Officials announced Thursday that Los Angeles County has automated the process of notifying law enforcement agencies when people who violate restraining orders fail to comply with judges’ orders to hand their guns over to authorities.
Previously, court clerks had to identify which of the county’s 88 law enforcement agencies to notify about a firearm relinquishment by looking up addresses for the accused, which could take multiple days, Presiding Judge Sergio C. Tapia II of the L.A. County Superior Court said during a news conference.
Now, “notices are sent within minutes” to the appropriate agencies, Tapia said.
“This new system represents a step forward in ensuring timely, consistent and efficient communication between the court and law enforcement,” he said, “helping to remove firearms from individuals who are legally prohibited from possessing them.”
According to a news release, the court launched the platform, which the Judicial Council of California funded with a $4.12 million grant in conjunction with the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department and district attorney’s office, and the L.A. Police Department and city attorney’s office.
The court also rolled out a new portal for law enforcement that “streamlines interagency communications by providing justice partners with a centralized list of relevant cases for review” and allows agencies “to view all firearm relinquishment restraining order violations within their jurisdiction,” according to the release.
The new digital approach “represents a major enhancement in public safety,” Luna said.
“Each of those firearms,” he said, “represents a potential tragedy prevented or a domestic violence situation that did not escalate, a life that was not lost to gun violence.”
SAN FRANCISCO — Rep. Nancy Pelosi, a trailblazing San Francisco Democrat who leveraged decades of power in the U.S. House to become one of the most influential political leaders of her generation, will not run for reelection in 2026, she said Thursday.
The former House speaker, 85, who has been in Congress since 1987 and oversaw both of President Trump’s first-term impeachments, had been pushing off her 2026 decision until after Tuesday’s vote on Proposition 50, a ballot measure she backed and helped bankroll to redraw California’s congressional maps in her party’s favor.
With the measure’s resounding passage, Pelosi said it was time to start clearing the path for another Democrat to represent San Francisco — one of the nation’s most liberal bastions — in Congress, as some are already vying to do.
“With a grateful heart, I look forward to my final year of service as your proud representative,” Pelosi said in a nearly six-minute video she posted online Thursday morning, in which she also recounted major achievements from her long career.
Pelosi did not immediately endorse a would-be successor, but challenged her constituents to stay engaged.
“As we go forward, my message to the city I love is this: San Francisco, know your power,” she said. “We have made history, we have made progress, we have always led the way — and now we must continue to do so by remaining full participants in our democracy, and fighting for the American ideals we hold dear.”
Pelosi’s announcement drew immediate reaction across the political world, with Democrats lauding her dedication and accomplishments and President Trump, a frequent target and critic of hers, ridiculing her as a “highly overrated politician.”
Pelosi has not faced a serious challenge for her seat since President Reagan was in office, and has won recent elections by wide margins. Just a year ago, she won reelection with 81% of the vote.
Share via
However, Pelosi was facing two hard-to-ignore challengers from her own party in next year’s Democratic primary: state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), 55, a prolific and ambitious lawmaker with a strong base of support in the city, and Saikat Chakrabarti, 39, a Democratic political operative and tech millionaire who is infusing his campaign with personal cash.
Their challenges come amid a shifting tide against gerontocracy in Democratic politics more broadly, as many in the party’s base have increasingly questioned the ability of its longtime leaders — especially those in their 70s and 80s — to sustain an energetic and effective resistance to President Trump and his MAGA agenda.
In announcing his candidacy for Pelosi’s seat last month after years of deferring to her, Wiener said he simply couldn’t wait any longer. “The world is changing, the Democratic Party is changing, and it’s time,” he said.
Chakrabarti — who helped Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) topple another older Democratic incumbent with a message of generational change in 2018 — said voters in San Francisco “need a whole different approach” to governing after years of longtime party leaders failing to deliver.
In an interview Thursday, Wiener called Pelosi an “icon” who delivered for San Francisco in more ways than most people can comprehend, with whom he shared a “deep love” for the city. He also recounted, in particular, Pelosi’s early advocacy for AIDS treatment and care in the 1980s, and the impact it had on him personally.
“I remember vividly what it felt like as a closeted gay teenager, having a sense that the country had abandoned people like me, and that the country didn’t care if people like me died. I was 17, and that was my perception of my place in the world,” Wiener said. “Nancy Pelosi showed that that wasn’t true, that there were people in positions of power who gave a damn about gay men and LGBTQ people and people living with HIV and those of us at risk for HIV — and that was really powerful.”
Chakrabarti, in a statement Thursday, thanked Pelosi for her “decades of service that defined a generation of politics” and for “doing something truly rare in Washington: making room for the next one.”
While anticipated by many, Pelosi’s decision nonetheless reverberated through political circles, including as yet another major sign that a new political era is dawning for the political left — as also evidenced by the stunning rise of Zohran Mamdani, the 34-year-old democratic socialist elected Tuesday as New York City’s next mayor.
Known as a relentless and savvy party tactician, Pelosi had fought off concerns about her age in the past, including when she chose to run again last year. The first woman ever elected speaker in 2007, Pelosi has long cultivated and maintained a spry image belying her age by walking the halls of Congress in signature four-inch stilettos, and by keeping up a rigorous schedule of flying between work in Washington and constituent events in her home district.
However, that veneer has worn down in recent years, including when she broke her hip during a fall in Europe in December.
That occurred just after fellow octogenarian President Biden sparked intense speculation about his age and cognitive abilities with his disastrous debate performance against Trump in June of last year. The performance led to Biden being pushed to drop out of the race — in part by Pelosi — and to Vice President Kamala Harris moving to the top of the ticket and losing badly to Trump in November.
Democrats have also watched other older liberal leaders age and die in power in recent years, including the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein, another San Francisco power player in Washington. When Ginsburg died in office at 87, it handed Trump a third Supreme Court appointment. When Feinstein died in office ill at 90, it was amid swirling questions about her competency to serve.
By bowing out of the 2026 race, Pelosi — who stepped down from party leadership in 2022 — diminished her own potential for an ungraceful last chapter in office. But she did not concede that her current effectiveness has diminished one bit.
Pelosi was one of the most vocal and early proponents of Proposition 50, which amends the state constitution to give state Democrats the power through 2030 to redraw California’s congressional districts in their favor.
The measure was in response to Republicans in red states such as Texas redrawing maps in their favor, at Trump’s direction. Pelosi championed it as critical to preserving Democrats’ chances of winning back the House next year and checking Trump through the second half of his second term, something she and others suggested will be vital for the survival of American democracy.
On Tuesday, California voters resoundingly approved Proposition 50.
In her video, Pelosi noted a litany of accomplishments during her time in office, crediting them not to herself but to her constituents, to labor groups, to nonprofits and private entrepreneurs, to the city’s vibrant diversity and flair for innovation.
She noted bringing federal resources to the city to recover after the Loma Prieta earthquake, and San Francisco’s leading role in tackling the devastating HIV/AIDS crisis through partnerships with UC San Francisco and San Francisco General, which “pioneered comprehensive community based care, prevention and research” still used today.
She mentioned passing the Ryan White CARE Act and the Affordable Care Act, building out various San Francisco and California public transportation systems, building affordable housing and protecting the environment — all using federal dollars her position helped her to secure.
“It seems prophetic now that the slogan of my very first campaign in 1987 was, ‘A voice that will be heard,’ and it was you who made those words come true. It was the faith that you had placed in me, and the latitude that you have given me, that enabled me to shatter the marble ceiling and be the first woman speaker of the House, whose voice would certainly be heard,” Pelosi said. “It was an historic moment for our country, and it was momentous for our community — empowering me to bring home billions of dollars for our city and our state.”
After her announcement, Trump ridiculed her, telling Fox News that her decision not to seek reelection was “a great thing for America” and calling her “evil, corrupt, and only focused on bad things for our country.”
“She was rapidly losing control of her party and it was never coming back,” Trump told the outlet, according to a segment shared by the White House. “I’m very honored she impeached me twice, and failed miserably twice.”
The House succeeded in impeaching Trump twice, but the Senate acquitted him both times.
Pelosi’s fellow Democrats, by contrast, heaped praise on her as a one-of-a-kind force in U.S. politics — a savvy tactician, a prolific legislator and a mentor to an entire generation of fellow Democrats.
Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a longtime Pelosi ally who helped her impeach Trump, called Pelosi “the greatest Speaker in American history” as a result of “her tenacity, intellect, strategic acumen and fierce advocacy.”
“She has been an indelible part of every major progressive accomplishment in the 21st Century — her work in Congress delivered affordable health care to millions, created countless jobs, raised families out of poverty, cleaned up pollution, brought LGBTQ+ rights into the mainstream, and pulled our economy back from the brink of destruction not once, but twice,” Schiff said.
