nominee

“Frankenstein” star Jacob Elordi, at 6 feet 5 easy to spot from across the ballroom, leaned down to hug Teyana Taylor, a supporting actress Oscar nominee for “One Battle After Another.” Nearby, her co-star Leonardo DiCaprio caught up with Steven Spielberg, who directed him 24 years ago in “Catch Me If You Can,” while “Sentimental Value” filmmaker Joachim Trier huddled with “One Battle’s” Paul Thomas Anderson, a fellow directing nominee. In the middle of it all, songwriter Diane Warren paused to take a selfie, still evidently enjoying the giddy thrill of being in a room full of fellow hopefuls even after 17 times.

In all, 203 of this year’s 230 Academy Award nominees gathered Tuesday at the Beverly Hilton Hotel for the annual nominees luncheon, a brief moment of campaign-free conviviality amid the churn of awards season. As flashbulbs followed the most famous faces, major stars like Timothée Chalamet, Emma Stone and Kate Hudson rubbed elbows and shared champagne toasts with lesser-known nominees from categories like animation, sound and live-action short before lining up for the annual class photo.

With the Oscars just weeks away on March 15, the long-running gathering — a ritual dating to 1982 and returning this year after being canceled in 2025 because of the Los Angeles County wildfires — offered the nominees a welcome stretch of easygoing mingling, largely free of competition. The reprieve is short-lived: Voting begins on Feb. 26, when the brutal math of awards season will reassert itself, meaning roughly 80% of them will head home on Oscar night empty-handed.

Kate Hudson, a lead actress nominee for “Song Sung Blue,” at the 2026 Oscar nominees luncheon at the Beverly Hilton Hotel.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

For first-time contenders, the luncheon carried a particular rush. Christalyn Hampton, a co-director of the documentary short “The Devil Is Busy,” which follows a day at an abortion clinic in Atlanta, said she was excited to meet “Sinners” director Ryan Coogler, whose period vampire thriller leads the field with a record 16 nominations.

“We’re two African American directors nominated this year — I think that’s pretty historic,” said Hampton, a former professional dancer whose first directing credit has landed her an Oscar nod. “Flying back and forth from Atlanta has been a bit exhausting, but to be in this moment with all these incredible filmmakers — you can’t complain.”

Jacob Elordi, left, and “Sirāt” film director Oliver Laxe — two extremely tall nominees — at the 2026 Oscar nominees luncheon at the Beverly Hilton Hotel.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

Still, even inside the awards-season bubble, the turmoil surrounding the movie business, the country and the world beyond it was hard to ignore. As attendees tucked into their chicken, more than a few discussions drifted to whether Netflix or Paramount would prevail in their attempts to acquire Warner Bros. and what either scenario might portend for the future of movies.

In her remarks, academy President Lynette Howell Taylor acknowledged the questions many nominees have been asking themselves amid industry contraction, political volatility and global conflict. “The art you create is vital,” Howell Taylor told the crowd. “I know many of us ask ourselves, ‘Should we be doing something else? Should we be doing something differently? Should we be doing more?’ The answer to that is personal. But what I do know is this: What you are doing is not easy and it is so needed.”

Teyana Taylor, nominated for supporting actress for “One Battle After Another,” at the 2026 Oscar nominees luncheon at the Beverly Hilton Hotel.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

She praised the resilience of filmmakers who have endured strikes, dangerous political environments and even war zones. “To not make your films, to not tell your stories, is to give in,” she said. “And there is not one of you in this room who has been willing to do that.”

That tension was felt especially sharply by Sara Khaki, co-director (with Mohammadreza Eyni) of the documentary feature nominee “Cutting Through Rocks,” which follows the first Iranian woman elected as a councilwoman in a rural village. The weeks since the nomination, Khaki said, have been both “terrible and wonderful,” as her home country has been rocked by protests against the Iranian government.

Elle Fanning, nominated for “Sentimental Value,” at the 2026 Oscar nominees luncheon at the Beverly Hilton Hotel.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

“What’s terrible is what we’re experiencing back home — the internet shut down, worrying about our loved ones,” she said. “What’s wonderful is what’s happening here. So it’s a mix of emotions, really.”

Another Iranian nominee was absent altogether. Mehdi Mahmoudian, nominated as a co-writer of director Jafar Panahi’s drama “It Was Just an Accident,” was arrested this month in Iran after signing a statement condemning the government’s deadly crackdown on protesters.

Actor Wagner Moura, nominated for “The Secret Agent,” and former AMPAS President Janet Yang at the 2026 Oscar nominees luncheon at the Beverly Hilton Hotel.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

At each table, nominees were asked to fill out a card with a simple question: “What movie made you want to be part of this world?” After pondering for a moment, “Nomadland” Oscar winner Chloé Zhao, nominated in the directing category for the second time for the wrenching drama “Hamnet,” wrote down Hirokazu Kore-eda’s 1998 film, “After Life,” a quietly humane meditation on memory and meaning that felt closely aligned with her own filmmaking sensibility. The answers, Howell Taylor explained, would be used for “a special moment” during the Oscar telecast.

As in years past, the luncheon also came with a bit of gentle coaching about what to do — and not to do — should one’s name be called on Oscar night, including moving briskly to the stage, keeping remarks to no more than 45 seconds and not leaning into the microphone.

