, announced he will serve as one of three Democrats leading an impeachment inquiry into Noem, whom Democrats have blasted for allowing and excusing violence by agents in Minneapolis and other cities.
Garcia called the shootings of Good and Pretti “horrific and shocking,” so much so that even some Republicans are acknowledging the “severity of what happened” — creating an opening for Noem’s impeachment.
“It’s unacceptable what’s happening right now, and Noem is at the top of this agency that’s completely rogue,” he said Thursday. “People are being killed on the streets.”
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) went to Minneapolis this week to talk to residents and protesters about the administration’s presence in their city, which he denounced as unconstitutional and violent.
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta has gone after a slew of Trump immigration policies both in California and across the country — including by backing a lawsuit challenging immigration deployments in the Twin Cities, and joining in a letter to U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi denouncing the administration’s attempts to “exploit the situation in Minnesota” by demanding local leaders turn over state voter data in exchange for federal agents leaving.
California’s leaders are far from alone in pressing hard for big changes.
Cardinal Joseph Tobin, the head of the Archdiocese of Newark (N.J.) and a top ally of Pope Leo XIV, sharply criticized immigration enforcement this week, calling ICE a “lawless organization” and backing the interruption of funding to the agency. On Thursday the NAACP and other prominent civil rights organizations sent a letter to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) arguing that ICE should be “fully dissolved” and that Homeland Security funding should be blocked until a slate of “immediate and enforceable restrictions” are placed on its operations.
Madrid, the Republican consultant, said California’s leaders have a clear reason to push for policies that protect immigrants, given the state is home to 1 in 4 foreign-born Americans and immigration is “tied into the fabric of California.”
And at a moment when Trump and other administration officials clearly realize “how far out of touch and how damaging” their immigration policies have become politically, he said, California’s leaders have a real opportunity to push their own agenda forward — especially if it includes clear, concrete solutions to end the recent “egregious, extra-constitutional violation of rights” that many Americans find so objectionable.
However, Madrid warned that Democrats wasted a similar opportunity after the unrest around the killing of George Floyd by calling to “defund the police,” which was politically unpopular, and could fall into a similar pitfall if they push for abolishing ICE.
“You’ve got a moment here where you can either fix [ICE], or lean into the political moment and say ‘abolish it,’” he said. “The question becomes, can Democrats run offense? Or will they do what they too often have done with this issue, which is snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?”
Source link
Why California’s fight over ticket fraud has become a proxy war against Ticketmaster and Live Nation
A year ago, Colorado firefighters Rick Balentine and Tim Cottrell were driving trucks carrying donations from Aspen to Los Angeles for victims of the Eaton and Palisades fires.
As they headed west, they planned to stop in Las Vegas and, while there, made a spontaneous decision to see the Eagles’ residency at the Sphere. Balentine and Cottrell bought resale tickets on StubHub for around $400 each. Cottrell used his credit card and received a confirmation email. But once they arrived to the venue, they weren’t allowed in. The seller failed to send the tickets.
All Cottrell could find was an email that said his tickets had been canceled, moments before the concert was to start. Other than getting their money back, there was no further explanation.
“We knew they were aftermarket tickets,” Balentine said, “but never in a million years did I think that tickets could get canceled.”
“I was very disappointed. There needs to be more protection out there, both for consumers and for artists, so people aren’t getting ripped off all the time.”
The rising demand for tickets has spurred a growing marketplace for all kinds of high-profile live events, including music tours and sports series like the upcoming World Cup. Whenever fans are unable to secure tickets on the primary market, through sellers like Ticketmaster or AXS, many will turn to the secondary market for resale tickets. Those tickets are typically sold through platforms like StubHub, SeatGeek and Vivid Seats. Customers who bought their passes directly from Ticketmaster can also resell them on that platform.
The majority of secondary-market transactions can be easy, leaving both the reseller and the customer satisfied. But with the rise of speculative or fake tickets, like the ones Balentine and Cottrell bought, securing valid tickets from the resale market has become more challenging.
What are speculative tickets?
Speculative tickets are offered by resellers who list concert passes they don’t yet have in their possession, with the intention that they will ultimately acquire the tickets and deliver them to the buyer. According to 2025 data from Live Nation, one in three Americans has fallen victim to a ticketing scam. But under California’s bill, AB 1349, selling speculative tickets could be banned on all resale platforms in the state. On Monday, the bill passed in an assembly vote and is headed to the state Senate for review.
Thousands of fans enjoy Shakira’s performance at SoFi Stadium in August.
(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)
Speculative tickets usually pop up as soon as a major artist announces a tour. Most recently, K-pop boy band BTS announced a world tour that includes four stops at SoFi Stadium. Before the general sale began Jan. 24, some sellers on Vivid Seats had already started listing tickets for over $6,000. Listings like these usually create a greater sense of scarcity, which can drive up ticket prices even more.