Gov. Gavin Newsom said Pelosi “has inspired generations,” that her “courage and conviction to San Francisco, California, and our nation has set the standard for what public service should be,” and that her impact on the country was “unmatched.”
“Wishing you the best in this new chapter — you’ve more than earned it,” Newsom wrote above Pelosi’s online video.
WASHINGTON — Dick Cheney was the public face of the George W. Bush administration’s boundary-pushing approach to surveillance and intelligence collection in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
An unabashed proponent of broad executive power in the name of national security, Cheney placed himself at the center of a polarizing public debate over detention, interrogation and spying that endures two decades later.
“I do think the security state that we have today is very much a product of our reactions to Sept. 11, and obviously Vice President Cheney was right smack-dab in the middle of how that reaction was operationalized from the White House,” said Stephen Vladeck, a Georgetown University law professor.
Prominent booster of the Patriot Act
Cheney was arguably the administration’s most prominent booster of the Patriot Act, the law enacted nearly unanimously after 9/11 that granted the U.S. government sweeping surveillance powers.
He also championed a National Security Agency warrantless wiretapping program aimed at intercepting international communications of suspected terrorists in the U.S., despite concerns over its legality from some administration figures.
If such an authority had been in place before Sept. 11, Cheney once asserted, it could have led the U.S. “to pick up on two of the hijackers who flew a jet into the Pentagon.”
Law enforcement and intelligence agencies still retain key tools to confront potential terrorists and spies that came into prominence after the attacks, including national security letters that permit the FBI to order companies to turn over information about customers.
But courts also have questioned the legal justification of the government’s surveillance apparatus, and a Republican Party that once solidly stood behind Cheney’s national security worldview has grown significantly more fractured.
The bipartisan consensus on expanded surveillance powers after Sept. 11 has given way to increased skepticism, especially among some Republicans who believe spy agencies used those powers to undermine President Trump while investigating ties between Russia and his 2016 campaign.
Congress in 2020 let expire three provisions of the Patriot Act that the FBI and Justice Department had said were essential for national security, including one that permits investigators to surveil subjects without establishing that they’re acting on behalf of an international terror organization.
A program known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which permits the U.S. government to collect without a warrant the communications of non-Americans located outside the country for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence, was reauthorized last year — but only after significant negotiations.
“I think for someone like Vice President Cheney, expanding those authorities wasn’t an incidental objective — it was a core objective,” Vladeck said. “And I think the Republican Party today does not view those kinds of issues — counterterrorism policy, government surveillance authorities — as anywhere near the kind of political issues that the Bush administration did.”
As an architect of the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, Cheney pushed spy agencies to find evidence to justify military action.
Along with others in the administration, Cheney claimed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction and had ties to al-Qaida. They used that to sell the war to members of Congress and the American people, though it was later debunked.
The faulty intelligence used to justify the invasion of Iraq is held up as a significant failure by America’s spy services and a demonstration of what can happen when leaders use intelligence for political ends.
The government’s arguments for war fueled a distrust among many Americans that still resonates with some in Trump’s administration.
“For decades, our foreign policy has been trapped in a counterproductive and endless cycle of regime change or nation building,” Tulsi Gabbard, the director of the Office of National Intelligence, said in the Middle East last week.
Many lawmakers who voted to support using force in 2003 say they have come to regret it.
“It was a mistake to rely upon the Bush administration for telling the truth,” Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said on the invasion’s 20th anniversary.
Expanded war powers
Trump has long criticized Cheney, but he’s relying on a legal doctrine popularized during Cheney’s time in office to justify deadly strikes on alleged drug-running boats in Latin America.
The Trump administration says the U.S. is engaged in “armed conflict” with drug cartels and has declared them unlawful combatants.
“These narco-terrorists have killed more Americans than Al-Qaeda, and they will be treated the same,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Oct. 28 on social media. ”We will track them, we will network them, and then, we will hunt and kill them.”
After 9/11, the Bush-Cheney administration authorized the U.S. military to attack enemy combatants acting on behalf of terror organizations. That prompted questions about the legality of killing or detaining people without prosecution.
Cheney’s involvement in boosting executive power and surveillance and “cooking the books of the raw intelligence” has echoes in today’s strikes, said Jim Ludes, a former national security analyst who directs the Pell Center for International Relations and Public Policy at Salve Regina University.
“You think about his legacy and some of it is very troubling. Some of it is maybe what the moment demanded,” Ludes said. “But it’s a complicated legacy.“
Vladeck noted an enduring legacy of the Bush-Cheney administration was “to blur if not entirely collapse lines between civilian reactions to threats and military ones.”
He pointed to designating foreign terrorist organizations, a tool that predated the Sept. 11 attacks but became more prevalent in the years that followed. Trump has used the label for several drug cartels.
Contemporary conflicts inside the government
Protecting the homeland from espionage, terrorism and other threats is a complicated endeavor spread across the government. When Cheney was vice president, for instance, agencies like the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, or ODNI, were established.
As was the case then, the division of labor can still be disputed, with a recent crack surfacing between Director Kash Patel’s FBI and the intelligence community led by Gabbard.
The FBI said in a letter to lawmakers that it “vigorously disagrees” with a legislative proposal that it said would remove the bureau as the government’s lead counterintelligence agency and replace it with a counterintelligence center under ODNI.
“The cumulative effect,” the FBI warned in the letter obtained by The Associated Press, “would be putting decision-making with employees who aren’t actively involved in CI operations, knowledgeable of the intricacies of CI threats, or positioned to develop coherent and tailored mitigation strategies.”
That would be to the detriment of national security, the FBI said.
Spokespeople for the agencies later issued a statement saying they are working together with Congress to strengthen counterintelligence efforts.
Tucker and Klepper write for the Associated Press.
On her first day in office, Mayor Karen Bass declared a state of emergency on homelessness.
The declaration allowed the city to cut through red tape, including through no-bid contracts, and to start Inside Safe, Bass’ signature program focused on moving homeless people off the streets and into interim housing.
On Tuesday, nearly three years after she took the helm, and with homelessness trending down two years in a row for the first time in recent years, the mayor announced that she will lift the state of emergency on Nov. 18.
“We have begun a real shift in our city’s decades-long trend of rising homelessness,” Bass said in a memorandum to the City Council.
Still, the mayor said, there is much work to do.
“The crisis remains, and so does our urgency,” she said.
The mayor’s announcement followed months of City Council pushback on the lengthy duration of the state of emergency, which the council had initially approved.
Some council members argued that the state of emergency allowed the mayor’s office to operate out of public view and that contracts and leases should once again be presented before them with public testimony and a vote.
Councilmember Tim McOsker has been arguing for months that it was time to return to business as usual.
“Emergency powers are designed to allow the government to suspend rules and respond rapidly when the situation demands it, but at some point those powers must conclude,” he said in a statement Tuesday.
McOsker said the move will allow the council to “formalize” some of the programs started during the emergency, while incorporating more transparency.
Council members had been concerned that the state of emergency would end without first codifying Executive Directive 1, which expedites approvals for homeless shelters as well as for developments that are 100% affordable and was issued by Bass shortly after she took office.
On Oct. 28, the council voted for the city attorney to draft an ordinance that would enshrine the executive directive into law.
The mayor’s announcement follows positive reports about the state of homelessness in the city.
As of September, the mayor’s Inside Safe program had moved more than 5,000 people into interim housing since its inception at the end of 2022. Of those people, more than 1,243 have moved into permanent housing, while another 1,636 remained in interim housing.
This year, the number of homeless people living in shelters or on the streets of the city dropped 3.4%, according to the annual count conducted by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority. The number of unsheltered homeless people in the city dropped by an even steeper margin of 7.9%.
The count, however, has its detractors. A study by Rand found that the annual survey missed nearly a third of homeless people in Hollywood, Venice and Skid Row — primarily those sleeping without tents or vehicles.
In June, a federal judge decided not to put Los Angeles’ homelessness programs into receivership, while saying that the city had failed to meet some of the terms of a settlement agreement with the nonprofit LA Alliance for Human Rights.
Councilmember Nithya Raman, who chairs the City Council’s Housing and Homelessness Committee, said the end of the emergency does not mean the crisis is over.
“It only means that we must build fiscally sustainable systems that can respond effectively,” she said. “By transitioning from emergency measures to long-term, institutional frameworks, we’re ensuring consistent, accountable support for people experiencing homelessness.”
Times staff writer David Zahniser contributed to this report.
Zohran Mamdani, the progressive standard-bearer who could become New York City’s next mayor after Tuesday’s election, faces a public-safety trap that has entangled progressives nationwide: Voters want less cruelty, not less accountability. Confuse the two, and even progressives will vote you out.