Directors Steven Spielberg, left, and Paul Thomas Anderson at the 2026 Oscar nominees luncheon at the Beverly Hilton Hotel.

(Kayla Bartkowski / Los Angeles Times)

Above all, Howell Taylor urged nominees to resist the temptation to thank everyone they’ve ever worked with. “You’ll forget someone and you’ll feel terrible,” she said.

Better, she suggested, to focus on what the moment actually means. “You are the show,” Howell Taylor reminded them. “It’s your speeches. This is an entertainment show millions of people will be watching, so let’s make the most of it.”

SACRAMENTO — California may be headed toward killing the billionaire birds that lay the golden eggs needed to nourish this Golden State.

The English fable about the farmer and his wife who foolishly whack their golden goose comes to mind when I think about the proposed billionaire tax in California.

The couple possessed a bird that laid a golden egg every morning, but they slaughtered it for one fat meal.

The billionaire tax — or wealth tax — would generate a one-time bounty for the state government of up to $100 billion collected over five years, according to its promoters. But its many critics say it would drive billionaires out of California, costing the state lots more in tax revenue over the long run.

These birds are capable of flying off to anywhere, after all.

Here’s how the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office summarizes the proposal’s fiscal effects:

• “Temporary increase in state revenues … probably would add up to tens of billions of dollars spread over several years.”
• ”Likely ongoing decrease in state income tax revenues of hundreds of millions of dollars or more per year.”

The golden goose is replaced by a mud hen.

Whether billionaires fly the coop or are forcibly penned in by the measure, as its drafters intend — and whatever the policy’s merits — it just seems like bad PR for California.

We might as well run TV ads and erect billboards along the border proclaiming: “Welcome to California, the land of opportunity. Make a fortune so state politicians can grab a sizable chunk.”

We’ve already got by far the highest income tax rates in the nation, topping out at 13.3%. The top 1% of earners pay between 40% and 50% of the entire state income tax collected annually. The top 0.1% kick in about 20%.

California is infamous for its unfriendly business climate, with byzantine regulations and an agonizingly slow permitting system.

“It sends out the worst possible message to the people we need in the state, the people who produce jobs,” says Rob Lapsley, president of the California Business Roundtable.

Democratic strategist Garry South says: “Bleating about ‘tax the billionaires’ is a good applause line at Democratic gatherings, but it appears oblivious to the fact they’re already being taxed …

“Our revenue base is disproportionately dependent on capital gains and other income sources unique to the well-off.”

This wealth tax is not being pushed by Sacramento Democrats.

Love from labor, spurned by Newsom

Gov. Gavin Newsom is adamantly opposed. “It is not something that will allow us to be competitive,” he says.

And the governor asserts: “You would have a windfall one time, and then over the years you would see a significant reduction in taxes because taxpayers will move.”

Most Democratic candidates for governor oppose the ballot initiative.

“Driving out the entrepreneurs and innovators who have enriched California is not the answer to the pressing societal question” of how to address the “growing concentration of wealth,” says the latest gubernatorial entry, San José Mayor Matt Mahan.

The initiative is being led by a labor organization: the Service Employees International Union–United Healthcare Workers West, which represents 120,000 healthcare workers. It intends to spend up to $14 million to collect nearly 875,000 voter signatures by June 24 to place the measure on the November statewide ballot.

It would impose a one-time 5% tax on the net worth of California’s 200-plus billionaires, based on their wealth as of Jan. 1 this year. The tax would be due in 2027, but it could be paid in installments over five years.

That’s assuming state bureaucrats can even figure out the billionaires’ worth. And the new tax law isn’t tied up in courts for many years, as it surely would be.

Band-Aid for Republican healthcare cuts

The measure’s purpose is to make up for the billions of dollars in federal cuts to California healthcare programs, especially Medi-Cal. Of the total tax take, 90% would go to healthcare and 10% to education.

“If we don’t do something about [the federal cuts], we’re going to see devastating consequences,” says Suzanne Jimenez, the union’s chief of staff.

Unless the billionaires are taxed extra, she says, money will need to be seized from other programs — such as education and public safety — to salvage healthcare.

It’s just the opposite, critics argue: If billionaires flee the state to avoid the wealth tax, all programs will suffer in the long run because the golden geese no longer will be producing billions in annual tax revenue.

Actually, a better, more reliable solution than the billionaire tax for Democrats is to flip the House of Representatives in November. Win enough seats to seize control from Republicans. Maybe take over the Senate, too. Then restore adequate federal healthcare funding.

Some political infighters suspect that the union is using the threat of a ballot initiative to negotiate more healthcare money from the state budget.

“I think this whole thing is a bluff,” says Mike Murphy, a veteran political consultant who has been helping the opposition. “If you don’t want to see this thing on the ballot, make me happy by putting more money in the budget.

“But they picked the wrong time to rob an empty bank.”

The state government is running on red ink, with deficit estimates ranging from $3 billion (Newsom’s figure) to $18 billion (the legislative analyst’s). Even deeper holes are projected for the future.

Jimenez denies the measure is being used as a negotiating hammer.

“No,” she says. “Our focus is to qualify this for the ballot.”