If enacted, the proposed legislation in California would require sellers to have event tickets in their possession before offering them for sale. The listing must include the location of the seat and specific refund rights. It prohibits a person from using software that automatically purchases more tickets than the specified limit, and it would raise the maximum civil penalty for each violation from $2,500 to $10,000.
The live music industry is a vital part of the state’s economy, contributing over $51 billion to California’s GDP and supporting over 460,000 jobs, according to the database 50 States of Music.
Ticketing fraud tends to affect more than just the consumer. Whenever an unknowing fan shows up to a venue with a fake ticket, it often falls on the venue and its staff to deal with the situation. Stephen Parker, the executive director of the National Independent Venue Association, said that if speculative tickets are banned in California, venues could save up to $50,000 in staffing expenses.
Los Angeles’ SoFi Stadium, where many concerts and ticketed live events are held.
(Icon Sportswire/Icon Sportswire via Getty Images)
“They have to deal with fans who are crying, who are angry, who are upset because they thought they were going to go see their favorite artists that night, and they paid [over the] ticket’s face value only to not get a ticket that works or to not get a ticket at all,” said Parker.
Fighting ticket fraud and reining in a ticketing giant
There are currently dozens of legislative bills throughout the U.S. focused on event ticketing issues. Some states like Maryland, Minnesota and Maine have already passed restrictions on speculative tickets.
The action comes after both the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission sued Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation Entertainment, in 2024 and 2025. The DOJ’s lawsuit suggests breaking up the company, which it accuses of engaging in monopolistic practices. The complaint also alleges the company forces venues into exclusive ticketing contracts and influences artists to use only its services.
Founded in 1976, Ticketmaster has been the industry’s largest ticket distributor since 1995, with around 80% of live concerts sold through the site. The company merged with Live Nation in 2010.
Ticketmaster has also acquired a growing share of the resale market, under the platform Ticketmaster Resale. The site allows consumers to list, sell or find tickets to live events. The business functions similarly to other resale sites, but Ticketmaster does not allow speculative ticket sales on its platform.
The Federal Trade Commission is currently suing the company on accusations that it engaged in illegal ticket vendor practices for its resale business, like misleading artists and consumers with so-called “bait-and-switch pricing,” where advertised prices are lower than the actual total. Following the FTC’s complaint, the ticket seller made changes to its policies.
Additionally, Ticketmaster is no longer allowing users to have multiple accounts, which made it easier to purchase more tickets than the specified limit, and it is shutting down Trade Desk, the controversial software that helps resellers track and price tickets across several marketplaces.
Hundreds enjoy a performance by Banda Los Lagos during Jalisco Fest at the 2025 Santa Fe Springs Swap Meet.
(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)
“The FTC case against us is very frustrating because we think they’re sort of blaming the victim here. We’re the ones that are dealing with millions and millions of bots attacking us every day,” said Dan Wall, Live Nation’s vice president of corporate and regulatory affairs. “We’re trying to convince the federal government and state governments to get on the same page of recognizing where the problem is, which is overwhelmingly in the resale industry, and trying to do something about it.”
“We’re a much more artist and consumer-focused company, and so we don’t engage in the different kinds of business practices that are sketchy and unfair to the fans. We try to be a much more honest, legitimate outlet for getting resale tickets,” said Wall.
Critics find that the surge of anti-speculative ticketing bills around the country is a way for Ticketmaster to divert attention from its own legal troubles and shift attention onto the resale market. Live Nation is a key supporter of the California bill. Diana Moss, the director of competition policy at the Progressive Policy Institute, called AB 1349 “overkill” when it comes to the provisions and restrictions it places on the secondary market.
Fans cheer Sexyy Red at the Rolling Loud concert at Hollywood Park in March.
(Michael Owen Baker/For The Times)
“A lot of these bills in the states are a vehicle to disable the resale markets and hinder how they operate. Resale markets are important to consumers,” said Moss. “If you disable the resale market, then fans have no place to go — but back to Ticketmaster. That’s the whole game, disable the resale markets with legislation and regulation, and then everybody has to go back and deal with Ticketmaster and pay their monopoly ticket fees.”
Provisions in AB 1349 deem a ticket a license. The question of whether a ticket is a right or a license is an ongoing controversy in the ticketing world. Opponents of the bill are fearful that this change would give more power to Live Nation, as they could impose restrictions on how the ticket can be used, such as whether you’re allowed to sell your ticket on other platforms or if you can transfer it at all. Meghan Callahan, from the Empower Fans Coalition, a group that opposes the bill, equates this licensing change to taking a lease out on the ticket.
“Ticketmaster’s goal is to create less competition. This bill imposes restrictions on everybody else but themselves,” said Callahan. “They are trying to use consumer-friendly concepts and sneak in these other provisions to embolden their monopoly.”
Wall at Ticketmaster said that nothing on the consumers’ end would change if this bill were to pass, adding that tickets are already licenses “from the venue for you to come on the property during the time of the show and sit in that seat.”
“Honesty doesn’t favor one person or another. That’s what this [bill] is about,” said Wall.
Source link