Even before he has taken office, Mamdani is already fending off attacks from opponents, including former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other political adversaries. They seek to brand him as a radical by tying him to the national Democratic Socialists of America’s most controversial criminal justice planks, such as declining to prosecute misdemeanor offenses.
Yet, in distancing himself from those specific policies, Mamdani is cleverly navigating a political minefield that has doomed other reformers. His strategy demonstrates a crucial lesson for the broader progressive movement: voters want a less inhumane justice system, not one that is unenforced. If progressives are perceived as abandoning accountability for offenses like shoplifting and public drug usage, they invite a political backlash that will not only cost them elections (or reelections) but also set back the cause of reform nationwide.
Americans across the political spectrum support reducing extremely harsh punishments. They want shorter sentences, alternatives to incarceration and rehabilitation over punishment. The moral case against excessive punishment resonates with voters who see our system as unnecessarily cruel. The evidence is overwhelming: 81% of Americans believe the U.S. criminal justice system needs reform, and 85% agree the main goal of our criminal justice system should be rehabilitation.
This is precisely the kind of stance that can trigger backlash. The 2022 recall of San Francisco’s progressive district attorney shows why. About 1 in 3 “progressive” voters cast a ballot to remove the progressive DA from office. It wasn’t because they disagreed with his policies; in fact, these same voters supported his specific reforms when his name wasn’t attached to them. Their opposition was rooted in a fear that declining to prosecute low-level crimes would create a deterrence vacuum and incentivize lawlessness.
In Los Angeles, George Gascón’s trajectory offers a cautionary tale. As Los Angeles County district attorney, he survived two recall attempts before losing his 2024 reelection bid by 23 points. L.A. voters hadn’t abandoned reform — they’d supported it just four years earlier. But Gascón’s categorical bans on seeking certain harsher sentences or charging juveniles as adults triggered a revolt from his own rank-and-file prosecutors, creating the perception that entire categories of misconduct would go unaddressed. When prosecutors publicly sued him, arguing his directives violated state law, the deterrence vacuum became tangible. By the time Gascón walked back some policies, voters’ trust had evaporated.
This pattern repeats across the country.In Boston, DA Kevin Hayden has distanced himself so forcefully from predecessor Rachael Rollins’ “do not prosecute” list that he bristles at reporters even mentioning it. Yet Hayden’s office is still diverting first-time shoplifters to treatment programs — the same approach Rollins advocated. The difference? Hayden emphasizes prosecution of repeat offenders while offering alternatives to first-timers. The policy is nearly identical; the politics couldn’t be more different.
Critics are right to argue that the old model of misdemeanor prosecution was a failure. It criminalized poverty and addiction, clogged our courts and did little to stop the revolving door. But the answer to a broken system is not to create a vacuum of enforcement; it is to build a new system that pairs accountability with effective intervention.
Mamdani has already shown political wisdom by declaring, “I am not defunding the police.” But the issue isn’t just about police funding — it’s about what behaviors the criminal justice system will address. As mayor, Mamdani would not control whether the prosecutors abandon prosecution of misdemeanors, but what matters are his stances and voters’ perception. He should be vocal about how we thinks prosecutors should respond to low-level offenses:
First-time shoplifters: Restitution or community service.
Drug possession: Treatment enrollment, not incarceration.
Quality-of-life violations: Social service interventions for housing and health.
DUI offenders: Intensive supervision and treatment.
To be clear, this isn’t about ignoring these offenses; it’s about transforming the response. For this to work, the justice system must use its inherent leverage. Instead of compelling jail time, a pending criminal case becomes the tool to ensure a person completes a treatment program, pays restitution to the store they stole from, or connects with housing services. This is the essence of diversion: Accountability is met, the underlying problem is addressed, and upon successful completion, the case is often dismissed, allowing the person to move forward without the lifelong burden of a criminal record.
Mamdani’s proposed Department of Community Safety is a step in the right direction. But it must work alongside, not instead of, prosecution for lower-level offenses, and Mamdani must frame it as a partner to prosecution. If voters perceive it as a substitute for accountability, his opponents will use it as a political weapon the moment crime rates fluctuate.
New York deserves bold criminal justice reform. But boldness without pragmatism leads to backlash that sets the entire movement back. The future of the criminal justice progressive movement in America will not be determined by its ideals, but by its ability to deliver pragmatic safety. For the aspiring mayor, and for prosecutors in California and beyond, this means understanding that residents want both order and compassionate justice.
Dvir Yogev is a postdoctoral researcher at the Criminal Law & Justice Center at UC Berkeley, where he studies the politics of criminal justice reform and prosecutor elections.
On Tuesday, voters will determine the fate of redistricting measure Proposition 50. But if you’re eager to vote in person, you don’t have to wait. You can easily pop into the polls a day early in many parts of California.
Where to vote in person on Monday
In Los Angeles County alone, there are 251 vote centers that will be open from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Monday. (They’ll also be open again on Tuesday, election day, from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.) At vote centers, you can vote in person, drop off your vote-by-mail ballot, or even register to vote and cast a same-day provisional ballot, which will be counted after officials verify the registration.
“Avoid the rush,” said Dean Logan, the L.A. County registrar-recorder/county clerk. “Make a plan to vote early.”
Also on Monday, San Diego County’s 68 vote centers are open from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.; Orange County’s 65 vote centers from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.; and Riverside County’s 55 vote centers and Ventura County’s nine vote centers between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
All of those vote centers also will be open on election day Tuesday from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.
Other counties have fewer in-person polling locations on Monday
San Bernardino County, however, only has six designated early voting poll stations. They’re open on Monday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., and also on election day from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Otherwise, San Bernardino County residents who want to vote in person on Tuesday can go to their assigned neighborhood polling location.
In Santa Barbara County, if you’ve lost or damaged a vote-by-mail ballot, you can request a replacement ballot through county’s elections offices in Santa Barbara, Santa Maria or Lompoc. Otherwise, voters can cast ballots at their assigned neighborhood polls on Tuesday.
How to drop off your vote-by-mail ballot
All Californian registered voters were mailed a vote-by-mail ballot. There are various ways to drop it off — through the mail, or through a county ballot drop box or polling place.
You can also send your ballot through the U.S. Postal Service. No stamps are needed. Note that your ballot must be postmarked by Tuesday (and received by the county elections office within seven days).
But beware: Officials have warned that recent changes to the U.S. Postal Service earlier this year may result in later postmarks than you might expect.
In fact, state officials recently warned that, in large swaths of California — outside of the metros of Southern California, the San Francisco Bay Area and the Sacramento area — mail that is dropped off at a mailbox or a post office on election day may not be postmarked until a day later, on Wednesday. That would render the ballot ineligible to be counted.
As a result, some officials are recommending that — at this point — it’s better to deliver your vote-by-mail ballot through a secure drop box, a vote center or a neighborhood polling place, rather than through the Postal Service.
“If you can’t make it to a vote center, you can go to any post office and ask at the counter for a postmark on your ballot to ensure you get credit for mailing your ballot on time,” the office of Atty. Gen. Robert Bonta said.
Most common reasons vote-by-mail ballots don’t get counted
In the 2024 general election, 99% of vote-by-mail ballots were accepted. But that means about 122,000 of the ballots, out of 13.2 million returned, weren’t counted in California.
Here are the top reasons why: • A non-matching signature: 71,381 ballots not counted. • Ballot was not received in time: 33,016 ballots not counted. • No voter signature: 13,356 ballots not counted.
If the voter didn’t sign their ballot, or the ballot’s signature is different from the one in the voter’s record, election officials are required to reach out to the voter to resolve the missing or mismatched signature.
Other reasons included the voter having already voted, the voter forgetting to put the ballot in their envelope, or returning multiple ballots in a single envelope.
Reporters blocked from key White House area without prior approval, citing structural changes and security concerns.
Published On 31 Oct 202531 Oct 2025
Share
United States President Donald Trump’s administration has barred reporters from accessing part of the White House press office without an appointment, citing the need to protect “sensitive material”.
In a memorandum on Friday to White House Communications Director Steven Cheung and Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, the National Security Council (NSC) said journalists were “no longer permitted” to visit a section where Leavitt’s office is located, “without prior approval in the form of an appointment”.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
The National Security Council said the change was made because structural changes to the NSC meant White House communications officials are now “routinely engaging with sensitive material”.
“In order to protect such material, and maintain coordination between National Security Council Staff and White House Communications Staff, members of the press are no longer permitted to access Room 140 without prior approval in the form of an appointment with an authorized White House Staff Member,” the memo said.
The White House move follows restrictions put in place earlier this month for reporters at the Department of Defense, a move that prompted dozens of journalists to vacate their offices in the Pentagon and return their credentials.
Previously, credentialed White House journalists could access Room 140, which is a short hallway from the Oval Office known as “Upper Press”, on short notice to speak with Leavitt, her deputy Cheung and other senior officials.