If it does, there will probably be flocks of golden geese voting by absentee ballot in other states.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: A political earthquake in mayor’s race makes election a referendum on L.A.’s future
Gavin’s exit, stage right: Tax billionaires, cut rents and other takeaways from California’s first gubernatorial debate
The L.A. Times Special: Real, fake or overblown? Sorting fact from fiction in fraud allegations surrounding Newsom, California

Until next week,
George Skelton

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

In a widely anticipated outcome that felt like a long-overdue coronation, Paul Thomas Anderson won the top honor at Saturday’s Directors Guild of America Awards for his Thomas Pynchon-inspired political thriller “One Battle After Another.” The ceremony was held at the Beverly Hilton Hotel in Beverly Hills.

It was the director’s first DGA win after two prior nominations, in 2008 for “There Will Be Blood” and in 2022 for his San Fernando Valley reminiscence “Licorice Pizza.”

Speaking at the podium after receiving the award from last year’s winner, “Anora” director Sean Baker, a humbled Anderson thanked the guild, mentioning recent EGOT winner Steven Spielberg, sitting in the audience right in front of him. “It reminds me, being in this room, of ‘Close Encounters,’ ” Anderson said. “We’re all brought here for a reason — some cosmic thing brought us to this room. It was that call to the mountain. It’s that feeling that we all love making s— and we need to do it.”

Anderson also devoted much of his speech to remembering his first-assistant director Adam Somner, who died from thyroid cancer in November 2024. “May you be blessed with the relationship I had with him,” the director said, “and if you have one already, hold them close and remind them that you love them.”

True to tradition, the evening was both a celebration of achievements in directing and an occasion for much pro-guild testifying — from nominees, winners and Christopher Nolan, presiding over his first ceremony as DGA president. “We are the best at what we do,” Nolan said, touching on last year’s 40% dip in DGA member employment with a note of solidarity and urgency. “We are the storytellers. We are the people who have to innovate.”

All five nominees for theatrical feature film are invited to give a speech during these annual awards, with the eventual winner speaking twice. Guillermo del Toro, up for his personal take on “Frankenstein,” saluted Nolan: “I love saying ‘President Nolan’ because it’s so good to say ‘President’ with a good word after it,” he cracked to hearty applause. (The joke was echoed by several podium speakers.)

Ryan Coogler, a DGA nominee for “Sinners,” thanked the guild for his health insurance and mentioned his longtime dream — not of filmmaking but of joining a union, like some of the adults in his life growing up.

“Lately I’ve been learning about alchemy, “ said Chloé Zhao, representing “Hamnet,” her domestic drama about the grief-stricken family life of William Shakespeare. “You need fire and you need a chalice. To me, that fire is my creativity. It’s my birthright to create. And that chalice is the community that holds me.”

Indicating the respect the DGA commands among actors, several A-listers attended the ceremony to introduce their directors: Leonardo DiCaprio for Anderson, Jacob Elordi for Del Toro and Timothée Chalamet, the latter celebrating his “Marty Supreme” director Josh Safdie with sincerity and gentle deprecation. “I don’t think Josh will ever be ‘institutional,’ ” Chalamet said. “I think Josh will forever be an insurgent filmmaker and I don’t think the world would be right otherwise.”

An Oscar victory path is now clear for Anderson, previously nominated for the academy’s directing honor three times, for “There Will Be Blood,” “Phantom Thread” and “Licorice Pizza,” but never a winner. Twenty of the last 23 recipients of the DGA’s top prize have gone on to take the Oscar for directing.

Here is a complete list of the night’s nominees, with winners in bold:

Outstanding directorial achievement in theatrical feature film

Paul Thomas Anderson, “One Battle After Another” (Warner Bros. Pictures)
Ryan Coogler, “Sinners” (Warner Bros. Pictures)
Guillermo del Toro, “Frankenstein” (Netflix)
Josh Safdie, “Marty Supreme” (A24)
Chloé Zhao, “Hamnet” (Focus Features)

Michael Apted Award for outstanding directorial achievement in first-time theatrical feature film

Charlie Polinger, “The Plague” (Independent Film Co.)
Hasan Hadi, “The President’s Cake” (Sony Pictures Classics)
Harry Lighton, “Pillion” (A24)
Alex Russell, “Lurker” (Mubi)
Eva Victor, “Sorry, Baby” (A24)

Outstanding directorial achievement in documentary

Mstyslav Chernov, “2000 Meters to Andriivka” (PBS)
Geeta Gandbhir, “The Perfect Neighbor” (Netflix)
Sara Khaki and Mohammadreza Eyni, “Cutting Through Rocks” (Assembly Releasing)
Elizabeth Lo, “Mistress Dispeller” (Oscilloscope Laboratories)
Laura Poitras and Mark Obenhaus, “Cover-Up” (Netflix)

Outstanding directorial achievement in dramatic series

Amanda Marsalis, “The Pitt,” “6:00 P.M.” (HBO Max)
Liza Johnson, “The Diplomat,” “Amagansett” (Netflix)
Janus Metz, “Andor,” “Who Are You?” (Disney+)
Ben Stiller, “Severance,” “Cold Harbor” (Apple TV+)
John Wells, “The Pitt,” “7:00 A.M.” (HBO Max)

Outstanding directorial achievement in comedy series

Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg, “The Studio,” “The Oner” (Apple TV+)
Lucia Aniello, “Hacks,” “A Slippery Slope” (HBO Max)
Janicza Bravo, “The Bear,” “Worms” (FX on Hulu)
Christopher Storer, “The Bear,” “Bears” (FX on Hulu)
Mike White, “The White Lotus,” “Denials” (HBO Max)

Outstanding directorial achievement in limited and anthology series

Shannon Murphy, “Dying for Sex,” “It’s Not That Serious” (FX on Hulu)
Jason Bateman, “Black Rabbit,” “The Black Rabbits” (Netflix)
Antonio Campos, “The Beast in Me,” “Sick Puppy” (Netflix)
Lesli Linka Glatter, “Zero Day,” “Episode 6” (Netflix)
Ally Pankiw, “Black Mirror,” “Common People” (Netflix)

Outstanding directorial achievement in movies for television

Stephen Chbosky, “Nonnas” (Netflix)
Jesse Armstrong, “Mountainhead” (HBO Max)
Scott Derrickson, “The Gorge” (Apple TV+)
Michael Morris, “Bridget Jones: Mad About the Boy” (Peacock)
Kyle Newacheck, “Happy Gilmore 2” (Netflix)

Outstanding directorial achievement in variety

Liz Patrick, “SNL50: The Anniversary Special” (NBC)
Yvonne De Mare, “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert,” “Julia Roberts; Sam Smith” (CBS)
Andy Fisher, “Jimmy Kimmel Live!,” “Stephen Colbert; Kumail Nanjiani; Reneé Rapp” (ABC)
Beth McCarthy-Miller, “SNL50: The Homecoming Concert” (Peacock)
Paul Pennolino, “Last Week Tonight With John Oliver,” “Public Media” (HBO Max)

Outstanding directorial achievement in sports

Matthew Gangl, 2025 World Series – Game 7 – Los Angeles Dodgers vs. Toronto Blue Jays (Fox Sports)
Steve Milton, 2025 Masters Tournament – Augusta National Golf Club (CBS Sports)
Rich Russo, Super Bowl LIX – Philadelphia Eagles vs. Kansas City Chiefs (Fox Sports)

Outstanding directorial achievement in reality / quiz & game

Mike Sweeney, “Conan O’Brien Must Go,” “Austria” (HBO Max)
Lucinda M. Margolis, “Jeopardy!,” “Ep. 9341” (Syndicated)
Adam Sandler, “The Price Is Right,” “10,000th Episode” (CBS)

Outstanding directorial achievement in documentary series / news

Rebecca Miller, “Mr. Scorsese,” “All This Filming Isn’t Healthy” (Apple TV+)
Marshall Curry, “SNL50: Beyond Saturday Night,” “Written By: A Week Inside the SNL Writers Room” (Peacock)
Susan Lacy and Jessica Levin, “Billy Joel: And So It Goes,” “Part Two” (HBO Max)
Alexandra Stapleton, “Sean Combs: The Reckoning,” “Official Girl” (Netflix)
Matt Wolf, “Pee-Wee as Himself,” “Part 1” (HBO Max)

Outstanding directorial achievement in commercials

Kim Gehrig (Somesuch), “You Can’t Win. So Win.” – Nike | Wieden+Kennedy
Miles Jay (Smuggler)
Spike Jonze (MJZ)
Andreas Nilsson (Biscuit Filmworks)
Steve Rogers (Biscuit Filmworks)

“Sinners” has made Oscars history.

The 98th Academy Award nominations were announced Thursday and Ryan Coogler’s musical horror earned 16 overall nominations, breaking the record for the most nominations for a film previously held by “All about Eve” (1950), “Titanic” (1997) and “La La Land” (2016). “Sinners’” nominations include best picture, directing, original screenplay and individual acting nods for stars Michael B. Jordan, Wunmi Mosaku and Delroy Lindo.

Paul Thomas Anderson’s comedic political thriller “One Battle After Another” followed with 13 total nominations, which included nods for picture, directing, adapted screenplay and actors Leonardo DiCaprio, Teyana Taylor, Benicio Del Toro and Sean Penn.

Yorgos Lanthimos’ alien comedy “Bugonia,” Chloé Zhao’s tragic Shakespeare drama “Hamnet,” Joseph Kosinski’s racing drama “F1,” Guillermo del Toro’s gothic monster mash “Frankenstein,” Josh Safdie’s ping-pong picture “Marty Supreme,” Brazilian political thriller “The Secret Agent,” Norwegian family drama “Sentimental Value” and Clint Bentley’s lyrical period piece “Train Dreams” rounded out the nominees for best picture.

Performers from both “The Secret Agent” and “Sentimental Value” also earned acting nominations, making it another banner year for international features. Other top nominees include “Frankenstein,” “Marty Supreme” and “Sentimental Value,” which earned nine nods apiece.

Actors Danielle Brooks and Lewis Pullman announced the nominations at the academy’s Samuel Goldwyn Theater. See the full list of nominees below.