The White House Correspondents Association, which represents journalists covering the White House, could not be reached for immediate comment.
The Trump administration removed Reuters, The Associated Press and Bloomberg News from the permanent “pool” of reporters covering the president months ago, although it allows those outlets to participate on a sporadic basis.
Friday’s announcement comes weeks after the crackdown on press access by the Defense Department, which now requires news outlets to sign a new policy or lose access to press credentials and Pentagon workspaces.
At least 30 news organisations declined to agree to the Pentagon restrictions, citing a threat to press freedoms and their ability to conduct independent newsgathering.
The Pentagon policy requires journalists to acknowledge new rules on press access, including that they could be branded security risks and have their Pentagon press badges revoked if they ask department employees to disclose classified or certain unclassified information.
This week voters across California received a suspicious text message saying they’d failed to turn in their ballots for the Nov. 4 statewide special election on redistricting.
The message may appear official. It includes the voter’s name and address and links to an official website providing information on early voting and vote-by-mall ballot drop-off locations.
But it’s not from the state, and officials urge caution.
The office of the California secretary of state received numerous reports from voters of “inaccurate text messages from Ballot Now,” according to a news release.
“This has caused voters to believe their returned ballots have not been received or processed by county elections officials,” Shirley Weber, secretary of state, stated in the release. “Let me be clear: Ballot Now is not in any way affiliated with the California Office of the Secretary of State.”
Weber’s office told The Times it doesn’t know the intent behind the Ballot Now text messages, and “we are trying to get to the bottom of it.”
Ballot Now did not respond to The Times’ request for comment.
Where voters can get trustworthy answers to their elections questions
Voters can find accurate information on elections and voting at the state secretary’s website or at their county election office. The secretary’s website includes the complete list of county election offices.
Questions that the secretary of state’s website can assist with include:
How do I check my voter status? By entering some personal information, you can see if you are registered to vote, where you’re registered, and check that your political party and language preference are correct at the website’s voter status page.
How do I track my ballot? You can sign up to track your ballot through the state’s online site Ballottrax.
By signing up on Ballottrax, voters receive automatic updates when their county elections office: mails their ballot to them, receives their ballot, counts their ballot, or when the office has any issues with the ballot.
Updates are available in 10 languages — including Spanish, Japanese and Tagalog — and you can choose to be texted, emailed or called with voice alert updates.
If you believe you’re the victim of election fraud or have witnessed a violation of the California Elections Code, you can submit a complaint form or call the secretary of state’s office.
Fill out an online form, download a PDF version of the form and mail it, or call the office — English speakers can call (916) 657-2166 or (800) 345-8683; Spanish speakers can call (800) 232-8682.
The physical form can be mailed to the California Secretary of State Elections Division at 1500 11th St., 5th Floor, Sacramento, CA 95814 or faxed to (916) 653-3214.
Los Angeles County residents are encouraged to call the Los Angeles County registrar-recorder/county clerk’s call center with any questions or concerns they have, said Mike Sanchez, spokesperson for the office.
The registrar of voters can be reached at (800) 815-2666, and the number for voter center information is (800) 815-2666; choose option No. 1.
People travelling to the county next year may need to check their travel insurance
15:06, 29 Oct 2025Updated 15:08, 29 Oct 2025
The travel advice for Italy has been updated (Image: Getty)
The UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has updated its travel guidance for Italy. The FCDO regularly offers and updates travel advice for 226 countries and territories worldwide, covering a range of topics including warnings, insurance, and entry requirements.
The latest update was shared last week and remains current today, October 29. The update saw the FCDO issue new information about the upcoming Winter Olympics and Paralympic Games planned to take place in Italy from February 6 to 22 and March 6 to 15. As outlined on the website, the updates were made to the ‘Warnings and insurance’ and ‘Safety and security’ pages.
The warnings and insurance page covers steps to follow before travel, travel insurance, and where to find travel advice updates. In an alert regarding travel insurance, the Foreign Office said: “If you choose to travel, research your destinations and get appropriate travel insurance. Insurance should cover your itinerary, planned activities and expenses in an emergency.”
The guidelines state that travel insurance should cover all activities included in your holiday, including sports and adventure tourism, which could require specialist insurance. The safety and security page covers topics including terrorism threats, crime, laws and cultural differences, winter sports, and outdoor activities and adventure tourism.
In an alert regarding winter sports, the Foreign Office said: “Get advice on weather and avalanche conditions before you travel and familiarise yourself with local skiing laws and regulations. You can contact the Italian State Tourist Board for advice on safety and weather conditions before you travel.”
The advice also highlighted regulations for the ski season. It stated: “From 1 November 2025, all skiers, snowboarders, sledders, and tobogganers will be required to wear CE-certified helmets at all ski resorts. This law applies regardless of age or activity. Failing to do so risks a fine of up to €200 and ski pass suspension for up to 3 days.”
There’s also guidance for travellers planning to engage in outdoor activities and adventure tourism. The advice states: “Hiking, mountaineering and other adventure sports have specific risks. Check the company is well-established in the industry and make sure your insurance covers these activities.
“For sports activities like skiing, potholing and mountaineering, and for sports classed as particularly dangerous, such as off-piste skiing, mountain biking, climbing, paragliding or BASE jumping, your insurance should include:
mountain rescue services
helicopter costs
repatriation to your country of residence or transfer to neighbouring countries for treatment.”
The advice could be particularly useful for anyone attending the Olympic Games and who hopes to take part in winter activities during their trip. You should always check the weather forecasts and conditions before taking part in activities such as hiking or mountaineering, ensuring you’re properly equipped in case of an emergency.
Anyone planning a visit should read the general advice set out on the ‘Winter Olympics’ page. It states: “Italy will host the Winter Olympic Games from 6 to 22 February and the Paralympic Winter Games from 6 to 15 March. Competitions will be hosted across several distant locations in Lombardy and Northeast Italy.
If you are planning to attend:
sign up to get email alerts about Italy’s travel advice
check the official Olympics website for a calendar of events, venue information, ticket sales and to stay informed of anything that might affect your travel or plans
keep your personal belongings and valuables safe, if your passport is lost and stolen, check the Getting help page.”
It also directs people to other advice pages, including the advice about winter sports and travel insurance previously mentioned.
A federal judge Tuesday ruled that Acting U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli is not lawfully serving in that role, but declined to dismiss criminal indictments that were challenged by defense attorneys.
Senior Judge J. Michael Seabright from the District of Hawaii was brought in to oversee the case after federal judges in Los Angeles recused themselves. In his ruling, Seabright said Essayli “unlawfully assumed the role of Acting United States Attorney” but can remain in charge under a different title.
Seabright said Essayli “remains the First Assistant United States Attorney” and can “perform the functions and duties of that office.”
Essayli, a former Riverside County assemblyman, was appointed as the region’s interim top federal prosecutor by U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi in April.
The top prosecutors in charge of U.S. Attorney’s offices are supposed to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate or a panel of federal judges, but the Trump administration has circumvented the normal process in order to allow Essayli and others to remain on the job without facing a vote.
Essayli’s temporary appointment was set to expire in late July, but the White House never moved to nominate him to a permanent role, instead opting to use an unprecedented legal maneuver to shift his title to “acting,” extending his term for an additional nine months.
Challenges to Essayli’s appointment have been brought in at least three criminal cases, with defense lawyers arguing that charges brought under his watch are invalid. The federal public defender’s office in Los Angeles asked the judge to disqualify Essayli from participating in and supervising criminal prosecutions in the district.
The U.S. Attorney’s office in Los Angeles did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Seabright’s ruling comes amid similar challenges across the country to the Trump administration’s tactics for installing loyalists who wield the power to bring criminal charges and sue on the government’s behalf.
A federal judge in August determined Alina Habba has been illegally occupying the U.S. attorney post in New Jersey, although that order was put on hold pending appeal. Last month a federal judge disqualified Nevada’s top federal prosecutor, Sigal Chattah, from several cases, concluding she “is not validly serving as acting U.S. attorney.” Chattah’s disqualification also is paused while the Department of Justice appeals the decision.
James Comey, the former FBI director charged with lying to Congress, cited the Nevada and New Jersey cases in a recent filing and is now challenging the legality of Trump’s appointment of Lindsey Halligan as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. Halligan was appointed after his predecessor, also a Trump appointee, refused to seek charges against Comey.
Since taking office, Essayli has doggedly pursued President Trump’s agenda, championing hard-line immigration enforcement in Southern California, often using the president’s language at news conferences. Essayli’s tenure has sparked discord in the office, with dozens of career DOJ prosecutors quitting.