Best picture
“Bugonia”
“F1”
“Frankenstein”
“Hamnet”
“Marty Supreme”
“One Battle After Another”
“The Secret Agent”
“Sentimental Value”
“Sinners”
“Train Dreams”

Actress in a leading role
Jessie Buckley, “Hamnet”
Rose Byrne, “If I Had Legs I’d Kick You”
Kate Hudson, “Song Sung Blue”
Renate Reinsve, “Sentimental Value”
Emma Stone, “Bugonia”

Actor in a leading role
Timothée Chalamet, “Marty Supreme”
Leonardo DiCaprio, “One Battle After Another”
Ethan Hawke, “Blue Moon”
Michael B. Jordan, “Sinners”
Wagner Moura, “The Secret Agent”

Actress in a supporting role
Elle Fanning, “Sentimental Value”
Inga Ibsdotter Lilleaas, “Sentimental Value”
Amy Madigan, “Weapons”
Wunmi Mosaku, “Sinners”
Teyana Taylor, “One Battle After Another”

Actor in a supporting role
Benicio del Toro, “One Battle After Another”
Jacob Elordi, “Frankenstein”
Delroy Lindo, “Sinners”
Sean Penn, “One Battle After Another”
Stellan Skarsgård, “Sentimental Value”

Directing
Chloé Zhao, “Hamnet”
Josh Safdie, “Marty Supreme”
Paul Thomas Anderson, “One Battle After Another”
Joachim Trier, “Sentimental Value”
Ryan Coogler, “Sinners”

Adapted screenplay
“Bugonia,” Will Tracy
“Frankenstein,” Guillermo del Toro
“Hamnet,” Chloé Zhao and Maggie O’Farrell
“One Battle After Another,” Paul Thomas Anderson
“Train Dreams,” Clint Bentley and Greg Kwedar

Original screenplay
“Blue Moon,” Robert Kaplow
“It Was Just an Accident,” Jafar Panahi
“Marty Supreme,” Josh Safdie and Ronald Bronstein
“Sentimental Value,” Joachim Trier and Eskil Vogt
“Sinners,” Ryan Coogler

Documentary feature
“The Alabama Solution”
“Come See Me in the Good Light”
“Cutting Through Rocks”
“Mr. Nobody Against Putin”
“The Perfect Neighbor”

Documentary short
“All the Empty Rooms”
“Armed Only with a Camera: The Life and Death of Brent Renaud”
“Children No More: ‘Were and Are Gone’”
“The Devil Is Busy”
“Perfectly a Strangeness”

Animated feature
“Arco”
“Elio”
“KPop Demon Hunters”
“Little Amélie or the Character of Rain”
“Zootopia 2”

Animated short
“Butterfly”
“Forevergreen”
“The Girl Who Cried Pearls”
“Retirement Plan”
“The Three Sisters”

Cinematography
“Frankenstein,” Dan Laustsen
“Marty Supreme,” Darius Khondji
“One Battle After Another,” Michael Bauman
“Sinners,” Autumn Durald Arkapaw
“Train Dreams,” Adolpho Veloso

Costume design
“Avatar: Fire and Ash,” Deborah L. Scott
“Frankenstein,” Kate Hawley
“Hamnet,” Malgosia Turzanska
“Marty Supreme,” Miyako Bellizzi
“Sinners,” Ruth E. Carter

Film editing
“F1,” Stephen Mirrione
“Marty Supreme,” Ronald Bronstein and Josh Safdie
“One Battle After Another,” Andy Jurgensen
“Sentimental Value,” Olivier Bugge Coutté
“Sinners,” Michael P. Shawver

International feature
“It Was Just an Accident” (France)
“The Secret Agent” (Brazil)
“Sentimental Value” (Norway)
“Sirāt” (Spain)
“The Voice of Hind Rajab” (Tunisia)

Live-action short
“Butcher’s Stain”
“A Friend of Dorothy”
“Jane Austen’s Period Drama”
“The Singers”
“Two People Exchanging Saliva”

Makeup and hairstyling
“Frankenstein,” Mike Hill, Jordan Samuel and Cliona Furey
“Kokuho,” Kyoko Toyokawa, Naomi Hibino and Tadashi Nishimatsu
“Sinners,” Ken Diaz, Mike Fontaine and Shunika Terry
“The Smashing Machine,” Kazu Hiro, Glen Griffin and Bjoern Rehbein
“The Ugly Stepsister,” Thomas Foldberg and Anne Cathrine Sauerberg

Original score
“Bugonia,” Jerskin Fendrix
“Frankenstein,” Alexandre Desplat
“Hamnet,” Max Richter
“One Battle After Another,” Jonny Greenwood
“Sinners,” Ludwig Göransson

Original song
“Dear Me” from “Diane Warren: Relentless”
“Golden” from “KPop Demon Hunters”
“I Lied to You” from “Sinners”
“Sweet Dreams of Joy” from “Viva Verdi!”
“Train Dreams” from “Train Dreams”

Production design
“Frankenstein”
“Hamnet”
“Marty Supreme”
“One Battle After Another”
“Sinners”

Sound
“F1”
“Frankenstein”
“One Battle After Another”
“Sinners”
“Sirāt”

Visual Effects
“Avatar: Fire and Ash”
“F1”
“Jurassic World Rebirth”
“The Lost Bus”
“Sinners”

Casting
“Hamnet”
“Marty Supreme”
“One Battle After Another”
“The Secret Agent”
“Sinners”

Hello and happy Thursday. I’m Times columnist Anita Chabria, filling in for Washington bureau chief Michael Wilner. Today we are talking about circling the drain, and whether its possible to escape the flush after the swirl has started.

Yes, I’m talking about President Trump’s latest latest grab at the levers of power, and whether it will pull us all down. Trump floated the existentially disturbing idea recently that the federal government should “take over” elections.

“The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting,” Trump said Monday on a podcast, making no attempt to keep election integrity nonpartisan.

This came shortly after the federal government raided a Georgia election office, still doggedly pursuing the very fake conspiracy that the 2020 vote was rigged against Trump. Lurking in the background of photos of that abuse of power was Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, a longtime peddler of conspiracy theories including that Ukraine housed secret U.S. biolabs.

It’s not just possible but likely that Gabbard will find “evidence” of fraud in Georgia because she has been claiming election interference since at least 2016 and reality has seemingly never been an impediment to her beliefs.

So some sort of report or “proof” probably will appear in coming months that Trump was right all along and that Democrats have tricked us all by stealing votes across the country.

That will be the basis for Trump to demand Congress “secure” the midterm election, and we all know how good they are at standing up to him.

But before we go there, let’s do a quick refresher on how Democrats supposedly steal elections, because that’s at the heart of what comes next.

It’s the immigrants, stupid

Trump (drawing from preexisting conspiracy theories promoted by many folks he has now placed in powerful positions) blames undocumented immigrants for his loss in 2020.

Under a long-running conservative election fraud hoax, Democrats allegedly made some sort of secret deal to allow Black and brown immigrants to illegally enter the country, if they would then promise to illegally vote en masse for Democrats.

“If we don’t get them out, Republicans will never win another election,” Trump said on that same podcast. “These people were brought to our country to vote and they vote illegally, and it is amazing that the Republicans are not tougher on it.”

This narrative has been proven false literally dozens if not hundreds of times in courts across the country, and by the rational minds of those who understand how impossible it would be for a conspiracy of this magnitude and complexity to go undetected — much less actually work.

Long before Harmeet Dhillon, the San Francisco Bay Area lawyer now demanding voter data as head of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, used her official power to pursue this false conspiracy, she spent years upon years filing lawsuits and doing media appearances making the same claims.

And time and again, she and others were swatted down by courts (and common sense and evidence) because illegal immigrants working in collusion with Democrats to steal the vote is not a real thing.

But now election deniers are in power, and the gravitational pull away from truth is accelerating. Conspiracy is reality as we get closer to the ballot box.

ICE them out

And if immigrants indeed are stealing elections in between raping our women and eating cats and dogs, there is an answer: ICE.

Who better to secure ballot boxes than a masked, terrifyingly unaccountable armed federal force of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency that maybe answers only to Corey Lewandowski (the shadowy political operative always at Kristi Noem’s side) and Stephen Miller?

Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that Kavanaugh stops — basically stopping folks for living while brown or Black — are legal, these agents have probable cause galore. Add to that a new, legally unfounded directive that they can detain folks at will, without a warrant, and you have the perfect force to suppress an election.

Imagine if on election day, ICE roams the street in Democratic-leaning, nonwhite neighborhoods, stopping and even detaining folks as they go to polls. Demanding papers, dragging away dissenters.

“Your damn right,” Trump hanger-oner Steve Bannon said recently, “We’re going to have ICE surround the polls come November. We’re not going to sit here and allow you to steal the country again. And you can whine and cry and throw your toys out of the pram all you want, but we will never again allow an election to be stolen.”

Would you go to the polls in that scenario? Would you allow your 18-year-old to go or your elderly parent? I’d think twice, even as crucial as this vote is.

And here’s a bit of outrage you can aim at Democrats: Congressional leadership considered including a ban on ICE at polling places as part of their proposed deal to keep government funded — but didn’t. Once again, for those in the back, Democrats could have tried to stop this, but chose not to.

But wait! That’s not all!

Why can’t we just mail in our ballots, you ask. Well, that would be because changes by Trump to the U.S. Postal Service, and how ballots may be counted, are going to make it harder to ensure that mail-in ballots are received and counted as they traditionally have been handled. So mailing your ballot may work out fine, or may not.

And there you have it, that’s how a free and fair democracy spins into the vortex of authoritarianism, where elections are held, ballots are counted, but reality is lost.

You are antigravity

But folks, we are not there yet. Today is not that day!

There are things you can do, aside from peacefully protesting. People can start to make sure that their identification is in order (as Orwellian as that sounds) and help others to do so as well.

It’s likely that in some places at least, voter identification laws will make it harder to cast a ballot, and people will need to start getting birth certificates, Social Security cards or other paperwork now in order to comply with those rules. Ask who in your community needs that kind of help and how you can provide it.

People are going to need ways to vote in person and support doing it. If you are an employer, would you consider giving folks time off to vote, since poll lines may be long? Would you sign up to help those without transportation get to polls? Would you help with voter registration drives to get people signed up to vote?

And you can be certain that election conspiracy believers will be observing the vote, as they always do. Can you train now to be a responsible and fair poll watcher, to ensure there is balance and fairness in these observations?

The one thing we can’t do is believe Trump is unstoppable, that the point of no return has already passed, and democracy is flowing out the sewer pipes into the sea. In fact, we have 271 days to reverse this.

It will take mass participation on multiple levels — but it can be done.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Supreme Court, with no dissents, rejects GOP challenge to California’s new election map
The deep dive: Fulton County in Georgia Challenges the F.B.I.’s Seizure of 2020 Ballots
The L.A. Times Special: California doctor sent abortion pills to Texas woman. Under a new law, her boyfriend is suing

Stay Golden,
Anita Chabria

P.S. Jeff Bezos Wednesday gutted his newspaper, the Washington Post. Its motto is “Democracy dies in darkness,” but also, democracy dies in layoffs by billionaires who can afford to send their wives into space for fun, but don’t want to pay for journalism that criticizes a dear leader.