The judge’s ruling Tuesday conceded arguments from the Justice Department that Essayli would continue leading the U.S. Attorney’s office in L.A. regardless of how the judged decided on the challenge to his status.
Assistant U.S. Atty. Alexander P. Robbins said that because Essayli also has been designated as first assistant U.S. attorney, he would retain his authority even if stripped of the “acting” title.
Bondi in July also appointed him as a “special attorney.” Robbins told the judge that “there’s no developed challenge to Mr. Essayli’s appointment as a special attorney or his designation as a first assistant.”
The prosecutor told the judge the government believes Essayli’s term will end Feb. 24 and that afterward the role of acting U.S. attorney will remain vacant.
Robbins argued in a court filing that the court shouldn’t order Essayli “to remove the prosecutorial and supervisory hats that many others in this Office wear, sowing chaos and confusion into the internal workings of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the largest district in the country.”
When asked by a Times reporter last month about the motion to disqualify him, Essayli said “the president won the election.”
“The American people provided him a mandate to run the executive branch, including the U.S. attorney’s office, and I look forward to serving at the pleasure of the president,” he said during a news conference.
NEW YORK — President Trump’s lawyers have asked a New York state appeals court to toss out his hush money criminal conviction, saying federal law preempts state law and there was no intent to commit a crime.
The lawyers filed their written arguments with the state’s mid-level appeals court just before midnight Monday.
In June, the lawyers asked a federal appeals court to move the case to federal court, where the Republican president can challenge the conviction on presidential immunity grounds. The appeals court has not yet ruled.
Trump was convicted in May 2024 of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal a hush money payment to adult film actor Stormy Daniels, whose affair allegations threatened to upend his 2016 presidential campaign. Trump denies her claim and said he did nothing wrong. It was the only one of the four criminal cases against him to go to trial.
Trump was sentenced in January to what’s known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him jail, probation, a fine or other punishment.
Appearing by video at his sentencing, Trump called the case a “political witch hunt,” “a weaponization of government” and “an embarrassment to New York.”
The Manhattan district attorney’s office, which prosecuted the case, will have a chance to respond to the appeals arguments in court papers. A message seeking comment was left with the office Tuesday.
At trial, prosecutors said Trump mislabeled payments to his then-lawyer Michael Cohen as legal fees to conceal that he was actually reimbursing the $130,000 that Cohen paid Daniels to keep her quiet in the final weeks of Trump’s successful 2016 presidential run.
At the time, Daniels was considering going public with a claim that she and the married Trump had a 2006 sexual encounter that Trump has consistently denied.
In their arguments to the New York state appeals court, Trump’s lawyers wrote that the prosecution of Trump was “the most politically charged prosecution in our Nation’s history.”
They said Trump was the victim of a Democratic district attorney in Manhattan who “concocted a purported felony by stacking time-barred misdemeanors under a convoluted legal theory” during a contentious presidential election in which Trump was the leading Republican candidate.
They wrote that federal law preempts the “misdemeanor-turned-felony charges” because the charges rely on an alleged violation of federal campaign regulations that states cannot enforce.
They said the trial was also spoiled when prosecutors introduced official presidential acts that the Supreme Court has made clear cannot be used as evidence against a U.S. president.
“Beyond these fatal flaws, the evidence was clearly insufficient to convict,” the lawyers wrote.
The lawyers also attacked the conviction on the grounds that “pure, evidence-free speculation” was behind the effort by prosecutors to persuade jurors that Trump was thinking about the 2020 election when he allegedly decided to reimburse Cohen.
WASHINGTON — House Republicans on Tuesday unveiled their long-promised report on former President Biden’s use of the autopen, delivering a blistering critique of his time in office and inner circle that largely rehashes public information while making sweeping accusations about the workings of his White House.
The GOP report does not include any concrete evidence that aides conspired to enact policies without Biden’s knowledge or that the president was unaware of laws, pardons or executive orders signed in his name. But Republicans said their findings cast doubt on all of Biden’s actions in office. They sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi urging a full investigation. President Trump ordered a similar inquiry earlier this year.
At its core, the report advances contested claims that Biden’s mental state declined to a degree that allowed White House officials to enact policies without his knowledge. It focuses heavily on the pardons he granted in office, including to his son, Hunter Biden, based on depositions with close Biden aides.
“The cost of the scheme to hide the fallout of President Biden’s diminished physical and mental acuity was great but will likely never be fully calculated,” the report reads. “The cover-up put American national security at risk and the nation’s trust in its leaders in jeopardy.”
Biden has strenuously denied he was unaware of his administration’s actions, calling such claims “ridiculous and false.” Democrats on the House Oversight committee denounced the probe as a distraction and waste of time.
Republicans are shifting attention back to Biden at a tumultuous time, 10 months into Trump’s presidency, with the government shut down and Congress at a standstill over legislation to fund it. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has kept the House out of session for nearly a month, with most public-facing committee work grinding to a halt.
The report on Biden was largely compiled over several months before the shutdown began. Based on interviews with more than a dozen members of Biden’s inner circle, the report offers few new revelations, instead drawing broad conclusions from unanswered questions.
It includes repeated references to polls of Biden’s approval rating and perceptions of his public gaffes and apparent aging, much of it publicly known.
It alleges a “cover-up of the president’s cognitive decline” orchestrated by Biden’s inner circle and takes particular aim at Biden’s doctor, Kevin O’Connor, who invoked his Fifth Amendment right against testifying. Republicans also singled out senior aides Anthony Bernal and Annie Tomasini, who similarly pleaded the Fifth. All three “should face further scrutiny” from the Justice Department, Republicans said.
Republicans also sent a letter to the D.C. Board of Medicine urging that O’Connor face “discipline, sanction or revocation of his medical license” and “be barred from the practice of medicine in the District of Columbia.”
The report does not include full transcripts of the at-times multiple hours of recorded testimony that witnesses delivered before the committee. It repeatedly scolds Biden officials and Democratic allies for defending Biden’s mental state.
“The inner-most circle, or cocoon, of the White House senior staff organized one of the largest scandals in American history — hiding a cognitively failing president and refusing any means of confirmation of such demise,” the report says.
While the report claims that record-keeping policies in the Biden White House “were so lax that the chain of custody for a given decision is difficult or impossible to establish,” Republicans do not offer any concrete instances of the chain of command being violated or a policy being enacted without Biden’s knowledge.
Still, Republicans argue that Biden’s use of the autopen should be considered invalid unless there is documented proof of him approving a decision.
“Barring evidence of executive actions taken during the Biden presidency showing that President Biden indeed took a particular executive action, the committee deems those actions taken through use of the autopen as void,” the report says.
Democrats and legal experts have warned that broad scrutiny of executive actions could pose future legal headaches for the Trump administration and congressional Republicans, who also often enact policies directed by lawmakers through devices like the presidential autopen.
Brown and Cappelletti write for the Associated Press.
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration on Monday asked the Supreme Court to allow it to fire the director of the U.S. Copyright Office.
The administration’s newest emergency appeal to the high court was filed a month and a half after a federal appeals court in Washington held that the official, Shira Perlmutter, could not be unilaterally fired.
Nearly four weeks ago, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit refused to reconsider that ruling.
The case is the latest that relates to Trump’s authority to install his own people at the head of federal agencies. The Supreme Court has largely allowed Trump to fire officials, even as court challenges proceed.
But this case concerns an office that is within the Library of Congress. Perlmutter is the register of copyrights and also advises Congress on copyright issues.
Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer wrote in his filing Monday that despite the ties to Congress, the register “wields executive power” in regulating copyrights.
Perlmutter claims Trump fired her in May because he disapproved of advice she gave to Congress in a report related to artificial intelligence. Perlmutter had received an email from the White House notifying her that “your position as the Register of Copyrights and Director at the U.S. Copyright Office is terminated effective immediately,” her office said.
A divided appellate panel ruled that Perlmutter could keep her job while the case moves forward.
“The Executive’s alleged blatant interference with the work of a Legislative Branch official, as she performs statutorily authorized duties to advise Congress, strikes us as a violation of the separation of powers that is significantly different in kind and in degree from the cases that have come before,” Judge Florence Pan wrote for the appeals court. Judge Michelle Childs joined the opinion. Democratic President Biden appointed both judges to the appeals court.
Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee, wrote in dissent that Perlmutter “exercises executive power in a host of ways.”
Perlmutter’s attorneys have argued that she is a renowned copyright expert. She has served as register of copyrights since then-Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden appointed her to the job in October 2020.
Trump appointed Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche to replace Hayden at the Library of Congress. The White House fired Hayden amid criticism from conservatives that she was advancing a “woke” agenda.
Shaquille O’Neal purchased a black 2025 Land Rover worth a reported $180,000 from an auto broker in Riverside. He paid even more to have it customized for his 7-foot-1 frame.