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

SACRAMENTO — We relearned something from the killings of two law-abiding citizens by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis: There’s a limit to how many government lies the public will tolerate.

When government officials arrogantly persist in blatantly lying, the public just might turn angrily against the prevaricators.

Or maybe they’re not lying technically. They simply might not care whether they’re telling the truth, or what it is. Their only intent is to spew a tale that fits a political agenda. Regardless, the citizenry can stomach only so much.

Another thing we relearned is that when a government keeps acting against the public’s wishes, the public tends to rise up and smack its leader, altering the leader’s direction.

That’s the sign of a functional democracy when enough people get riled up and elbow their way into leading the government themselves.

In the process, they’re very likely to prod various other governments — state and local — into acting on their behalf.

We’ve been seeing this play out in the aftermath of the Minneapolis killings.

But, in fact, the public rebellion has been building during a yearlong nightmare of unjustified, inhumane, un-American violence by federal immigration agents. Their targets have been people with brown skin suspected of living in the country illegally. Never mind that many not only are documented, they’re U.S. citizens.

Such has been the slipshod and authoritarian way President Trump’s promised mass deportation program has been carried out.

Polls have consistently shown that voters strongly support the president’s goals of protecting the border and also deporting the “worst of the worst” undocumented criminals. But people have increasingly objected to his roughhouse methods, including masked federal agents slapping around and pepper-spraying legal protesters.

It’s not clear whether the two Minnesota citizens victimized by quick-draw federal agents were protesting. You can’t believe the Trump administration.

And that’s the danger in habitually lying: People can become so cynical that most disregard whatever they’re told by their so-called leaders. And that cripples what’s necessary for an ongoing healthy democracy: a cooperative relationship based on trust between citizens and those they’ve chosen to govern.

Some things we do know about the slain Minnesota citizens.

Alex Pretti, 37, was an intensive care nurse in a VA hospital. He was shooting video with his cellphone of agents and protesters when he was pepper-sprayed and wrestled to the ground by several agents as his legally carried handgun was removed. Then he was shot in the back several times.

He was not a “domestic terrorist” and “assassin” who wanted to “massacre law enforcement,” as Trump sycophants immediately lied on TV before backing off, after most of America saw videos of the killing and the president got nervous.

Renee Good, 37, was a mother and poet who appeared merely to be trying to drive through protest chaos when an agent shot her three times through the windshield. She did not try to run down the agent, as the administration claimed.

Good was not “obviously a professional agitator” who “violently, willfully and viciously ran over the ICE officer,” as Trump wrote on social media.

Public outrage at the lying and the brutish immigration enforcement has pressured elected officials into action all around the country.

Sure, you can call it political grandstanding and, of course, much of it is. But good politics and sound democracy involve listening to the public and acting on its desires.

In Sacramento, the state Senate held an emotional two-hour debate over a bill aimed at permitting people to sue federal law enforcement when their constitutional rights are violated. Rights such as the ability to peacefully protest and to be protected against excessive force. Lawsuits already are allowed against state and local officers. But federal agents are practically untouchable.

Senate Bill 747 by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) passed on a 30-10 party-line vote — Democrats for and Republicans against. The measure moved to the Assembly.

The vote was yet another sorry sign of today’s unhealthy political polarization. Not one Republican could break out of the Trump web and vote to hold illegally operating federal agents accountable in civil courts. But neither could one Democrat detect enough fault in the bill to vote against it.

Some law enforcement groups oppose the legislation because they fear it would spur additional suing against local cops. Look for an amendment in the Assembly.

The heated Senate debate reflected Democratic lawmakers’ frustration with Trump — and many of their constituents’ fears.

“The level of anxiety and anger is higher than I’ve ever seen in my 13 years in the Legislature,” Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Santa Ana) told me.

“People are coming into our offices fearful for relatives or friends who are hiding out, afraid to go to doctors’ appointments and their kids are staying away from schools.”

During the debate, several senators mentioned two young protesters who were each permanently blinded in one eye by rubber bullets shot by Homeland Security officers in Santa Ana. Lawmakers also railed against “kidnappings” off the street of people simply because of their skin colors, accents and dress.

“California is not going to let these thugs get away with it,” Wiener vowed.

“There’s a lot of hyperbole on this floor,” Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Huntington Beach) asserted. He called for repeal of California’s “sanctuary” laws that greatly restrict cooperation by state and local officers with federal immigration agents.

Easing those laws is probably a good idea. But more important, we’ve got to restrain undisciplined federal agents from shooting unarmed people in the back.

Sen. Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield), who revealed that she has been packing a firearm for 30 years, said that Pretti should never have brought his gun to a protest even if it was legal — which it isn’t in California.

And she’s right. But he never brandished the weapon and shouldn’t have paid with his life.

Neither should Pretti have been immediately attacked as a bad guy by lying federal officials. They’re now paying a political price.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Planned Parenthood, reproductive healthcare could receive $90 million in new state funding
The TK: Healthcare experts warn “people will die” unless state steps up amid federal cuts
The L.A. Times Special: Meet the un-Gavin. Kentucky’s governor sees a different way to the White House

Until next week,
George Skelton

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

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

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

Staking the middle ground

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A progressive rallying cry

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

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

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

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

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

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

Showdown on Capitol Hill

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What else you should be reading

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

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

I’ll see you all soon,
Michael Wilner

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

SACRAMENTO — When a California governor goes to Europe and lectures world leaders that they must “grow a spine” and “stand tall” against the American president, I wince.

Not that they shouldn’t, nor that President Trump doesn’t deserve almost any nasty thing said about him. It just seems a tad arrogant.

A world stage in the Swiss Alps is not the proper place for a state governor to be scolding leaders of foreign nations about how they should deal with the U.S. president, no matter how despicably Trump behaves.

Gov. Gavin Newsom is merely the top elected official of one state, even if he can boast that it’s the fourth- or fifth-largest economy in the world. It still doesn’t have a seat at the United Nations or an awesome military that is the heart of NATO and the Western alliance.

Contrary to hackneyed bragging points, California is not a “nation state.” We’re a state — highly populated, but one of 50.

At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last week, Newsom was like the lightweight boxer trying to punch far above his class.

He was attempting to score points in the early rounds of his fight for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, repeating what has been working well for him: swinging from the heels at Trump and attracting the attention of party activists across the country.

And that’s fine for here in the U.S. This is the arena where it belongs.

One can argue that Newsom overdoes it, reaching for all the national exposure he can grab and not focusing enough on the job Californians hired him for at the state Capitol. But there’s no disputing his political success nationally. He’s leading the early polls of potential contenders for the presidential nomination.

But that was probably of little concern for the foreign leaders and other global elites attending the prestigious annual World Economic Forum.

Newsom was given two speaking slots, presumably to inform international movers and shakers about California’s golden investment opportunities. But after arriving, he began blathering about the evil American president, Trump’s threats to hike tariffs and seize Greenland and how European leaders are allegedly cowering before him.

The governor soon after was disinvited to speak at one event, a series of interviews hosted by Fortune magazine at USA House, the Trump administration headquarters.

Newsom blamed Trump for blocking his participation, accusing White House staffers of pressuring the event sponsors.

Well, duh! You can’t shoot spit wads like a little kid at a big meanie and not expect some to be shot back.

“No one in Davos knows who third-rate governor Newscum is or why he is frolicking around Switzerland instead of fixing the problems he created in California,” asserted White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly, using the classless president’s oft-repeated derogatory name for the governor.

Whatever. Snatching Newsom’s mic was probably the right decision. Davos delegates didn’t need to hear a political stump speech attacking the American president or be berated by a governor for also not beating up on him.

This was some of the fiery, expletive-laced stuff the governor had been telling reporters, referring to European leaders:

“Wake up! Where the hell has everybody been? Stop this bullshit diplomacy of sort of niceties. … Have some spine, some goddamn balls ….

“The Europeans should decide for themselves what to do, but one thing they can’t do is what they’ve been doing. … And it’s embarrassing. Just, I can’t take this complicity, people rolling over. I should have brought a bunch of knee pads for all the world leaders. … I mean, it’s just pathetic.

“And I hope people understand how pathetic they look on the world stage.”

The leaders of Canada and France demonstrated how to make the same point — but with dignity — about standing firm against bullying.

“There is a strong tendency for countries to go along to get along. To accommodate. To avoid trouble. To hope that compliance will buy safety. It won’t,” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney told the forum attendees.

French President Emanuel Macron said, “We do prefer respect to bullies. And we do prefer rule of law to brutality.”

Newsom was allowed to keep one speaking slot: an interview on the forum’s main stage with Ben Smith, editor in chief of the news outfit Semafor.

“Is it surprising the Trump administration didn’t like my commentary and wanted to make sure that I was not allowed to speak? No,” Newsom said. “It’s consistent with … their authoritarian tendencies.”

There’s something distasteful — perhaps even unpatriotic — about an elected American official, regardless of party, vilifying a U.S. president when among allied leaders abroad. Even if it is the dreadful Trump.

But American politics has changed greatly for the worse in recent years, as evidenced by the Newsom-Trump spitball flinging.

California Gov. George Deukmejian spoke at the 1989 Davos forum and was a model of civil diplomacy, promoting the state’s trade and investment opportunities and laying off demagoguery.

Of course, Deukmejian and President Bush were both Republicans. So the Duke didn’t assail the president, not that he would have anyway. He had too much respect for the presidential institution when traveling abroad.

But unlike today’s top elected Republicans, Deukmejian didn’t shy away from giving the president advice. At Davos, the governor urged Bush not to renege on his “read my lips, no new taxes” pledge that got him elected. To reduce the federal deficit, cut spending, the governor cautioned.

Bush ignored such advice and raised taxes — and lost his 1992 reelection bid to Democrat Bill Clinton.

Clinton’s campaign motto is still a classic: “It’s the economy, stupid!”

Newsom needs to pick up on that. Or at least work it into his anti-Trump rant.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: GOP rails against Newsom’s late date for special election to fill Rep. Doug LaMalfa’s seat
The TK: Trump lawyers urge Supreme Court to block California’s new election map while upholding Texas’
The L.A. Times Special: California is suffering truth decay. Sacramento should do something about it

Until next week,
George Skelton

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