It was meant to be delivered to Baton Rouge, La., earlier this month but never arrived at its intended destination.
Instead, Shaq’s latest automobile purchase appears to be the “high-value vehicle” that is being investigated as stolen by the Lumpkin County Sheriff’s Office in Georgia and thought to be somewhere in Atlanta as of Monday morning.
In a news release last week, the Sheriff’s Office indicated that the vehicle had been “originally ordered through a California-based auto brokerage on behalf of a high-profile client.”
The New York Post was first to report that the client was O’Neal and the company was Riverside’s Effortless Motors. Ahmad Abdelrahman, owner of Effortless Motors, confirmed both facts to The Times during a phone interview.
Abdelrahman said his company had provided O’Neal with numerous customized vehicles over the last two years. He referred to the NBA and Louisiana State legend as “an amazing human being” and said that Effortless Motors was offering a $10,000 reward for information leading to the recovery of the vehicle.
“The last guy you want to steal a car from is Shaquille O’Neal, you know?” Abdelrahman said. “I’ve never had this happen to us before. We do all his vehicles. We’ve transported deals for him hundreds of times, and something like this is definitely insane.”
In a statement emailed to The Times on Monday, the Lumpkin County Sheriff’s Office said that its criminal investigations division “is actively investigating the theft of a high-value vehicle that was fraudulently removed from a business in the Dahlonega area earlier this month. Investigators have confirmed that the vehicle was transported from a local fabrication business under false pretenses and is believed to have been taken to the Atlanta metropolitan area.”
The department added that multiple search warrants had been obtained and executed as part of the investigation and several people of interest had been identified.
Abdelrahman told The Times that O’Neal’s Land Rover was customized locally by Effortless Motors but was supposed to have additional fabrication work done in Georgia before completing its trip to Louisiana.
After learning that the vehicle never arrived in Baton Rouge, Abdelrahman said, he contacted the company he had hired to ship the vehicle, FirstLine Trucking LLC, and was told that “their system was hacked.”
“They never got our order,” Abdelrahman said he was told, “and the hackers intercepted the vehicle and picked it up, and they vanished with the car.”
FirstLine Trucking did not immediately respond to messages from The Times. O’Neal has not publicly commented on the matter.
WASHINGTON — Betty Ford reportedly said that if the White House West Wing is the “mind” of the nation, then the East Wing — the traditional power center for first ladies — is the “heart.”
That “heart” beat for more than 100 years as first ladies and their teams worked from their East Wing offices on everything from stopping drug abuse and boosting literacy to beautifying and preserving the White House itself. It’s where they planned White House state dinners and brainstormed the elaborate themes that are a feature of the U.S. holiday season.
That history came to an end after wrecking crews tore down the wing’s two stories of offices and reception rooms this month. Gone is an in-house movie theater, as well as a covered walkway to the White House captured in so many photos over the years. An East Wing garden that was dedicated to Jacqueline Kennedy was uprooted, photographs show.
President Trump ordered the demolition as part of his still-to-be approved plan to build a $300-million ballroom.
The Republican former real estate developer has long been fixated on building a big White House ballroom. In 2010, he called a top advisor to then-President Obama and offered to build one. Trump made no secret of his distaste for the practice of hosting elegant White House state dinners underneath tents on the South Lawn. The Obama White House did not follow up on his request.
Now Trump, in his second term, is moving quickly to see his wish for what he calls a “great legacy project” become reality. He has tried to justify the East Wing tear-down and his ballroom plans by noting that some of his predecessors also added to the White House over the years.
First ladies and their staffs witnessed history in the East Wing, a “place of purpose and service,” said Anita McBride, who worked there as chief of staff to First Lady Laura Bush.
“Tearing down those walls doesn’t diminish the significance of the work we accomplished there,” McBride told the Associated Press.
McBride said she supports a ballroom addition because the “large and expensive tent option” that has been used when guest lists stretched longer than could be comfortably accommodated inside the White House “was not sustainable.” Tents damage the lawn and require additional infrastructure to be brought in, such as outdoor bathrooms and trolleys to move people around, especially in bad weather, she said.
Others feel differently.
Krish O’Mara Vignarajah, who was policy director for First Lady Michelle Obama, said the demolition was a “symbolic blow” to the East Wing’s legacy as a place where women made history.
“The East Wing was this physical space that had seen the role of the first lady evolve from a social hostess into a powerful advocate on a range of issues,” she said in an interview.
Here’s a look at some of the history that came out of the East Wing and the first ladies who spent time there:
Rosalynn Carter
She was the first first lady to have her own office in the East Wing. Most first ladies before Carter had worked out of the private living quarters on the second or third floor of the residence. Carter wanted a place where she could separate work and home.
“I always need a place to go that is private, where I don’t have to dress and don’t have to put on makeup,” she wrote in her memoir. “The offices of the staff of the first lady were always in the East Wing, and it seemed a perfect place for my office too.”
In her memoir, Carter wrote about her favorite route to her office in winter months. She walked through the basement, past laundry rooms and workshops and the bomb shelter kept for the president and his staff. The thermostats in the residence above had been turned down low because of President Carter’s energy conservation program, making the East Wing so cold that she was forced to wear long underwear.
The subterranean passageway shown to her by a residence staffer provided some relief. “With Jimmy’s energy conservation program, it was the only really warm place in the White House, with large steam pipes running overhead,” the first lady wrote.
Nancy Reagan
Photos from the East Wing in the early 1980s show the first lady meeting with staff, including her press secretary, Sheila Tate. For a generation of Americans, Nancy Reagan was most closely associated with a single phrase, “Just Say No,” for the anti-drug abuse program she made a hallmark of her White House tenure.
As Reagan once recalled, the idea for the campaign emerged during a 1982 visit with schoolchildren in Oakland. “A little girl raised her hand and said, ‘Mrs. Reagan, what do you do if somebody offers you drugs?’ And I said, ‘Well, you just say no.’ And there it was born.”
Hillary Clinton
Clinton bucked history by becoming the first first lady to insist that her office be in the West Wing, not the East Wing. In her memoir, Clinton wrote that she wanted her staff to be “integrated physically” with the president’s team. The first lady’s office relocated to what is now the Eisenhower Executive Office Building while Clinton was assigned an office on the second floor of the West Wing.
“This was another unprecedented event in White House history and quickly became fodder for late-night comedians and political pundits,” Clinton later wrote.
Laura Bush
Bush wrote in her memoir about what it was like at the White House after the Sept. 11 attacks. Most of her staff members, in their 20s, “kicked off their high heels and fled from the East Wing” after they were told to “run for their lives” when reports suggested the White House was a target, she wrote.
“Now they were being asked to come back to work in a building that everyone considered a target and for a presidency and a country that would be at war.”
Michelle Obama
Obama was the first Black woman to serve as first lady, becoming a global role model and style icon who advocated for improved child nutrition through her “Let’s Move” initiative. She and her staff in the East Wing also worked to support military families and promote higher education for girls in developing countries.
Photos from the time show Obama typing on a laptop during an online chat about school nutrition and the White House garden she created.
Melania Trump
Trump pushed the boundaries of serving as first lady by not living at the White House during the opening months of President Trump’s first term. She stayed in New York with their then-school-age son, Barron, so he wouldn’t have to switch schools midyear. When she eventually moved to the White House, she and her East Wing aides launched an initiative called “Be Best,” focused on child well-being, opioid abuse and online safety.
Jill Biden
Biden was the first first lady to continue a career outside the White House. The longtime community college English professor taught twice a week while serving as first lady. But in her East Wing work, she was an advocate for military families; her late father and her late son Beau served in the military. Biden also advocated for research into a cure for cancer and secured millions of dollars in federal funding for research into women’s health.
“Chainsaw Man — The Movie: Reze Arc,” the Japanese anime from Crunchyroll and Sony, claimed the top spot at the domestic box office this weekend, taking in an estimated $17.25 million, according to Comscore.
The R-rated movie, based on Tatsuki Fujimoto’s popular manga series, follows teen demon hunter Denji, who is betrayed by the yakuza and killed as he attempts to pay off the debts he inherited from his parents. His beloved chainsaw-powered dog Pochita makes a deal and sacrifices his life, fusing with Denji who is reborn with the ability to transform parts of his body into chainsaws.
“Chainsaw Man,” already a global hit, delivered a blow to Disney and 20th Century’s biopic “Springsteen: Deliver Me From Nowhere,” starring Jeremy Allen White, which came in a disappointing fourth place with an estimated $9.1 million.
Based on the 2023 Warren Zanes book of the same name, the film plumbs Springsteen’s life and career through the creative process, during the making of his 1982 acoustic album “Nebraska.”
The Times described the movie as a “thoughtful exploration of the creative process” that runs out of steam by the end, “meandering aimlessly into a depressive period of Springsteen’s, and it never quite regains its footing.”
In its second week out, the horror sequel “Black Phone 2” took the No. 2 slot, earning an estimated $13 million over the weekend, giving the Universal and Blumhouse movie a domestic total of $49.1 million.
Rounding out the third spot is Paramount’s romantic drama “Regretting You,” the latest film adaptation of novelist Colleen Hoover (“It Ends With Us”). Starring Allison Williams and Dave Franco, it opened to an estimated $12.5 million domestically.
For most of President Trump’s second term, Republicans have bent to his will. But in two Midwestern states, Trump’s plan to maintain control of the U.S. House in next year’s election by having Republicans redraw congressional districts has hit a roadblock.
Despite weeks of campaigning by the White House, Republicans in Indiana and Kansas say their party doesn’t have enough votes to pass new, more GOP-friendly maps. It’s made the two states outliers in the rush to redistrict — places where Republican-majority legislatures are unwilling or unable to heed Trump’s call and help preserve the party’s control on Capitol Hill.
Lawmakers in the two states still may be persuaded, and the White House push, which has included an Oval Office meeting for Indiana lawmakers and two trips to Indianapolis by Vice President JD Vance, is expected to continue. But for now, it’s a rare setback for the president and his efforts to maintain a compliant GOP-held Congress after the 2026 midterms.
Typically, states redraw the boundaries of their congressional districts every 10 years, based on census data. But because midterm elections typically tend to favor the party not in power — and the GOP holds a razor-thin majority in the House — Trump is pressuring Republicans to devise new maps that favor their candidates.
Democrats need to gain only three seats to flip House control, and the fight has become a bruising back-and-forth.
With new maps of their own, multiple Democratic states including California are moving to counter any gains made by Republicans. The latest, Virginia, is expected to take up the issue in a special session starting Monday.
Opposition to gerrymandering has long been a liberal cause, but Democratic states are now calling for redistricting in response to Trump’s latest effort, which they characterize as an unprecedented power grab.
Indiana
Indiana, whose U.S. House delegation has seven Republicans and two Democrats, was one of the first states on which the Trump administration focused its redistricting efforts this summer.
But a spokesperson for state Senate Leader Rodric Bray’s office said Thursday that the chamber lacks the votes to redraw Indiana’s congressional districts. With only 10 Democrats in the 50-member Senate, that means more than a dozen of the 40 Republicans oppose the idea.
Bray’s office did not respond to requests for an interview.
The holdouts may come from a few schools of thought. New political lines, if poorly executed, could make solidly Republican districts more competitive. Others say they believe it is simply wrong to stack the deck.
“We are being asked to create a new culture in which it would be normal for a political party to select new voters, not once a decade — but any time it fears the consequences of an approaching election,” state Sen. Spencer Deery, a Republican, said in a statement in August.
Deery’s office did not respond to a request for an interview and said the statement stands.
A common GOP argument in favor of new maps is that Democratic-run states such as Massachusetts have no Republican representatives, while Illinois has used redistricting for partisan advantage — a process known as gerrymandering.
“For decades, Democrat states have gerrymandered in the dark of the night,” Republican state Sen. Chris Garten said on social media. “We can no longer sit idly by as our country is stolen from us.”
Republican Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith, who would vote to break a tie in the state Senate if needed, recently called on lawmakers to forge ahead with redistricting and criticized the holdouts as not sufficiently conservative.
“For years, it has been said accurately that the Indiana Senate is where conservative ideas from the House go to die,” Beckwith said in a social media post.
Indiana is staunchly conservative, but its Republicans tend to foster a deliberate temperance. And the state voted for Barack Obama in 2008.
“Hoosiers, it’s very tough to to predict us, other than to say we’re very cautious,” former GOP state lawmaker Mike Murphy said. “We’re not into trends.”
The party divide reflects a certain independent streak held by voters in Indiana and Kansas and a willingness by some to break ranks.
Writing in the Washington Post last week, former Gov. Mitch Daniels, a Republican, urged Indiana lawmakers to resist the push to gerrymander. “Someone has to lead in climbing out of the mudhole,” he said.
“Hoosiers, like most Americans, place a high value on fairness and react badly to its naked violation,” he wrote.
Kansas
In Kansas, Republican legislative leaders are trying to bypass the Democratic governor and force a special session for only the second time in the state’s 164-year history. Gov. Laura Kelly opposes mid-decade redistricting and has suggested it could be unconstitutional.
The Kansas Constitution allows GOP lawmakers to force a special session with a petition signed by two-thirds of both chambers — also the supermajorities needed to override Kelly’s expected veto of a new map. Republicans hold four more seats than the two-thirds majority in both the state Senate and House. In either, a defection of five Republicans would sink the effort.
Weeks after state Senate President Ty Masterson announced the push for a special session, GOP leaders were struggling to get the last few signatures needed.
Among the holdouts is Rep. Mark Schreiber, who represents a district southwest of Topeka. He told the Associated Press that he “did not sign a petition to call a special session, and I have no plans to sign one.” Schreiber said he believes redistricting should be used only to reflect shifts in population after the once-every-10-year census.
“Redistricting by either party in midcycle should not be done,” he said.
Republicans would probably target U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids, the Democrat representing the mostly Kansas City-area 3rd Congressional District, which includes Johnson County, the state’s most populous. The suburban county accounts for more than 85% of the vote and has trended to the left since 2016.
Kansas has a sizable number of moderate Republicans, and 29% of the state’s 2 million voters are registered as politically unaffiliated. Both groups are prominent in Johnson County.
Republican legislators previously tried to hurt Davids’ chances of reelection when redrawing the district, but she won in 2022 and 2024 by more than 10 percentage points.
“They tried it once and couldn’t get it done,” said Jack Shearer, an 82-year-old registered Republican from suburban Kansas City.
But a mid-decade redistricting has support among some Republicans in the county. State Sen. Doug Shane, whose district includes part of the county, said he believes his constituents would be amenable to splitting it.
“Splitting counties is not unprecedented and occurs in a number of congressional districts around the country,” he said in an email.
Volmert and Hanna write for the Associated Press. Volmert reported from Lansing, Mich., and Hanna from Topeka, Kan. AP writer Heather Hollingsworth in Lenexa, Kan., contributed to this report.
WASHINGTON — Twenty-two days into the government shutdown, California Rep. Kevin Kiley spent an hour of his morning in Washington guiding a group of middle school students from Grass Valley through the empty corridors of the U.S. Capitol.
Normally, one of his staff members would have led the tour. But the Capitol is closed to all tours during the shutdown, unless the elected member is present. So the schoolchildren from Lyman Gilmore Middle School ended up with Kiley, a Republican from Rocklin, as their personal tour guide.
“I would have visited with these kids anyway,” Kiley said in his office after the event. “But I actually got to go on the whole tour of the Capitol with them as well.”
Kiley’s impromptu tour is an example of how members of California’s congressional delegation are improvising their routines as the shutdown drags on and most of Washington remains at a standstill.
Some are in Washington in case negotiations resume, others are back at home in their districts meeting with federal workers who are furloughed or working without pay, giving interviews or visiting community health centers that rely on tax credits central to the budget negotiations. One member attended the groundbreaking of a flood control project in their district. Others are traveling back and forth.
“I’ve had to fly back to Washington for caucus meetings, while the opposition, the Republicans, don’t even convene and meet,” Rep. Maxine Waters, a longtime Los Angeles Democrat, said in an interview. “We will meet anytime, anyplace, anywhere, with [House Speaker Mike] Johnson, with the president, with the Senate, to do everything that we can to open up the government. We are absolutely unified on that.”
The shutdown is being felt across California, which has the most federal workers outside the District of Columbia. Food assistance benefits for millions of low-income Californians could soon be delayed. And millions of Californians could see their healthcare premiums rise sharply if Affordable Care Act subsidies are allowed to expire.
For the California delegation, the fallout at home has become impossible to ignore. Yet the shutdown is in its fourth week with no end in sight.
In the House, Johnson has refused to call members back into session and prevented them from doing legislative work. Many California lawmakers — including Kiley, one of the few GOP lawmakers to openly criticize him — have been dismayed by the deadlock.
“I have certainly emphasized the point that the House needs to be in session, and that canceling a month’s worth of session is not a good thing for the House or the country,” Kiley said, noting that he had privately met with Johnson.
Kiley, who represented parts of the Sacramento suburbs and Lake Tahoe, is facing political uncertainty as California voters weigh whether to approve Proposition 50 on Nov. 4. The measure would redraw the state’s congressional districts to better favor Democrats, leaving Kiley at risk, even though the Republican says he believes he could still win if his right-leaning district is redrawn.
The Senate has been more active, holding a series of votes on the floor and congressional hearings with Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi and CIA Director John Ratcliffe. The chamber, however, has been unable to reach a deal to reopen the government. On Thursday, the 23rd day of the shutdown, the Senate failed to advance competing measures that would have paid federal employees who have been working without compensation.
The Republicans’ plan would have paid active-duty members of the military and some federal workers during the shutdown. Democrats backed a bill that would have paid all federal workers and barred the Trump administration from laying off any more federal employees.
“California has one of the largest federal workforces in the country, and no federal worker or service member should miss their paychecks because Donald Trump and Republicans refused to come to the table to protect Americans’ health care,” Sen. Alex Padilla said in a statement.
Working conditions get harder
The strain on federal employees — including those who work for California’s 54 delegation members — are starting to become more apparent.
Dozens of them have been working full time without pay. Their jobs include answering phone calls and requests from constituents, setting the schedules for elected officials, writing policy memos and handling messaging for their offices.
House Speaker Mike Johnson speaks about the shutdown at a news conference Thursday with other Republican House members.
(Eric Lee / Getty Images)
At the end of October, House staffers — who are paid on a monthly basis — are expected to miss their first paycheck.
Some have been quietly told to consider borrowing money from the U.S. Senate Federal Credit Union, which is offering a “government shutdown relief loan program” that includes a no-interest loan of up to $5,000 to be repaid in full after 90 days.
The mundane has also been disrupted. Some of the cafeterias and coffee carts that are usually open to staffers are closed. The lines to enter office buildings are long because fewer entrances are open.
The hallways leading to the offices of California’s elected officials are quiet, except for the faint sound of occasional elevator dings. Many of their doors are adorned with signs that show who they blame for the government shutdown.
“Trump and Republicans shut down the government,” reads a sign posted on the door that leads into Rep. Norma Torres’ (D-Pomona) office. “Our office is OPEN — WORKING for the American people.”
Rep. Ted Lieu, a Democrat from Torrance, posted a similar sign outside his office.
A sign is posted outside of the office of Rep. Ted Lieu, a California Democrat, in Washington on Wednesday.
(Ana Ceballos / Los Angeles Times)
Rep. Vince Fong, a Republican who represents the Central Valley, has been traveling between Washington and his district. Two weeks into the shutdown, he met with veterans from the Central Valley Honor Flight and Kern County Honor Flight to make sure that their planned tour of the Capitol was not disrupted by the shutdown. Like Kiley’s tour with the schoolchildren, an elected member needed to be present for the tour to go on.
“His presence ensured the tour could continue as planned,” Fong’s office said.
During the tour, veterans were able to see Johnson as well, his office said.
Shutdown highlights deep divisions
California’s congressional delegation mirrors the broader stalemate in Washington, where entrenched positions have kept both parties at a negotiation impasse.
Democrats are steadfast in their position that they will not agree to a deal unless Republicans extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits expiring at the end of the year, while Republicans are accusing Democrats of failing to reopen the government for political gain.
Kiley is one of the few Republicans who has called on Johnson to negotiate with Democrats on healthcare. Kiley said he thinks there is a “a lot of room to negotiate” because there is concern on both sides of the aisle if the tax credits expire.
“If people see a massive increase in their premiums … that’s not a good thing,” he said. “Especially in California, where the cost of living is already so high, and you’re suddenly having to pay a lot more for healthcare.”
Rep. Robert Garcia, the chair of the House Democratic Caucus, in a press event Wednesday with five other California Democrats talked about the need to fight for the healthcare credits.
Garcia, of Long Beach, said he recently visited a healthcare center in San Bernardino County that serves seniors with disabilities. He said the cuts would be “devastating” and would prompt the center to close.
“That’s why we are doing everything in our power to negotiate a deal that reopens the federal government and saves healthcare,” he said.
As the shutdown continues, many Democrats are digging their heels on the issue.
At an Oct. 3 event outside of Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center, for instance, Rep. Laura Friedman held a news conference with nurses and hospital staff and said she would not vote for a bill to reopen the government unless there is a deal on healthcare.
Last week, the Glendale Democrat said her position hasn’t changed.
“I will not support a shutdown deal that strips healthcare from tens of thousands of my constituents,” she said.
When Boxer retired in 2017, after serving 24 years in the Senate, she walked away from one of the most powerful and privileged positions in American politics, a job many have clung to until their last, rattling breath.
(Boxer tried to gently nudge her fellow Democrat and former Senate colleague, Dianne Feinstein, whose mental and physical decline were widely chronicled during her final, difficult years in office. Ignoring calls to step aside, Feinstein died at age 90, hours after voting on a procedural matter on the Senate floor.)
Last week, she drew a second significant challenger to her reelection, state Sen. Scott Wiener, who jumped into the contest alongside tech millionaire Saikat Chakrabarti, who’s been campaigning against the incumbent for the better part of a year.
Boxer, who turns 85 next month, offered no counsel to Pelosi, though she pushed back against the notion that age necessarily equates with infirmity, or political obsolescence. She pointed to Ted Kennedy and John McCain, two of the senators she served with, who remained vital and influential in Congress well into their 70s.
On the other hand, Boxer said, “Some people don’t deserve to be there for five minutes, let alone five years … They’re 50. Does that make it good? No. There are people who are old and out of ideas at 60.”
There is, Boxer said, “no one-size-fits-all” measure of when a lawmaker has passed his or her expiration date. Better, she suggested, for voters to look at what’s motivating someone to stay in office. Are they driven by purpose — and still capable of doing the job — “or is it a personal ego thing or psychological thing?”
“My last six years were my most prolific,” said Boxer, who opposes both term limits and a mandatory retirement age for members of Congress. “And if they’d said 65 and out, I wouldn’t have been there.”
Art Agnos didn’t choose to leave office.
He was 53 — in the blush of youth, compared to some of today’s Democratic elders — when he lost his reelection bid after a single term as San Francisco mayor.
“I was in the middle of my prime, which is why I ran for reelection,” he said. “And, frankly,” he added with a laugh, “I still feel like I’m in my prime at 87.”
A friend and longtime Pelosi ally, Agnos bristled at the ageism he sees aimed at lawmakers of a certain vintage. Why, he asked, is that acceptable in politics when it’s deplored in just about every other field of endeavor?
“What profession do we say we want bright young people who have never done this before to take over because they’re bright, young and say the right things?” Agnos asked rhetorically. “Would you go and say, ‘Let me find a brain surgeon who’s never done this before, but he’s bright and young and has great promise.’ We don’t do that. Do we?
“Give me somebody who’s got experience, “ Agnos said, “who’s been through this and knows how to handle a crisis, or a particular issue.”
“I thought that I had done a good job … and a number of people said, ‘Gee, it’s a pity that you can’t run for a third term,’ ” Wilson said as he headed to New Haven, Conn., for his college reunion, Yale class of ’55. “As a matter of fact, I agreed with them.”
Still, unlike Boxer, Wilson supports term limits, as a way to infuse fresh blood into the political system and prevent too many over-the-hill incumbents from heedlessly overstaying their time in office.
Not that he’s blind to the impetus to hang on. The power. The perks. And, perhaps above all, the desire to get things done.
At age 92, Wilson maintains an active law practice in Century City and didn’t hesitate — “Yes!” he exclaimed — when asked if he considered himself capable of serving today as governor, even as he wends his way through a tenth decade on Earth.
His wife, Gayle, could be heard chuckling in the background.
“She’s laughing,” Wilson said dryly, “because she knows she’s not in any danger of my doing so.”
1 of 2 | A portrait of President Donald Trump is draped on the front of the Department of Labor Headquarters in Washington, D.C., on August 30. On Friday, the department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics is expected to release the Consumer Price Index report. File Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo
Oct. 24 (UPI) — The Bureau of Labor Statistics is set to release the Consumer Price Index report Friday, two weeks after calling back economists and other employees to prepare the document despite the government shutdown.
The CPI report was originally scheduled to be published Oct. 15, but the shutdown delayed work. However, federal law requires the Social Security Administration to make its cost-of-living adjustment annually based on inflation from the third quarter.
That adjustment, known as COLA, must be published by Nov. 1, though it was originally expected to be released in mid-October.
The BLS called back economists and IT specialists to prepare the report the second week of October.
Economic experts expect Friday’s report will show that inflation has risen to its highest level since May 2024 — 3.1%, ABC News reported. The Federal Reserve‘s target annual inflation rate is 2%.
NBC News reported the report is expected to be released at 8:30 a.m. EDT.
Thursday marked the 23rd day the government was closed for business pending the passage of a stopgap funding bill, making it the second-longest federal shutdown in U.S. history. Friday is Day 24.
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La.,, speaks during a press conference on the 23rd day of the government shutdown at the U.S. Capitol on Thursday. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo
