pandemic

Two prominent Latino Democratic elected leaders are battling to become a new member of Congress. The race to represent a swath of Southern California that sweeps from southeastern Los Angeles cities to Long Beach will be among the state’s most contested intraparty battles, with the winner earning a perch that could become a springboard to higher office.

Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia and state Assemblymember Cristina Garcia are running to represent the new 42nd Congressional District, a Latino majority district that was created in December by the state’s redistricting commission as California loses a congressional seat for the first time in its history.

“It’s fair to say this is one of the more prominent Democrat-on-Democrat races” on the ballot, said Robb Korinke, a Democratic strategist who lives in Long Beach and is not aligned with either candidate. (Korinke was appointed by Robert Garcia to the city’s Technology and Innovation Commission in 2015.)

The new district combined pieces of the areas currently represented by Reps. Alan Lowenthal and Lucille Roybal-Allard to account for population loss in Los Angeles County without eliminating a district where Latinos could elect a candidate of their choice.

Roybal-Allard’s district, which included much of South Los Angeles, the Eastside and southeast L.A. County, was the most Latino in the nation. Lowenthal’s straddled Los Angeles and Orange counties. Both announced their retirements in December, creating a rare open seat to represent California in the U.S. House of Representatives. Robert Garcia and Cristina Garcia revealed their intentions to seek the seat soon after.

Cristina Garcia and Robert Garcia are both 44, the children of immigrants and the focus of national attention for their work. They are vying to be the most progressive in the heavily liberal district and will face off in a June 7 primary where the top two vote-getters, regardless of party, will advance to compete in the November general election. No prominent Republican is running in the race; the filing deadline is in March.

Robert Garcia’s home is in Long Beach’s Belmont Heights neighborhood, a collection of Craftsmans and beach cottages in walking distance of Colorado Lagoon and the restaurants and boutiques of the city’s 2nd Street entertainment district.

About 14 miles north, Cristina Garcia lives in Bell Gardens — not far from where she grew up — on a working-class block of modest houses with security bars on the windows and a backyard rooster that rousts the neighborhood.

The communities they live in reflect the district’s disparate constituents: Along the coast, affluent residents are focused on issues such as climate change and solar tax credits, while inland, lower-income workers worry that their children suffer higher asthma rates because of their proximity to pollution-spewing industries. Other parts of the district include Downey and Bellflower, the post-World War II tract homes of Lakewood, and Long Beach’s Art Deco airport, Cal State campus and port.

More than half of the new district’s residents are Latino citizens of voting age, but redistricting experts warn that turnout, particularly during nonpresidential elections, might disadvantage that electorate. Though Latinos live throughout the district, they are more concentrated in the southeastern Los Angeles cities.

“The core of the voting base is not in the area that is most heavily Latino and where Voting Act protections lie,” said Democratic strategist Paul Mitchell, referring to the landmark federal legislation that prohibits the disenfranchisement of minority communities.

Voters most likely to turn out are those who live in Long Beach, Lakewood and Signal Hill in the southern part of the district, which Mitchell and other strategists who are not aligned with any candidate in the race say benefits Robert Garcia.

The Peruvian-born, gay Latino mayor of Long Beach is widely considered the front-runner.

He has been endorsed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, U.S. Sen. Alex Padilla, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, Lowenthal and several unions. In the two weeks after he announced his campaign on Dec. 17, Garcia raised more than $323,000.

Additionally, at least two independent expenditure committees that can accept unlimited donations are supporting his bid — one funded by business and development interests and the other by LGBTQ activists and labor.

Garcia received national attention for his handling of the pandemic while grieving the loss of his parents to COVID-19. The New York Times called Long Beach “a Model for the Vaccine Rollout”; schools there reopened earlier than in much of California because the city, which has its own health department, prioritized vaccinating teachers early.

“I have proven that as mayor that I can lead a large complex organization and that it can be done in a way that has both common sense and is progressive,” said Garcia, who was among a handful of local officials given a prime-time speaking slot at the 2020 Democratic National Convention.

He has been accused of being too beholden to powerful donors and criticized for registering as a Republican in 2002 — less than a decade after Proposition 187, the GOP-backed ballot measure that sought to deny taxpayer-funded services to those in the country illegally.

He was a California youth coordinator for George W. Bush’s 2000 presidential campaign and founded the Long Beach Young Republicans in 2005. Garcia downplays his involvement in both, although media clips from the time quote him proudly playing a prominent role in the club. He also notes he was in high school during Proposition 187 and wasn’t involved in politics then.

Garcia said he followed his family’s lead in supporting the GOP because of their fondness for President Reagan, whose immigration policy provided the pathway for their citizenship.

He registered as a decline-to-state voter in 2007, two years before he won a City Council seat; and as a Democrat in 2010, four years before he successfully ran for mayor, according to the Los Angeles County voter registration database.

“People are allowed to grow and change,” and former Republicans shouldn’t be treated as “second-class Democrats,” Garcia said, pointing to his refusal to take corporate PAC money and support for single-payer healthcare. “What matters is your record.”

His rival, Cristina Garcia, says that his history concerns her.

“Everyone needs to run as a progressive these days. But is that what our record has shown?” she said. “How committed are you to all of this corridor, not just Long Beach?”

Garcia organized opposition to Proposition 187 while in high school. After college, she became a math teacher and moved away. Then her mother had a heart attack, prompting Garcia to return home.

She became involved in local politics, lost a City Council race in her hometown and became a vocal activist in the corruption scandal in neighboring Bell. That helped propel her to a 2012 victory in an Assembly race over a prominent fellow Democrat who vastly outspent her.

During her time in Sacramento, Garcia focused on environmental justice, notably the cleanup of the toxic lead-tainted soil near the shuttered Exide Technologies battery recycling plant in Vernon.

She was also dubbed the “tampon queen” or “period princess” — titles she embraced — because of her efforts such as making sure menstrual products are available for free at public schools in California.

The motivations that led her to run for the Legislature also made her decide to run for Congress, Garcia said.

“This region has been ignored for all my life. This is a front-line community,” she said, adding that elected officials give a lot of lip service to the concept of equity. “But how do we make sure we’re putting actions behind that?”

As the leader of the Assembly’s women’s caucus, Garcia was an outspoken advocate for victims when the #MeToo movement rocked the statehouse in 2017 and 2018. She was featured in a Time magazine photo collage of female leaders as part of its “Person of the Year” issue because of her work to hold lawmakers accountable for inappropriate sexual behavior.

Then she was accused of similar behavior. Two Assembly investigations found that, although she had violated the Assembly’s sexual harassment policy and was “overly familiar” with a staff member while intoxicated, her behavior was not sexual.

Garcia, while accepting blame for some allegations, noted that the more serious claims of groping were not substantiated.

In other controversies, she admitted to calling former Assembly Speaker John A. Perez a “homo,” though she said she didn’t mean it as a slur. (Perez has endorsed Robert Garcia.)

She was also accused by other Democrats of making a derogatory statement about Asian Americans during a debate about affirmative action. Cristina Garcia said her remark — reportedly, “This makes me feel like I want to punch the next Asian person I see in the face” — was taken out of context. She said she was trying to explain how the debate was creating unnecessary, “unhealthy” divisions among ethnic groups.

Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, whose Lakewood home is in the district, rebuked Garcia during her controversies. But he has endorsed her congressional run, as have Secretary of State Shirley Weber, Treasurer Fiona Ma, several state legislators and elected officials from southeast Los Angeles communities.

She did not begin fundraising until after the first of the year, so her campaign finances will not be known until spring.

“It’s not the first time I’ve been out-fundraised, and we have been successful,” she said, pointing to her 2012 Assembly race, in which she ran out of money two weeks before the election. Volunteers hand-delivered tens of thousands of fliers.

“We don’t need dollar for dollar,” she said. “We need enough dollars.”

It’s the city that’s proved irresistible for Chappell Roan and marked the finish line for fictional character Forrest Gump.

Santa Monica easily sits among the pantheon of iconic Southern California communities due to its combination of weather, beach backdrop, energy and friendliness.

Yet, that lore has been chipped away by sexual scandal, stagnation and, more recently, by another bubbling calamity.

My colleagues Salvador Hernandez and Richard Winton documented last week that Santa Monica is on the brink of financial crisis, with hundreds of millions of dollars in sex abuse settlements draining the city.

How Santa Monica fell into this predicament and the measures it may take, including cutbacks, to remedy this situation are the focal points of their article.

Let’s take a look at their reporting.

One man’s rampage

The city still faces 180 claims of sexual abuse by a former Santa Monica police dispatcher, a scandal that has already cost $229 million in settlement payouts.

Eric Uller, the former city dispatcher, preyed on children mostly in predominantly Latino neighborhoods of the city, often traveling in an unmarked police vehicle, or his personal SUV.

Uller had been hired and continued to work with children despite a 1991 background check that revealed he had been arrested as a teen for molesting a toddler he baby-sat, according to a report reviewed by The Times.

It wasn’t until 2018 that he would be arrested and charged. He died by suicide in November 2018.

On Tuesday, the city declared that it is in fiscal distress, a move that raised concerns among city workers that cuts, and perhaps layoffs, were coming.

“The financial situation the city is dealing with is certainly serious,” City Manager Oliver Chi said during Tuesday’s City Council meeting.

The worries among city workers reached such a peak that before Tuesday’s meeting Chi sent out an email to all city employees, trying to reassure them no layoffs were being planned.

Santa Monica’s recently approved budget for 2025-26 expects $473.5 million in revenue, but $484.3 million in costs, and city officials worry that the sexual abuse scandal could continue to put a drain on city coffers that are already reeling from an economic downturn.

More than just sex scandals

Current and former officials said the current financial woes were taking shape years ago.

“Santa Monica has failed to reign in unnecessary spending for a number of years, and we’ve known this financial crisis has been looming for a while,” said former Santa Monica Mayor Phil Brock, who lost his seat in the November election.

The city has faced a steep downturn in tourism and retail revenues, Brock said, along with several businesses that have left downtown and the promenade.

“You might have to right-side services, and look at areas where [the city] might be overstaffed,” he said. “I recommend we go back to basics.”

Staving off a panic

Santa Monica officials had initially been set to consider a “fiscal emergency,” a move that would have triggered certain measures by the city to address it, such as cuts and dipping into reserves.

But the declaration voted on Tuesday instead called for a declaration of “fiscal distress,” which Chi said was meant more for the city to communicate its financial situation with other agencies, get help in seeking grants and other funding, and as a tool to work on a “realignment of city operations.”

One city official, who asked not to be named because they weren’t cleared to speak on the record, said employees remained skeptical of what steps the city would take, and whether it could mean cuts to their pay or benefits.

What steps exactly the city is set to take remain unclear.

Whatever happens next in Santa Monica, our reporters will be there to document. As for now, check out the full article.

The week’s biggest stories

(Julie Leopo/Julie Leopo / For The Times)

Trump administration policies and their reactions

Jimmy Kimmel suspension and protest

Crime, courts and policing

Infrastructure needs and upgrades

More big stories

This week’s must-reads

More great reads

For your weekend

(Illustrations by Lindsey Made This; photograph by Saul Lopez)

Going out

Staying in

L.A. Affairs

Get wrapped up in tantalizing stories about dating, relationships and marriage.

Have a great weekend, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Andrew J. Campa, reporter
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

The Ellison era of Paramount was barely a month old when another major potential Hollywood merger appeared on the horizon.

Last week the share prices of Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery surged following reports that the former was preparing a bid to take over the latter with a mostly cash offer backed by the Larry Ellison family. This would come a remarkably short time after Skydance Media, the production company founded by Larry’s movie producer son David, combined with Paramount in an $8-billion deal.

A merger of Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery would have profound ramifications for the media and entertainment industry.

It would consolidate two of Hollywood’s oldest studios, Paramount and Warner Bros., in the most significant movie business merger since Walt Disney Co. devoured the entertainment assets of 21st Century Fox in 2019. The film industry has still not recovered from having the 20th Century Fox studio effectively taken off the board.

Additionally, a merger would put two mass-market streaming services, Paramount+ and HBO Max, under the same roof, probably leading to the eventual melding of the two. The Ellison clan’s move would also bring Warner Bros. Discovery’s linear TV networks, including CNN, HGTV, Food Network and TNT, together with Paramount’s Comedy Central, MTV and BET.

All of this would lead to substantial “synergies,” meaning cuts and layoffs, at a time when the job market in entertainment and corporate media is already fraught as the industry reconfigures itself. Paramount is currently bracing for thousands of layoffs as the new owners seek $2 billion in cost savings.

That’s not to mention the changes that would likely come if CNN came under the control of Ellison.

Larry Ellison, the Oracle Corp. billionaire who, depending on the day, is one of the world’s two wealthiest people alongside Elon Musk, is known to be Trump-friendly. The effects of the Ellison reign are already being felt at Paramount’s CBS News, where a former conservative think tank leader was recently appointed as ombudsman and where center-right and staunchly pro-Israel journalist Bari Weiss is expected to have an influential role after Ellison buys her digital media startup the Free Press.

So why is all this happening now, and why so quickly?

After all, the Wall Street Journal first reported Ellison’s interest in Warner Bros. Discovery on Sept. 11, just weeks after the Paramount-Skydance combo closed on Aug. 7.

In a sense, this scenario is unsurprising. Wall Street has been practically begging for another wave of consolidation in the media business, as the audience for theatrical movies shrinks, cord-cutting guts TV profits and more of viewers’ attention turns to YouTube, Netflix and TikTok. Most of the legacy entertainment companies don’t have the streaming firepower to compete. They need to combine to measure up.

But the timing is unexpected, and the unavoidable political considerations are particularly interesting.

With Trump in the White House, the political winds are clearly blowing in the Ellisons’ direction, after the Skydance and RedBird Capital team that bid for Paramount placated federal regulators with promises to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and to make CBS News more balanced, at least in eyes of Trump-appointed FCC Chairman Brendan Carr.

Paramount paid $16 million to settle Trump’s lawsuit over a “60 Minutes” Kamala Harris interview. Ellison and his team want to make a Warner Bros. deal happen when a friendly administration is in power.

Paramount has lately upped its spending, acquiring the rights to UFC (run by Trump friend Dana White), locking down “South Park” for Paramount+ and announcing a deal with Activision to make a “Call of Duty” movie.

Also of note is that Ellison’s group is coming in with an offer for the whole company even as Warner Bros. Discovery Chief Executive David Zaslav prepares to split the media giant into two firms: one with the studios, HBO and streaming businesses, and the other with the TV networks. Putting in a bid now could dissuade other potential buyers that might be interested in just one part.

Apple and Amazon have long been seen as potential bidders for Warner Bros. (Amazon already owns MGM), but it’s unlikely they would want a bunch of TV channels that are on the brink of being orphaned. Analysts have speculated that one reason for the proposed split was to make the studio and streaming assets more attractive to buyers by uncoupling them from the challenged pay-TV business. That split is expected to take place sometime in mid-2026.

Paramount’s bid could also preempt those that may want to do a deal, but are firmly on the Trump administration’s bad side. NBCUniversal owner Comcast Corp.’s CEO Brian Roberts has been the subject of disparaging Trump missives. Comcast is liberal network MSNBC’s parent company (for now). A regulatory review involving a perceived Trump enemy would likely not go well.

Of course, competitive bids could emerge anyway, for example, if a private equity player such as Apollo Global decided to get into the mix after previously expressing interest in Paramount through an unsuccessful team-up with Sony.

Big mergers in media and entertainment often fail, and they’re always disruptive.

Warner Bros. itself was involved in some of the most disastrous deals ever: AT&T’s purchase of Time Warner, and before that, the media company’s ill-fated marriage with AOL. Warner Bros. is now on a box-office hot streak, but that has come after years of Zaslav taking heat for killing projects such as “Batgirl.”

Such deals result in mass layoffs. Movie theater owners will most likely see darker days ahead as they’ll be minus yet another big supplier of blockbusters. Journalist Richard Rushfield, of the Ankler newsletter, demanded that somebody do something to stop it. We’ll see.

An Oracle scion buying two studios one after the other probably wasn’t the tech takeover of Hollywood that many people envisioned. Analysts long assumed that Apple would be the one to buy an entertainment powerhouse — maybe even Disney — despite having not shown any particular inclination for doing so. But though it’s not the Silicon Valley roll-up people anticipated, it may be the one they’re going to get.

Stuff we wrote

Numbers of the week

An anime film slayed its Hollywood competition at the box office over the weekend.

“Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba Infinity Castle,” already a big hit in Japan, was the highest-grossing movie domestically, beating new films “Downton Abbey: The Grand Finale,” “The Long Walk” and “Spinal Tap II: The End Continues.”

The film, distributed by Sony Pictures and Crunchyroll, opened with a better-than-expected $70 million in ticket sales from the U.S. and Canada, according to studio estimates, making it the biggest anime opening ever. It’s also the highest-grossing domestic debut of the year so far for an animated film.

Its global weekend for Sony, which owns the Crunchyroll anime brand and streaming service, totaled $132.1 million, which includes 49 international markets.

Including grosses from Japan, the movie’s worldwide tally has surpassed $450 million, according to Comscore.

The success of “Demon Slayer,” part of a long-running popular franchise and not to be confused with Netflix’s hit “KPop Demon Hunters,” is a relief to theater owners at a time when other genres are struggling, including superheroes, comedies and original animation. It’s the latest evidence of anime’s growing global clout.

Comedian Nate Bargatze didn’t shortchange the Boys & Girls Clubs of America, nor did he kill the Emmys telecast’s ratings on Sunday night.

The 77th Emmy Awards ceremony from the Peacock Theater in Los Angeles delivered an average of 7.42 million viewers on CBS, up 8% from last year’s audience for ABC.

Once among the most-watched live awards shows on television, the Emmy Awards audience declined dramatically over the last decade as most of the series celebrated no longer have the broad reach they did when traditional TV still dominated the culture, reports Stephen Battaglio.

But the audience level appears to have stabilized. Nielsen data shows that ratings for the Emmy Awards grew for the second consecutive year. The figure is the highest since 2021, when the telecast also aired on CBS.

HBO Max’s “The Pitt,” Apple TV+’s “The Studio” and Netflix’s “Adolescence” were big winners.

Film shoots

Finally …

Listen: The music of Le Tigre, just because it rocks. I just started the audiobook of Le Tigre and Bikini Kill frontwoman Kathleen Hanna’s memoir, “Rebel Girl.” Essential for punk rock fans.

There are certain first names that are also businesses that tap into the Angeleno collective unconsciousness and bring a smile of familiarity even to those who’ve never patronized the place.

Tommy’s Burgers, especially. Frederick’s of Hollywood. Phillippe the Original. Nate’n Al’s. Lupe’s and Lucy’s.

And, of course, Leonardo’s.

The nightclub chain with five spots across Southern California has entertained patrons since 1972. Its cumbia nights, Mexican regional music performances and a general air of puro pinche parri bridged the gap in the cultural life of Latino L.A. between the days of the Million Dollar Theater and today’s corrido tumbado stars.

Its namesake, Leonardo Lopez, came to Santa Monica from Mexico in the late 1960s, at age 17, to work as a dishwasher and proceeded to create a cultural empire.

On Friday, the Los Angeles City Council honored him in a celebration that reflected the joy and diversity — but especially the resilience — of Latino LA.

His family members count at least 40 businesses among them, including restaurants, banquet halls, concert venues, equestrian sports teams, political firms that work Southern California’s corridors of power, and the Pico Rivera Sports Arena, Southern California’s cathedral of Mexican horse culture. They were one of the main forces in the 2023 fight that carved out exemptions for traditional Mexican horse competitions such as charrería and escaramuza when the L.A. City Council banned rodeos.

“Our family is like a pyramid, with every person supporting each other at every level,” said Leonardo’s son, Fernando. “And my dad is at the very top.”

A resplendent celebration

He and about 40 other relatives went to Friday’s City Council meeting to see their patriarch recognized. They strode through City Hall’s august corridors in charro outfits and Stetsons, berets and hipster glasses, leopard-print blouses and sharp ties — the diversity of the Mexican American experience in an era where too many people want to demonize them.

Leonardo was the most resplendent of them all, sporting an outfit with his initials embroidered on his sleeves and his back. A silver cross on his billowing red necktie gleamed as much as his smile.

“You work and work and work to hope you do something good, and it’s a blessing when others recognize you for it,” Lopez told me in Spanish as we waited in a packed conference room for the council meeting to start. He gestured to everyone. “But this is the true blessing in my life.”

Sitting at the head of a long table, Lopez doted on his grandson but also greeted well-wishers like Esbardo Carreño. He’s a historian who works for the government of Durango, the state where Lopez was born in 1950.

“Don Leonardo came with a bigger vision than others,” Carreño said in Spanish. “But he never left his people back home,” noting how Lopez has funded restoration projects in Durango’s eponymous capital, a welcome arch at the entrance to the entrepreneur’s hometown of La Noria and more.

“My tío and dad and my other tíos made it in L.A. because there was no Plan B,” said Lopez’s nephew, Lalo Lopez. He was shepherding guests toward his uncle while also talking up a fundraiser later that evening at the Sports Arena for L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath. “That’s a lesson all us kids learned fast.”

Spanish-language reporters pulled Don Leonardo into the City Hall press room for an impromptu conference, where he talked about his career and offered child-rearing advice.

“Get them busy early,” he joked, “so they don’t have that free time to do bad things.”

Lopez motioned to Fernando and his son Fernando Jr. — both wearing charro suits — to join him at the podium.

“I got them to follow me” to be proud of their Mexican heritage. “Today, it’s the reverse — now I follow them!”

Councilmember Monica Rodriguez then grabbed Lopez. The meeting was about to start.

Always the sharpest-dressed member of the council, Rodriguez didn’t disappoint with a taupe-toned tejana that perfectly complemented her gray-streaked hair, black-framed glasses and white outfit.

Her introduction of Lopez was even better.

“His spaces have created a place where we [Latinos] can be authentically who we are,” said Rodriguez, who represents the northeast San Fernando Valley. She praised Lopez’s life’s work as an important balm and corrective “at a time especially when our community is under attack.”

“I want to thank you, Don Leonardo, for being that example of how we can really be the force of resilience and strength in the wake of adversity,” the council member concluded. “It’s a reminder to everyone who’s feeling down that we will persevere.”

Lopez offered a few words of thanks in English, tipping his sombrero to council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, who had previously honored him in 2017 when each council member recognized an immigrant entrepreneur in their district.

Harris-Dawson returned the respect.

“You are such angels in this city — L.A. is not L.A. without the Lopez family,” he said, noting how two Leonardo’s stood in his South L.A. district and “y’all never left” even as other live music venues did. Harris-Dawson told attendees how the Lopez family had long catered jazz festivals and youth sports leagues without ever asking for anything in return.

“The only time I’ve seen you closed was that weekend of the terrible ICE raids,” Harris-Dawson said. “And you all were back the next week ready to go and you had security out. … Thank you all for treating us like family.”

The Lopez clan gathered around their jefe at the podium for one final photo op. Doctors and contractors, retirees and high schoolers: an all-American family and as Angeleno as they come. See ustedes soon at — where else? — Leonardo’s.

Today’s top stories

Colorado River water flows in the Central Arizona Project aqueduct beside a neighborhood in Phoenix.

(Kelvin Kuo / Los Angeles Times)

The dwindling Colorado River

• A group of experts say Western states urgently need to cut water use to avert a deepening crisis on the Colorado River.
• The river’s major reservoirs are less than one-third full, and another dry winter would push reservoirs toward critically low levels.
• They say the Trump administration should act to ensure reductions in water use.

Trump’s $1.2-billion call to remake UCLA

• A Times review of the Trump administration’s settlement proposal to UCLA lays out sweeping demands on numerous aspects of campus life.
• The government has fined UCLA nearly $1.2 billion to settle allegations of civil rights violations.
• Hiring, admissions and the definitions of gender are among the areas the Department of Justice seeks to change.

A looming fight over vaccines

• After Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ousted vaccine experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, California is now making its own vaccine guidance.
• The CDC is no longer a trusted source for vaccine guidance, some experts now say.
• California and medical groups are urging more people to get vaccinated against COVID-19 compared with the Trump administration.

Your utility bills

The Emmys were last night

What else is going on

Commentary and opinions

• There will be cooling in all L.A. rentals by 2032. Here’s how contributors Sophia M. Charan and Hye Min Park suggest you survive the heat until then.
• Wait, what happened to saving the children? California columnist Anita Chabria points out that California congressmen dodge the issue.

This morning’s must-read

Other must-reads

For your downtime

(Amir Mrzae / For The Times)

Going out

Staying in

And finally … your photo of the day

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Today’s great photo is from Times photographer Allen J. Schaben of ctor Kathy Bates on the red carpet at the 77th Primetime Emmy Awards. See Allen’s photos from the awards show here.

Have a great day, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Andrew Campa, Sunday writer
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

When the thought of truly delicious pancakes bubbles up, various trips and experiences flood my mind and activate my hunger receptors.

I’m transported back aboard the Amtrak booze train heading to San Diego for a Chargers game, where I have to make time for Richard Walker’s Pancake House. Their famed, often still sizzling and flaky, gigantic baked apple pancake is the embodiment of flapjack largesse.

There’s the homespun goodness of a sweet cream pancake volcano at the Black Bear Diner, a common haunt when I visit family in the Inland Empire. And can you visit The Grove for breakfast without trying Du-Par’s heavenly and buttery pancakes?

Pancakes own a special place in many of our hearts, partly because they are comforting, filling and customizable.

Food writer Khushbu Shah created a list of 11 pancake spots throughout Los Angeles that includes classics and some new spots.

We’ll dip into that grouping and pull out some favorites where new memories can be created.

Breakfast by Salt’s Cure (Santa Monica)

The oatmeal griddle cakes from Breakfast by Salt’s Cure.

(Andrea D’Agosto)

I almost hesitate to call these pancakes, and in fact, the official name on the menu is “Oatmeal Griddle Cakes.”

Made from a base of oat flour and cinnamon sugar, these thin-yet-hearty griddle cakes taste like a deeply gooey, slightly underbaked oatmeal cookie. There is absolutely no maple syrup or syrup of any kind available, but you won’t need any if you are careful to get the scoops of cinnamon molasses butter into every nook and cranny.

Café Telegrama (Hollywood)

(Stephanie Breijo / Los Angeles Times)

What sets the pancakes at Café Telegrama apart from the rest of the pancakes in Los Angeles are their iconic crispy edges.

Perfectly caramelized, they are the result of cooking the pancakes for at least seven minutes in a generous pool of nutty brown butter. The edges are in sharp contrast to the rest of the pancake, which is quite tender thanks to the ricotta in the batter.

They arrive stacked two to a plate, swimming in maple syrup, and topped with a generous amount of house-made blueberry compote.

The Griddle Cafe (Hollywood Hills West)

Bigger isn’t always better, but it’s impossible not to be delighted by the truly massive, dinner plate-sized pancakes that show up either two or three to a stack at this legendary Sunset Boulevard breakfast spot.

While the classic buttermilk pancakes are solid, this is not the place to hold back — you might as well really go for it with one of the diner’s over-the-top novelty options.

The best?

Either the Golden Ticket, pancakes stuffed with brown sugar-baked bananas, caramel, walnuts and streusel; or the Black Magic, a stack of pancakes brimming with crispy yet soft crushed Oreo cookies and a mountain of whipped cream. Just be ready to nap afterward.

Yang’s Kitchen (Alhambra)

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

It’s worth braving the weekend brunch lines at this beloved Alhambra institution for the giant cornmeal pancakes.

The team at Yang’s whips together cornmeal from Grist & Toll with mochiko rice flour from Koda Farms to create a pancake that is gently chewy with deep savory notes from the cornmeal.

There is no maple syrup: Instead, they come topped with fresh whipped cream, seasonal fruit and condensed milk for drizzling. They might not be traditional by any means, but it’s always worth ordering a stack for the table.

For more, check out the full story.

The week’s biggest stories

(Richard Shotwell / Invision / AP)

Emmys and entertainment news

Charlie Kirk slaying

Children and education

Sports programs looking to reboot

More big stories

This week’s must-reads

More great reads

For your weekend

(Illustrations by Lindsey Made This; photograph by Chris Pizzello / Invision / AP)

Going out

Staying in

L.A. Affairs

Get wrapped up in tantalizing stories about dating, relationships and marriage.

Have a great weekend, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Andrew J. Campa, reporter
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

“The Conjuring: Last Rites” gave movie theaters a needed jolt over the weekend with a much better than expected domestic opening of $84 million and a global take of $194 million, a franchise best and the latest success for Warner Bros. and its New Line Cinema banner.

But it will take more than supernatural scares to ease Hollywood’s jitters after a weak summer movie season that exposed more challenges facing the traditional film industry.

Ticket sales fell slightly from last year’s summer season, which for the movie business spans from the first weekend of May through Labor Day. Movies grossed $3.67 billion in the U.S. and Canada this summer, down 0.2% from the same period in 2024, according to data from Comscore. More importantly, it’s still down from the pre-pandemic norm of about $4 billion, a disappointing result given that summer typically accounts for about 40% of annual grosses.

If you account for inflation, it’s even worse. Adjusting for today’s dollars, summer revenue was down 34% from 2019, meaning theater attendance was weaker than the topline revenue stats suggest. With actual attendance still impaired compared with the days before COVID-19, there’s a growing sense that the industry’s fears have come true: Audience habits have changed, and they’re not going back.

The problem wasn’t a lack of movies compared with last year. The effects of the 2023 writers’ and actors’ strikes have dissipated by now.

Rather, the issue was a shortage of big studio movies that audiences really wanted to see. The biggest release was Disney’s “Lilo & Stitch” remake, which collected $424 million domestically. There was nothing like last summer’s “Inside Out 2” or “Deadpool & Wolverine,” which both generated more than $600 million in North America.

The problem of the shrinking overall audience could be due to multiple factors.

In particular, theater owners blame the shrinking of the theatrical window — the period of time a new movie is held back from home video after its big screen debut — to roughly 45 days from the previously standard 90 days. Audiences know they don’t have to wait long before a new movie becomes available in their living room. That encourages them to save their money for only the biggest, Imax-worthy spectacles. The growing influence of Imax and premium large format screening may exacerbate that trend, as audiences choose between paying extra for a better “experience,” or just waiting to see “F1 The Movie” on their couch.

There were plenty of sequels and reboots, but those often performed worse than prior installments, indicating that audiences were less enthusiastic about seeing another Marvel movie or rampaging dino feature. “Jurassic World: Rebirth” made $861 million globally, which was big, but still the series’ smallest outing since 2001’s “Jurassic Park III.” Warner Bros.’ “Superman” collected a healthy $614 million, but that was still less than 2013’s “Man of Steel” ($670 million).

Superheroes didn’t come flying to the rescue. Marvel’s “Thunderbolts” put up a modest $382 million while “The Fantastic Four: First Steps” opened strong but collapsed in subsequent weeks for a total of $511 million worldwide, a middling outcome for the Disney-owned comic book universe. No wonder studios are increasingly looking at video games as a source of intellectual property for movie adaptations, as my colleague Sam Masunaga recently wrote. After all, Generation Alpha’s list of favorite franchises is dominated by video game-related titles, according to a recent National Research Group report.

Another threat emerged as international audiences appeared to sour on some U.S. blockbusters. “Superman” and “Fantastic Four” grossed less abroad than they did at home, which is an unusual result for big-budget action flicks.

It’s not clear why, but some explanations have been floated. China is no longer the reliable source of revenue that it once was, as audiences increasingly favor local-language productions. Some speculate that America’s diminished standing abroad has contributed to audience fatigue. The quintessential Americanness of the Superman brand is also widely believed to be a factor in that film’s underperformance outside the U.S.

Original animation struggled, as Pixar fielded its worst opening weekend ever with “Elio.” To add insult to injury, Sony Pictures Animation’s “KPop Demon Hunters” became a cultural phenomenon, but only after first launching on Netflix.

The rest of the year has some major releases, but they’re not expected to bring the business back to full strength. September is usually a slow month for moviegoing, “Last Rites” notwithstanding. Disney’s “Zootopia 2,” Universal’s “Wicked: For Good” and James Cameron’s “Avatar: Fire and Ash” will probably do huge business. But while individual films can do well, the overall picture isn’t so rosy.

Stuff we wrote

Number of the week

Artificial intelligence company Anthropic agreed to pay $1.5 billion to authors and publishers to settle a lawsuit that accused the company of illegally using written work to train its chatbot Claude.

The topline figure is the largest known settlement for a copyright case, equating to $3,000 per work for an estimated 500,000 books, The Times’ Queenie Wong reported.

But the case was not an outright win for authors worried about AI being trained on their published material. Far from it.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup of San Francisco ruled in June that Anthropic’s use of the books to train the AI models constituted “fair use,” meaning it wasn’t illegal. Fair use is a doctrine that allows for the limited use of copyrighted materials without permission in certain cases, such as teaching, criticism and news reporting. It’s an essential part of AI companies’ defense against copyright infringement claims.

The real problem for Anthropic was that the startup had illegally downloaded millions of books through online libraries. So the piracy was the true sin in this case, not the training of AI on books without permission.

Anthropic pirated at least 7 million books from Books3, Library Genesis and Pirate Library Mirror, online libraries containing unauthorized copies of copyrighted books, to train its software, according to the judge. However, it also bought millions of print copies in bulk and scanned them into digital and machine-readable forms, which Alsup found to be in the bounds of fair use.

Film shoots

Finally …

Listen: Zach Top’s “Ain’t in It for My Health,” for throwback country goodness.

Read: Amy Nicholson’s review of “The Wizard of Oz” at Sphere in Las Vegas.

The security of former Vice President Kamala Harris, once the duty of the U.S. Secret Service, has been thrown into flux, again, days after President Trump canceled her federal protection.

My colleague Richard Winton broke the news Saturday morning that the Los Angeles Police Department, which was assisting the California Highway Patrol in providing security for Harris, has been pulled off the detail after internal criticism of the arrangement.

Let’s jump into what Winton wrote about this quickly-evolving story.

What happened to Harris’ Secret Service protection?

Former vice presidents usually get Secret Service protection for six months after leaving office, while former presidents are given protection for life.

But before his term ended in January, President Joe Biden signed an order to extend Harris’ protection to July 2026.

Aides to Harris had asked Biden for the extension. Without it, her security detail would have ended last month, according to sources.

Trump ended that arrangement as of Monday.

How did the CHP and LAPD get involved?

Winton wrote Aug. 29 that California officials planned to utilize the CHP as her security detail. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who was required to sign off on such CHP protection, would not confirm the arrangement. “Our office does not comment on security arrangements,” said Izzy Gordon, a spokesperson for Newsom. “The safety of our public officials should never be subject to erratic, vindictive political impulses.”

Fox 11 broke the story of the use of LAPD officers earlier this week and got footage of the security detail outside Harris’ Brentwood home from one of its news helicopters.

On Thursday, Winton verified that LAPD Metropolitan Division officers designated for crime suppression had joined the security detail.

The effort was described as “temporary” by Jennifer Forkish, L.A. police communications director.

Roughly a dozen or more officers have begun working to protect Harris.

Sources not authorized to discuss the details of the plan said the city would fund the security while Harris was hiring her own security in the near future.

Controversy ensued

The Los Angeles Police Protective League, the union that represents rank-and-file LAPD officers, lambasted the move.

The union did not address Harris as a former vice president, nor as California senator or state attorney general, in its official rebuke.

“Pulling police officers from protecting everyday Angelenos to protect a failed presidential candidate who also happens to be a multi-millionaire, with multiple homes and who can easily afford to pay for her own security, is nuts,” its board of directors said.

The statement continued: Mayor Karen Bass “should tell Governor Newsom that if he wants to curry favor with Ms. Harris and her donor base, then he should open up his own wallet because LA taxpayers should not be footing the bill for this ridiculousness.”

What’s next?

The CHP has not indicated how the LAPD’s move would alter its arrangement with the former vice president or said how long it will continue.

The curtailing of Secret Service protection comes as Harris is going to begin a book tour next month for her memoir, “107 Days.” The tour has 15 stops, which include visits to London and Toronto. The book title references the short length of her presidential campaign.

For more info, check out the full story.

The week’s biggest stories

LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell

(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)

Crime, courts and policing

Trump administration policies and reactions

Traffic and transportation

Fire and nature

More big stories

This week’s must-reads

More great reads

For your weekend

(Illustrations by Lindsey Made This; photograph by Hannah Pilkes)

Going out

Staying in

L.A. Affairs

Get wrapped up in tantalizing stories about dating, relationships and marriage.

Have a great weekend, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Andrew J. Campa, reporter
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

In a couple of months, California voters will have the opportunity to reshape our state’s political map and, perhaps, tilt the balance of power nationally from red to blue.

Gov. Gavin Newsom, who gained recent national attention for his CAPS LOCK social media posturing, spearheaded a bold overhaul of California’s congressional map in response to Texas Republicans’ efforts to add five GOP seats to the House of Representatives.

The redistricting effort, presented at the ballot as Proposition 50, has been blasted by Republicans, but its ultimate fate will be decided by voters on Nov. 4

Times reporters and colleagues Hailey Wang, Vanessa Martínez and Sandhya Kambhampati dissected what the changes could mean.

Here’s some of their analysis.

Methodology behind the analysis

To get a sense of how the proposed maps might alter the balance of power in Congress, The Times used results from the 2024 presidential election to calculate the margin of victory between Democrats and Republicans in the redrawn districts.

In some cases, districts were split apart and stitched together with more liberal areas. In one area, lines have been redrawn with no overlap at all with their current boundary.

As a result, four formerly Republican-leaning swing districts would tilt slightly Democratic, and two others would shift more heavily toward the left. Four out of the five remaining Republican strongholds would become even darker red under the proposed map.

All told, the new maps could help Democrats earn six seats.

We’ll examine two Southern California districts from their list.

41st District: Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Corona)

Rep. Ken Calvert’s 41st District, long centered in the competitive western Inland Empire, would be eliminated and completely redrawn in Los Angeles County. The district would transform from a swinging GOP-leaning seat into one where Democrats would hold a 14-point advantage.

Parts of the new 41st would be carved out of the current 38th District, represented by Democrat Linda Sánchez. That change shifts some of Sánchez’s Democratic base into the new 41st district, making it more favorable to Democrats while leaving the 38th slightly less blue.

At the same time, the Latino share of the population would rise, further bolstering the Democrat‘s strength in the proposed district. The new 41st seat would become a majority-minority district. The redistricting proposal includes 16 majority-minority districts; the same number as the current map.

A section of the current 41st district would be added to Anaheim Hills’ Republican Young Kim’s 40th District. The reshaped 40th District would move 9.7 points to the right — the biggest rightward shift among Republican-held districts.

48th District: Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Bonsall)

In 2024, voters in the 48th District reelected Republican representative Darrel Issa by 19 points, while his district swung to Trump by 15 points.

But the proposed lines would shift Republican voters into a neighboring district in favor of bluer voters from the Coachella Valley, giving Democrats a new edge.

The district’s demographics would also change, with a larger share of Latino voters. As a result, a safe Republican seat would become a swing district, where Democrats would hold a narrow 3-point advantage.

The proposed 48th District includes Palm Springs, a liberal patch that was previously in the 41st District.

What the changes could mean

The analysis found the redistricting effort, which will go to voters on Nov. 4, could turn 41 Democratic-leaning congressional districts into 47.

Democrats currently hold 215 seats in the House, and Republicans have 220. The shift could be enough to threaten the GOP’s narrow majority.

For more on the analysis, check out the full article.

The week’s biggest stories

(Evan Vucci / Associated Press)

COVID and healthcare policies

Crime, courts and policing

Transportation and traffic

Entertainment and media news

More big stories

This week’s must-reads

More great reads

For your weekend

(Etienne Laurent/For The Times)

Going out

Staying in

Have a great weekend, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Andrew J. Campa, reporter
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

When billionaire casino mogul and top Republican donor Steve Wynn was accused of a decades-long pattern of sexual misconduct in the midst of the #MeToo movement, elected officials across the country quickly distanced themselves from him.

The news broke in January 2018, and some Republicans immediately called on their colleagues to return donations from Wynn, who was accused of pressuring employees to perform sex acts.

Sen. Susan Collins told CNN, “I don’t even think it’s a close call to return the money.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham also chimed in: “We should do of ourselves what we ask of the Democratic Party. So I don’t think we should have a double standard for ourselves.”

Within months, Wynn started to donate again, and by 2020, he was once again a major GOP donor, giving millions of dollars to conservative super PACs, President Trump’s reelection campaign, candidates and state Republican parties across the nation.

This year, Wynn gave more than three-quarters of a million dollars to a joint fundraising committee aimed at helping Republicans retake control of the U.S. House of Representatives, and that group gave donations to dozens of incumbents across the country, including nearly every member of California’s Republican delegation to Congress.

The recipients include Reps. Mike Garcia of Santa Clarita and David Valadao of Hanford, whose seats will be hotly contested in next year’s midterm elections because they are key to GOP hopes to retake control of the House.

Elections experts said Wynn’s reemergence in the political arena and the candidates’ willingness to take his money were unsurprising, and unlikely to move voters.

“In politics in general, I think the hope of people who have been accused of wrongdoing is that we’re all amnesiacs. And eight times out of 10 we are,” said Jessica Levinson, an election law professor at Loyola Law School. “Republicans in tight races — very few people are going to vote against them because they got money from a PAC that got money from Steve Wynn.

“At this point, because we’re not in that cycle of breaking news about Steve Wynn, I think it’s probably a pretty reasonable calculation, one, because time has faded and two, because it’s not a direct contribution.”

Wynn donated $771,900 — the maximum allowed — to the Take Back the House 2022 joint fundraising committee on March 26, according to the Federal Election Commission. From that day through the end of the month, the committee, which is controlled by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, sent $5,800 max-out donations to more than 40 members of Congress, with FEC documentation citing Wynn as the source of the money.

The California Republicans who received these donations are Reps. Devin Nunes of Tulare, Darrell Issa of Bonsall, Doug LaMalfa of Richvale, Tom McClintock of Elk Grove, Michelle Steel of Seal Beach, Valadao, Garcia and McCarthy. Rep. Young Kim of La Habra also received a donation from Take Back the House 2022 on March 31, but her FEC filing does not identify the donor.

McCarthy was the only one to respond to requests for comment.

Asked about the new donations, McCarthy said in a statement, “Steve Wynn is one of the great innovators in the history of modern capitalism. I thank him for his continued support, and I look forward to working with him to retake the House Majority.”

In 2018, McCarthy reportedly gave a Wynn contribution to charity in the aftermath of the sexual misconduct allegations.

Three years ago, a Wall Street Journal investigation found that Wynn had engaged in sexual misconduct for decades. Among the cases cited was one by a casino hotel manicurist who claimed Wynn forced her to have sex with him and who received a $7.5-million settlement, the Journal reported.

Wynn, now 79, responded to the investigation by denying that he had ever assaulted any woman and by blaming his ex-wife for airing the allegations as she sought to revise their divorce settlement.

Though Wynn was never charged criminally, the fallout was severe. He resigned as the head of his namesake company. Gambling regulators in Nevada and Massachusetts fined Wynn Resorts tens of millions of dollars for its executives covering up or ignoring Wynn’s alleged behavior. Wynn agreed to pay Wynn Resorts $20 million to partly settle shareholder lawsuits against the company.

Wynn, who previously had supported Democrats including President Obama, stepped down as finance chair of the Republican National Committee. His name was stripped off a commons at the University of Pennsylvania, his alma mater where he once served as a trustee.

Among the politicians who returned or donated Wynn contributions were Sens. Jeff Flake of Arizona, Rob Portman of Ohio, Dean Heller of Nevada, Tim Scott of South Carolina, and then-House Speaker Paul Ryan of Wisconsin.

McCarthy is in line to take the speaker’s gavel if Republicans win control of the House next year. His Take Back the House 2022 is a joint fundraising committee of 59 members of Congress and 20 other political committees that raised nearly $22 million in the first quarter of this year, according to the Federal Election Commission. Wynn was one of 11 people who maxed out to the committee.

Wynn’s attorney did not respond to a request for comment, but he told the Associated Press that Wynn “has the same rights and entitlements as any other private citizen in the United States of America.”

Four of the Californians who received donations from the PAC — Garcia, Valadao, Steel and Kim — are among the 22 incumbent Republicans targeted by Democrats in the 2022 election. The four seats are in traditional Republican strongholds but their demographics are changing. Mirroring a national trend, these suburban districts have grown increasingly competitive as their residents have grown more diverse. Democrats won the four seats during the blue wave in 2018; Republicans flipped them back last year.

An added uncertainty is redistricting because California lost a congressional seat based on the latest census report. Garcia’s northern Los Angeles County seat, which he won by 333 votes in November, may shift closer to Los Angeles when the redistricting commission redraws the maps, a move that would make it more Democratic.

It’s been more than 2,000 days since Covid-19 appeared in late 2019 growing to more than 700 million cases and at least 7 million deaths globally. Like many other people who were infected by Covid-19, I have long thought about its origins and where we go next.

As someone who had been a lawyer admitted to practice before the Supreme Courts of the US, New York and Massachusetts, and as chief legal counsel of President Jimmy Carter’s White House Conference on Families, looking at Covid-19 from an international law perspective by the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt”, it’s clear to me that no country has proven where the disease originated.

Under international law the principle of onus probandi,serious matters like lethal modalities such as nuclear, chemical and biological weapons or allegations of lethal pathogenic origins require the highest standard of “proof beyond a reasonable doubt”. It is also why the complaining party, not the accused, that bears the burden of proof.

That’s also why the WHO Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens explicitly requires the proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” gold standard, not the lower “preponderance of the evidence” test that something is merely more likely true than not. And it’s why the WHO panel operates under the legal principle of in dubio pro reo, a presumption of innocence until the accusing party proves otherwise.

Applying these standards, the required burden of proof level has not been met in even one case as the US and some allies have falsely accused Wuhan as being the origin of Covid-19.

China, in fact met its primary obligations under the WHO International Health Regulations, including timely notification to WHO of unusual pneumonia cases in December, 2019; sharing viral genome sequencing with WHO in December, 2019; and facilitating the WHO-China joint investigation during 2021.

I also find it unpersuasive that the “beyond a reasonable doubt” test was met since there were multiple independent reports, including wastewater and antibody blood testing of varying levels of credibility, of Covid-19  being present in Europe and the Americas prior to December 1, 2019. Since there is substantial evidence that Covid-19 appeared earlier on in numerous venues far beyond China, it has to be a case of “where there’s smoke, there’s fire”. For example, consider:

In Italy, multiple studies based on the presence of antibodies in blood samples found Covid-19 as early as October, 2019.

In France, the analysis of thousands of blood samples detected Covid-19 antibodies in 13 cases from November, 2019 to January, 2020.

In the Americas, signs of Covid-19 based on the presence of antibodies in blood samples were found in Brazil in November, 2019 and in the US in early December, 2019.

To me, however, the most convincing evidence is that after so much time has passed and so much money has been expended, no Western intelligence agency has been able to find Covid-19s origin with a high level of confidence; therefore not “beyond a reasonable doubt”.

Beginning with 2020, without the legal proof threshold being met, a handful of lawsuits outside the US, were filed against China over Covid-19 . All have been unsuccessful. In the US, a greater number of cases yielded only two Pyrric victories among numerous defeats whose massive judgments in cases that are mere political theater, clogged an understaffed, overburdened  judicial system, but not one cent will ever be collected because under international law, these judgments will be uncollectable. There are several reasons for these disparities.

Legally, other nations have more respect for the longstanding doctrine of sovereign immunity governing one nation or its political subdivisions suing another. Consequently, such cases are also more difficult to file there.  The doctrine, which must be music to Donald Trump’s ears, can be traced back to the English common law doctrine: rex non potest peccare or “the king can do no wrong”.

The US is the most litigious country globally, having the highest number of cases filed annually. One of the reasons is an unusual feature of the American legal system that allows litigants to bring cases without paying their lawyer, unless their lawyers are successful, in which case the lawyers take a negotiated percentage of the judgment, usually upwards of 40%.

From the 1990s, The US had been more politically divided. As part of this trend, American views on China were negatively affected and have severely deteriorated, accelerated by Covid-19. For example, Gallup found that about 41% of American had a favorable view of China in February, 2019, but by 2023 this number fell to 15%. Putting these facts together, it’s no surprise that the US has been the ground zero for quixotic  lawsuits seeking damages for Covid19.

US courts are governed by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act which accords foreign states broad immunity from lawsuits in US courts with several seemingly narrow exceptions. China, however, adheres to the principle of absolute sovereign immunity, and does not recognize the exceptions and abstains from appearing in US courts.

The exceptions, however, encouraged the conservative attorneys-general of red states Missouri and Mississippi to sue China. They were fully aware of China’s position and the futility of obtaining damages, beyond performing a political theater of the absurd that would further gum up an already understaffed judicial system.

Both officials belong to the National Association of Attorney Generals, which we jokingly call “National Association of Aspiring Governors” and both used the suits to waste taxpayers money to further their political careers, and in the case of the Missouri A-G, to help him become US senator.

The “justice is blind” mantra, at least in the case of Missouri, also fall on deaf ears. The 2-1 decision that turned on the narrow exceptions, smacks of political bias. At least one of the two judges allowing the exceptions to hold against China, perhaps both, should have recused themselves to avoid an appearance of impropriety; each was a Trump-appointee.

Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr., who wrote the majority opinion is first cousin of the notorious extreme right media commentator Rush Limbaugh. The latter, with an audience of more than 15 million, had said that “the coronavirus is being weaponized as yet another weapon to bring down Donald Trump and it probably is a ChiCom (Chinese Communist) laboratory experiment that is in the process of being weaponized”. Judge Limbaugh had an unambiguous moral duty to recuse himself. but didn’t.

The cases have many flaws but I agree with the dissent in the Missouri case, written by the Chief Judge, not a Trump-appointee, that the exceptions did not apply to China.

The Covid-19 nightmare may be over but other pathogens with pandemic potential are literally waiting in the wings. Last year there were 17 global disease outbreaks, including Marburg virus. Mpox and H5N1 bird flu.

Experts warn that there is a 40 to 53% likelihood of another serious pandemic within 25 years.

Trump has already slashed the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) budget from $9.3 to 4.2 billion in 2026. At the same time WHO will (again) lose its largest contributor next year per orders of President Trump to the tune of $500 million to $1.3 billion. Combined, this will cripple the UN body and severely weaken global health surveillance, especially neutering WHOs Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network that relies heavily on American data-sharing and technical support. Trump has even forbidden the remaining experts who weren’t fired from the CDC, from co-authoring scientific papers with WHO staff.

Sadly, like the CDC. the WHO itself is destined to be in poor health, and may suffer terminal decline, causing needless deaths at home and abroad if the US continues down its selfish path. This churlish US action will undoubtedly severely increase the more than 14 million deaths forecast globally by 2030 as a consequence of savage 83% budget cuts to the US Agency for International Development and related US foreign aid programs.

China will assuredly pick up some of the slack, especially via its Belt and Road Initiative and its Health Silk Road but cannot unilaterally restore funding to previous levels. Other nations hopefully can pick up some of the shortfall.

Under international law, we may never know where Covid-19 came from. However, If we don’t want the past to be prologue and if we don’t follow philosopher George Santayana’s wise advice that those who don’t learn from the mistakes of history are bound to repeat them, we must prepare our new multipolar world for the health and other shocks that await us.

If you live in the greater Los Angeles area, it’s likely you have a defining San Fernando Valley moment or routine.

Those can include waiting 30 minutes at Glendale’s Porto’s for savory potato balls or meat pies. Or perhaps that’s flying out of Southern California’s top-ranked airport, Hollywood Burbank, at least according to Fodor’s Travel Guide.

Maybe you melted your face off in Woodland Hills, the hottest community in all the county, or unsuccessfully tried to reverse parallel park there. Of course, San Fernando Valley’s favorite spots include Universal Studios Hollywood and its own mission.

For fans and newcomers to the area alike, there’s a little something for everyone.

The Food Team at The Times has crafted its own tribute to the Valley, with its 65 favorite places to eat, 24 best bars and coffee shops, top Italian deli and even some celeb hotspots.

All the articles are worth a view. Here’s a small sample of what our writers covered.

(Stephanie Breijo / Los Angeles Times)

Cupid’s Hot Dogs (from the 65 favorite places to eat)

Colleague Stephanie Breijo wondered why Cupid’s is so quintessentially San Fernando Valley.

Maybe it’s the large “The VALLEY” mural in the Winnetka location’s parking lot — where carhop service and car shows can occasionally be found — or perhaps it’s that iconic heart-shaped signage that has stood over low-slung buildings and strip malls for nearly 80 years.

It’s probably the fact that the Walsh family has been slinging hot dogs across the Valley since 1946, with sisters Morgan and Kelly Walsh serving as third-generation stewards.

Whatever the case, their thin dogs still snap with each bite. The signature Cupid dog — a creation of their father’s in the 1980s — is punchy with mustard and onions, and the chili is so thick it’s practically a paste.

The flavors and generational influence collide here, a sort of trip through decades of family and Valley history in a single hot dog stand.

Canto VI (from the 24 best bars and coffee shops)

Restaurant critic Bill Addison wrote that Canto VI owner Brian Kalliel brought a high level of experience into his Chatsworth venture.

Kalliel previously worked as a sommelier at Augustine Wine Bar and Mélisse.

He sets his caliber for wines high, and delivers with an ever-changing selection through which he guides customers from behind the bar, engaging them in conversations on their tastes.

Wine flights, by-the-glass options, a few rarer bottles with some age for the nerds: Kalliel has his audience covered. The dining room — serving wine-friendly snacks, including nicely composed cheese and salumi boards, and Italian-leaning entrees from Chester Hastings, formerly chef at Joan’s on Third — has distinct supper club vibes.

Couples gravitate to the bar. Larger groups land at dimly lit tables. Ordering happens at the counter, which can be disorienting if the staff doesn’t make the process clear to first-timers. With a full house the place feels informal and occasionally a little chaotic and decidedly grown-up, largely due to Kalliel’s confident, hospitable ringleader presence.

(Brandon Ly / Los Angeles Times)

Where Kelly Kapowski grabs a burger

Senior Food Editor Danielle Dorsey tracked down celebrities, media members and politicians to ask about their hidden Valley gems.

Tiffani Thiessen, of “Saved by the Bell” and voice of She-Hulk in the “Lego Marvel Avengers: Mission Demolition,” gave us three.

“Bill’s Burgers [is] our [favorite] burger in the Valley,” Thiessen said. “Super casual setting for a quick bite with the best legendary old school burger.

“Oy Bar [is] one of our favorite date night spots [and the] food is always on point. Casa Vega [is a] nostalgic Mexican joint that has been a staple in the Valley for many years and [I] hope it continues.”

Hopefully readers will find their own San Fernando Valley staple. For more, check out the entire Guide to the 818.

The week’s biggest stories

(Joe Burbank / Associated Press)

Trump administration policies and push back

Labor Day travel and plans

Crime, courts and policing

Community struggles and issues

More big stories

This week’s must-reads

More great reads

For your weekend

(Illustrations by Lindsey Made This; photograph by HBO / David John Photography)

Going out

Staying in

L.A. Affairs

Get wrapped up in tantalizing stories about dating, relationships and marriage.

Have a great weekend, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Andrew J. Campa, reporter
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

For college football fans, the tranquility and/or boredom of game-free weekends has officially ended.

Yes, the college football season is back today along with all of the game-day traditions: tailgating, plopping on the couch with a 60-inch screen, backyard barbecues and incessant complaining about traffic from residents near the Rose Bowl.

Hope is high for the USC and UCLA football programs, members of the Big 10 Conference (it still feels weird saying that!).

Our L.A. Times sports team put together an amazing digital preview package for the upcoming season. The Trojans start first, hosting Missouri State at the Memorial Coliseum at 4:30 p.m. today while the Bruins welcome Utah to the Rose Bowl at 8 p.m.

Let’s sample some of that coverage and wish both teams the best of luck. And as an Alabama alumnus myself, may I add a very loud Roll Tide!

Expect a roller-coaster season from USC quarterback Jayden Maiava

My colleague and Trojans beat writer Ryan Kartje said the redshirt junior made a concerted effort over the summer to eliminate the back-breaking mistakes he struggled with last season.

Since last season, he dug deeper into head coach Lincoln Riley’s offense and worked on his mechanics with the experts at the 3DQB training academy in Huntington Beach.

But Maiava’s style has lent itself to high variance.

He loves to chuck it deep and too often throws it into coverage. That could yield some thrilling results. We’ll have to see if that will benefit USC or not.

But 4.3% of his passes last season were deemed turnover-worthy by Pro Football Focus. That was third-highest in the Big Ten and too high for USC’s offense to reach its potential.

Check out Kartje’s six bold predictions for USC football.

UCLA’s defense will need big seasons from safety Key Lawrence and edge rusher Devin Aupiu.

My colleague and UCLA beat writer Ben Bolch said UCLA will look for leadership on defense.

Perhaps the most energetic player on the team, Lawrence, a Mississippi transfer, also boasts plenty of talent, speed and smarts.

Barring a setback from a minor right leg injury he sustained midway through training camp, Lawrence projects to be an opening-day starter.

He’ll need to anchor a secondary that’s replacing every starter.

As for Aupiu, UCLA’s pass rush was meh last season, generating 22 sacks to rank tied for No. 78 in the nation.

As a part-time starter, Aupiu made 4½ tackles for losses, including 1½ sacks — decent production given his limited playing time and easily the most among returning players. Getting into the backfield more often this season is a must for the redshirt senior.

Bolch has more in his article: “Ten Bruins who must step up for the football team to thrive in ’25.”

Prediction time: The Bruins will be bowl-bound while the Trojans will split with their rivals.

Bolch is predicting a season full of surprises and a bowl berth for the Bruins. Does he think they’ll beat USC? You’ll have to read his preview.

Kartje is predicting a fast start for the Trojans, who will run into some bumps and bruises in the Big 10 before rallying with a flourish. Will USC topple UCLA and Notre Dame?

Kartje thinks only one victory is in store, but which one? Read his preview to find out.

Our Times sports team also lays out key points to watch in UCLA’s and USC’s season openers while they chat up what’s in store this season.

Of course, you can always find more at each team’s landing page, https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla and https://www.latimes.com/sports/usc.

See you at a game.

The week’s biggest stories

Trump administration policies and reactions

California politics

Crime, courts and policing

Entertainment news

More big stories

This week’s must-reads

More great reads

For your weekend

(Stephanie Breijo / Los Angeles Times)

Going out

Staying in

Have a great weekend, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Andrew J. Campa, reporter
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

It was bound to happen sometime. This year, the most important Hollywood movie of the key summer season didn’t start its quest for world domination in movie theaters. It came out on Netflix.

“KPop Demon Hunters,” the cartoon musical about a girl group using catchy tunes to keep evil at bay, has become a viral phenomenon since it launched on the streamer June 20. With 210 million views globally so far, it’s the most watched animated movie ever on Netflix, and is expected to soon top “Red Notice” as the company’s most popular film.

That should be no surprise at this point. Unlike many previous widely watched Netflix movies, “KPop” — produced by Culver City-based Sony Pictures Animation — has penetrated the cultural zeitgeist, leading to gushing from millennial parents’ group chats including mine, chart-topping songs and, of course, memes galore.

To keep the momentum going, Netflix took the unusual step of putting the movie in theaters weeks after its streaming debut.

“KPop Demon Hunters” sing-along screenings played in more than 1,750 locations domestically to packed houses, with more than 1,150 sold-out showings, though it did not play in AMC cineplexes. It was the No. 1 movie in theaters, scoring in the ballpark of $18 million in ticket sales, according to industry sources, enough to top the third weekend of Zach Cregger’s horror hit “Weapons.” Netflix released the sing-along version of “KPop Demon Hunters” for streaming on Monday.

Netflix, as is its typical practice, did not report actual box office grosses, so the counts for its first No. 1 box office hit aren’t official. Nonetheless, theater operators were clearly relieved to have the movie, even if for only two days. The August box office doldrums are in full swing, with little to cheer about from the traditional studios.

The summer blockbuster season is expected to end with about $3.5 billion in total revenue from the first weekend of May through Labor Day, according to analysts, which would be either roughly flat or slightly down from last year’s thin slate. More than $4 billion is considered normal or healthy by pre-pandemic standards.

The biggest hit this summer was Disney’s “Lilo & Stitch,” a live-action remake that collected $422 million in the U.S. and Canada and more than $1 billion globally. Last summer, two movies topped $600 million: Pixar’s “Inside Out 2” and Marvel’s “Deadpool & Wolverine,” both of which were Disney titles.

Netflix has had a tense relationship with the theatrical business since it first got into making movies. The company puts movies in cinemas for limited runs as part of marketing efforts, awards campaigns and as a way to appease filmmakers who prefer the big-screen experience. Co-Chief Executive Ted Sarandos earlier this year called the theatrical business “outdated” for most people, citing weak box office numbers after the COVID-19 closures.

Indeed, theatrical attendance has shrunk even more than the top-line revenue figures suggest, with shortfalls partly papered over by increases in ticket prices over the years.

When Scott Stuber ran Netflix’s film business, he pushed the company to do more with theaters because auteur directors wanted it. The film side is now run by Dan Lin.

People who advocate for the multiplex keep hoping that some event will persuade Netflix that its theory is wrong — that something like the “KPop Demon Hunters” screenings or next year’s Imax rollout for Greta Gerwig’s upcoming “Narnia” project will prove that Sarandos is mistaken and theatrical windows will actually benefit Netflix beyond using them as promotional ploys.

Rivals say their movies do better on streaming services when they’re already theatrical hits, a theme repeated by the new owners of Paramount who are trying to grow their direct-to-consumer business.

But if anything, Netflix is digging in.

The company sees the success of “KPop,” along with the recent release of “Happy Gilmore 2,” as proof that movies can resonate culturally without theaters and the massive advertising budgets necessary to open a film on 4,000 domestic screens. The Adam Sandler-starring sequel scored 46.7 million views in its first three days on the service and set a Nielsen record for the most-watched streaming movie in a single week.

Netflix has long faced skepticism from Hollywood over its film business, which can put up big viewership with movies like “Red Notice” and “The Adam Project” that seem to vanish from audiences’ consciousness without a trace.

We kind of already knew that movies, particularly animated musicals aimed at kids, could find a big audience online without being a theatrical smash. “Encanto,” released in November 2021 during the pandemic and the Bob Chapek era, did paltry box office by modern Disney standards but became a phenomenon when its Lin-Manuel Miranda-penned songs took off on social media.

When kids latch onto something, they watch it repeatedly, and they don’t care if it’s been in theaters or not. If the movie is good and relevant to them, it can work regardless of the release strategy.

Would “KPop Demon Hunters” have worked if it had been released in theaters exclusively? Who knows. If it had opened to modest box office results, as animated original movies tend to do lately, it would have immediately been written off as a disappointment. Instead, it stayed on the Netflix top 10 lists for weeks and climbed the Nielsen rankings because of word of mouth.

Part of its success is that the movie feels very “now,” whereas animated films sometimes aim for timelessness. It’s culturally specific, with universal themes (friendship and young people’s need to belong) that have powered Disney blockbusters for decades. A colleague of mine aptly described it as a sort of “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” meets “Frozen.” Its music is current and rides the wave of everything influenced by South Korean pop culture.

Will it have the enduring influence of the “Frozen” franchise or “Moana,” movies that started primarily as properties for girls but became touchstones for a broader audience? Perhaps not, but it does give Netflix another data point to validate its streaming movie strategy.

Stuff we wrote

Number of the week

Even $3-trillion Apple isn’t immune to streaming inflation.

Apple TV+, home of series including “The Studio” and “Ted Lasso,” is raising its subscription price by $3 to $12.99 a month, following the lead of other streamers chasing better returns.

Finally …

Read: I’m listening to the audiobook of Blink-182 bassist Mark Hoppus’ “Fahrenheit-182.” A must for this San Diego native.

If you browse through social media, it’s easy to find commentary about canceling the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics.

There are Angelenos who lack confidence in the city and county’s ability to roll out the red carpet due to perceived failures during the Palisades and Altadena fires.

Others believe construction will lead to the displacement of the homeless or that the Games won’t make money.

One syndicated columnist pleaded with L.A. not to work with “a lawless U.S. regime,” while sportswriter and author Jeff Pearlman wondered if Latin American athletes would feel safe in the U.S. due to the Trump administration’s current deportations.

There are pushes from some, but how possible is it that the Games will be canceled?

My colleague Thuc Nhi Nugyen wrote about that issue and dispelled the notion any cancellation was likely.

Let’s dive into her work.

Why is backing out difficult? We’re three years away

Host cities and host country national organizing committees (in this country, the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee) sign a host city contract (HCC) after the International Olympic Committee officially awards the Games.

The contract for the 2028 Games, signed by then-Mayor Eric Garcetti and then-City Council President Herb Wesson in September 2017, includes procedures for termination from the IOC’s perspective but doesn’t leave the same option for the host city or the national organizing committee.

“While one cannot foreclose all potential theories, it is hard to imagine a scenario where Los Angeles could terminate the HCC without facing substantial legal issues,” Nathan O’Malley, an international arbitration lawyer and a partner at Musick, Peeler & Garrett, wrote in an email. “Especially if the reason for ending the contract was a political disagreement between the federal, state and local branches of government.”

When even COVID-19 didn’t stop the Games

After an initial one-year delay of the Tokyo Games, medical professionals pleaded to cancel amid rising COVID-19 cases.

Public sentiment soured drastically, with protests in the streets. A March 2021 poll by Asahi Shimbun, one of the most prominent newspapers in Japan, found 83% of voters believed that the Olympics set to take place that summer should be postponed or canceled.

But, Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga said, only “the IOC has the authority to decide.”

Breaching the contract could have put Tokyo in danger of being sued by the IOC for $4-5 billion, economist Andrew Zimbalist told Yahoo Sports in 2021. The Nomura Research Institute estimated the total cost of cancellation to be 1.8 trillion yen — about $12.3 billion.

What influence will President Trump have?

LA28 chairman Casey Wasserman has emphasized that he has assurances from the federal government that the United States will be open, despite recent travel bans and tighter scrutiny of international travelers arriving in the U.S.

Trump’s June proclamation includes exemptions for athletes, team personnel or immediate relatives entering the country for the FIFA World Cup, the Olympics or other major sporting event as determined by the Secretary of State.

But in the two months since the ban, visas have been denied for athletes, including the Cuban women’s volleyball team traveling for a tournament in Puerto Rico, a baseball team from Venezuela that qualified to play in the Senior Baseball World Series and Senegal’s women’s basketball team preparing for a training camp.

One final outlook

If any city should be ready to host the biggest Olympics in history, it should be L.A. Not only because of the existing venues, but because of the unprecedented 11-year planning time after the IOC awarded the Games in 2017.

Now with less than three years remaining, relocating to a city that would likely have to build new venues would be unrealistic for the IOC.

“For Los Angeles, a city whose identity is partly predicated on staging the Olympics twice, and now having a third time,” said Mark Dyreson, a sports historian at Penn State University, “I think it would be really, really difficult for L.A. to give up the Olympics.”

For more, check out the full story.

The week’s biggest stories

High-profile murders and deaths

Health issues and heat

Trump and his impact on California politics

Los Angeles-area fires

More big stories

This week’s must-reads

More great reads

For your weekend

(Illustrations by Lindsey Made This; photograph by Jamie-Lee B.)

Going out

Staying in

L.A. Affairs

Get wrapped up in tantalizing stories about dating, relationships and marriage.

Have a great weekend, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Andrew J. Campa, reporter
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

What Californians think about Gov. Gavin Newsom’s plan to temporarily redraw the state’s congressional districts has been a source of hot debate.

Republicans rallied around polling conducted by Politico last week that noted that California voters preferred an “independent line-drawing panel” determining seats to the House of Representatives versus giving that role to the state Legislature.

New polling, however, suggests more voters may now be backing the governor than stand opposed, with a large contingent undecided, according to reporting from my colleagues Melody Gutierrez and Laura J. Nelson.

Let’s jump into what the numbers say.

Why is Newsom considering redistricting?

The high-stakes fight over political boundaries could shape control of the U.S. House, where Republicans currently hold a narrow majority.

Texas’ plan creates five new Republican-leaning seats that could secure the GOP’s House majority. Texas is creating the new districts at the behest of President Trump to help Republicans keep control of the House in the midterm elections. California’s efforts are an attempt to temporarily cancel those gains. The new maps would be in place for the 2026, 2028 and 2030 congressional elections.

Newsom and Democratic leaders say California must match Texas’ partisan mapmaking to preserve balance in Congress.

New polling supports Californians fighting back

The UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll, conducted for the Los Angeles Times, asked registered voters about the Newsom-backed redistricting push favoring California Democrats. This effort serves as a counterattack to President Trump and Texas Republicans reworking election maps to their advantage.

When voters were asked whether they agree with California’s redistricting maneuver, 46% said it was a good idea, and 36% said it was a bad idea.

Slightly more, 48%, said they would vote in favor of the temporary gerrymandering efforts if it appeared on the statewide special election ballot in November. Nearly a third said they would vote no, and 20% said they were undecided.

One interpretation of the data

“That’s not bad news,” said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Berkeley IGS Poll. “It could be better.”

DiCamillo added: “With ballot measures, you’d like to be comfortably above 50% because you got to get people to vote yes and when people are undecided or don’t know enough about initiatives, they tend to vote no just because it’s the safer vote.”

The strongest backers

Among voters who regularly cast ballots in statewide elections, overall support for redistricting jumped to 55%, compared with 34% opposed.

DiCamillo said that is significant.

“If I were to pick one subgroup where you would want to have an advantage, it would be that one,” he said.

Where to find the undecided votes

Winning in November, however, will require pushing undecided voters to back the redistricting plan.

Among Latino, Black and Asian voters, nearly 30% said they have yet to decide how they would vote on redistricting.

Women also have higher rates of being undecided compared with men, at 25% to 14%.

Younger voters are also more likely to be on the fence, with nearly a third of 18- to 29-year-olds saying they are unsure, compared with 11% of those older than 65.

The ever-growing divide

The partisan fight over election maps elicited deeply partisan results.

Nearly 7 in 10 Democratic voters said they would support the redistricting measure, and Republicans overwhelmingly panned the plan by about the same margin (72%).

Former President Obama endorsed it, and California’s former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a moderate Republican, told the New York Times he would fight it.

The effort faced opposition this week in Sacramento during legislative hearings, where Republicans blasted it as a partisan game-playing.

California Republicans attempted to stall the process by filing an emergency petition at the state Supreme Court, arguing that Democrats violated the California Constitution by rushing the proposal through the Legislature.

The high court rejected the legal challenge Wednesday.

We’ll be following along and providing updates until election day. For now, check out the full article.

The week’s biggest stories

(Hector Amezcua/The Sacramento Bee)

Gavin Newsom’s policies and reactions

Crime, courts and policing

Entertainment news

Amazing animal tales

More big stories

This week’s must-reads

More great reads

For your weekend

Going out

Staying in

Have a great weekend, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Andrew J. Campa, reporter
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

Movies from India’s prolific film industry have found success on the world stage before.

“RRR,” an over-the-top Telugu-language action film, energized audiences in the U.S. and elsewhere a few years ago, even scoring a history-making Oscar for its original song “Naatu Naatu.” Hindi screenings have long drawn crowds to American multiplexes.

But the filmmakers behind “Ramayana” — an upcoming two-part epic based on one of the most important ancient texts in Hinduism — have something more ambitious in mind.

The massive productions — each estimated to cost $200 million to $250 million — are aimed not merely at an Indian audience, nor are they meant to appeal primarily to Hindus, who number an estimated 1.2 billion globally, according to Pew Research Center.

Rather, the goal is to turn “Ramayana,” with its grand-scale adventure story and high-tech computer-generated effects, into a full-blown international blockbuster, filmed specifically for Imax’s giant screens in what is intended to be the largest-ever rollout for an Indian film, according to its backers.

Executive Namit Malhotra — who is financing and producing the project through his firm Prime Focus — set the bar high in a recent interview with The Times, comparing his film to the likes of James Cameron’s “Avatar,” Ridley Scott’s “Gladiator” and the movies of Christopher Nolan.

While Hollywood studio bosses talk about reaching all four demographic “quadrants” (men and women, young and old) with their tentpole movies, Malhotra wants to draw two additional categories: believer and nonbeliever. For such a so-called six-quadrant movie to work, to use Malhotra’s terminology, it would have to succeed in the U.S.

“In my mind, if people in the West don’t like it, I consider that as a failure,” Malhotra told The Times recently. “It is meant for the world. So if you don’t like it, shame on me. We should have done a better job.”

Poster art for the upcoming film ‘Ramayana.’

(DNEG)

It’s a major gamble for Malhotra, who founded Prime Focus in Mumbai in 1997. The firm expanded significantly when it acquired British effects house Double Negative, and rebranded as DNEG. Malhotra owns nearly 68% of the parent company, Prime Focus Ltd.

He’s going to great lengths to make sure his big bet pays off. DNEG, headquartered in London with offices in India, Los Angeles and elsewhere, is handling the visuals. The firm has produced special effects for global studio features for years, creating Oscar-winning work for such movies as Denis Villeneuve’s “Dune: Part Two” and Nolan’s “Tenet.”

“Ramayana” is directed by Nitesh Tiwari, the man behind 2016’s “Dangal,” the highest-grossing Bollywood film ever, including huge sales in China. Hans Zimmer and prolific Indian musician-composer A.R. Rahman (“Slumdog Millionaire”) are collaborating on the score, while the visual effects and production design team includes veterans from “Mad Max: Fury Road,” “Avengers: Endgame” and the “Lord of the Rings” franchise.

The success of “RRR,” which told the story of two Indian legends with larger-than-life abilities fighting British imperialism, is one reason Malhotra is confident that “Ramayana” might connect with Westerners more familiar with the Bible and “The Odyssey” (the subject of a much-hyped 2026 Nolan film) than with Hindu mythology. U.S. cinephiles have in the past embraced mythical Asia-set films such as Ang Lee’s “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon” and “Life of Pi.”

So why not “Ramayana?”

After all, family, good vs. evil and personal striving are all key themes that transcend national borders.

“Emotions are universal,” said Tiwari in a video call. “If the audience connects with you emotionally, I think they will connect with the whole story. Emotions have powers to travel across boundaries.”

Filmed entirely on soundstages, the first part of “Ramayana” is scheduled to hit theaters next year, with a significant push from Imax. “Part 2,” currently in production, is planned for 2027. Each part is timed for Diwali, the Hindu festival of lights. The films do not yet have a U.S. distributor.

This comes as Imax has beefed up its clout as what is increasingly seen as a linchpin component for the release of big-screen movies, not just for Hollywood spectacles but also, lately, for local language films. Imax showcased just a handful of Indian movies on its screens in 2019, according to Chief Executive Richard Gelfond. Last year, the company played 15.

So far this year, international films made in their local language have accounted for more than 30% of Imax’s total global box office revenue, Gelfond said. Much of that tally came from “Ne Zha 2,” a Chinese-produced animated film that grossed roughly $2 billion worldwide, mostly from its home country.

As such, Gelfond has high hopes for “Ramayana.” “Judging from what we’ve seen, this has all the elements to be a global success,” Gelfond said.

At its core, “Ramayana,” based on the epic poem from thousands of years ago, tells the story of Hindu deity Rama, an incarnation of the god Vishnu, and his quest to rescue his love Sita from the demon king Ravana.

A three-minute teaser trailer introduced the concept, emphasizing the big names attached (including actors Ranbir Kapoor as Rama, Sai Pallavi as Sita and Yash as Ravana), displaying some “Game of Thrones” opening credits-style visuals and conveying the tale’s historical importance. “Our truth. Our history,” reads the onscreen text. The video has 9.4 million views on YouTube.

“Ramayana” is a quintessentially Indian story. It has been adapted for stage and screen before, perhaps most notably as a series for Indian TV in the late 1980s.

For the new version, Malhotra wants to eliminate any language barriers. DNEG is using syncing technology from its Brahma AI unit to seamlessly present the film in local languages for international audiences. In the U.S., for example, the movie will screen in English.

“It’s a global film from the day we start,” he said. “I’m not trying to make it to appease Indian people in India. … If you go and watch ‘Ramayana’ and your family watches it, and people in India watch it, what’s the difference? It should speak to you like any other film.”

Stuff we wrote

Number of the week

Airing election misinformation continues to be expensive for cable news networks.

Newsmax will pay $67 million to settle a defamation suit filed by Dominion Voting Systems over false claims about voter fraud in the 2020 election that aired on the right-wing news channel.

The network announced the settlement with the voting equipment maker Monday but did not apologize for its reporting.

Fox News settled a similar case with Dominion in 2023 for $787.5 million after it aired incorrect election claims. Newsmax is much smaller than Fox, which continues to battle a lawsuit from another voting machine company, Smartmatic.

Streaming is getting closer to another major milestone. According to Nielsen’s the Gauge report, streaming services accounted for 47.3% of U.S. TV usage in July, compared with 22% for cable and 18.4% for broadcast. That’s what happens when there’s new “Squid Game” on Netflix and there’s not much on regular TV.

Finally …

Listen: No Joy, “Bugland.” Excellent ’90s-style rock.

If you’re a Gen Xer or younger, there’s a good chance you’ve contemplated moving out of California.

The reasons are obvious. It’s expensive and difficult to raise a family, pay rent or even consider buying a home.

That struggle isn’t just on the mind of locals. Midwestern and Southern states have recognized an opportunity and are making their best pitches to frustrated Californians.

So, is there a price Tulsa, Okla., could offer you to move? Are the incentives of cheaper gas, much shorter commutes and overall drive times enough of an appeal? I haven’t even mentioned the cost of living and a real chance of buying a home.

My colleague Hannah Fry spoke with Californians who moved to Tulsa for a variety of reasons. Here are a couple of their stories.

Cynthia Rollins, former San Diego resident

Rollins felt socially isolated working a remote job in Ocean Beach for a tech company, but still overwhelmed by the sheer volume of people around her.

Months earlier she read about a program, Tulsa Remote, that would pay remote workers to relocate to Oklahoma’s second-largest city for at least a year. She decided to give it a shot and visit.

“When I was [in California], I was so consumed with the process of day-to-day living — the traffic, getting places, scheduling things,” Rollins said. “Here there’s so much more space to think creatively about your life and to kind of set it up the way you want.”

After five months in Tulsa, Rollins met her significant other at a trivia night. Her partner, with whom she now lives, made the journey from California to Tulsa for school during the pandemic.

“He grew up in Santa Cruz and was living 10 minutes from me down the road in Pacifica, but we never met in California,” she said. “We met in Tulsa.”

What is Tulsa offering?

Tulsa Remote — funded by the George Kaiser Family Foundation — started in 2019, and has sought to recruit new residents to diversify the city’s workforce.

It decided to offer $10,000 to remote workers who would move to the state for at least a year.

The program also provides volunteer and socializing opportunities for new residents and grants them membership at a co-working space for 36 months.

What do the numbers say?

Tulsa Remote has attracted more than 3,600 remote workers since its inception.

More than 7,800 Californians have applied to the program and 539 have made the move, cementing California as the second-most popular origin state behind Texas.

Those numbers reflect something of a wider trend: From 2010 through 2023, about 9.2 million people moved from California to other states, while only 6.7 million people moved to California from other parts of the country, according to the American Community Survey.

A Public Policy Institute of California survey conducted in 2023 found that 34% of Californians have seriously considered leaving the state because of high housing costs.

Zach and Katie Meincke, former Westsiders

The lower cost of living was a huge bonus for the Meinckes when they moved three years ago.

They went from paying $2,400 in monthly rent on a two-bedroom, two-bathroom apartment in L.A.’s Westside to a five-bedroom, three-bathroom house in Tulsa for just a few hundred dollars more.

It ended up being fortuitous timing for the couple, who discovered they were expecting their first child — a daughter named Ruth — just weeks after they decided to move.

The couple are expecting their second child in December.

It’s a life milestone that Meincke says may not have happened in Los Angeles. In California, it costs nearly $300,000 to raise a child to 18. In Oklahoma, researchers estimate it costs about $241,000, according to a LendingTree study this year.

“There was no way we were going to move into a house in Los Angeles unless we had roommates, and that’s not an ideal situation,” Zach Meincke said. “We were 37 when we left Los Angeles and it felt like we were at a point that if we wanted to have all those other things in life — children, a house — we need to make that shift.”

For more on the moves, check out the full article here.

The week’s biggest stories

(Mario Tama / Getty Images)

Trump policies and reactions

Wildlife and the environment

Entertainment news

More big stories

This week’s must reads

More great reads

For your weekend

Going out

Staying in

L.A. Affairs

Get wrapped up in tantalizing stories about dating, relationships and marriage.

Have a great weekend, from the Essential California team

Jim Rainey, staff writer
Andrew J. Campa, reporter
Kevinisha Walker, multiplatform editor
Karim Doumar, head of newsletters
Diamy Wang, homepage intern
Izzy Nunes, audience intern

How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to [email protected]. Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on latimes.com.

For most people, memories of childhood coughs and colds are synonymous with a menthol-smelling ointment in a dark blue jar with a turquoise cap.

For more than a century, Vicks VapoRub has been a household name across continents. How it became one has roots in the Spanish flu pandemic in the early 20th century.

The story begins with an act of fatherly love.

In 1894 in the state of North Carolina in the eastern United States, the nine-year-old son of a pharmacist named Lunsford Richardson was sick with croup, a respiratory infection that causes a bark-like cough.

Desperate to find a treatment, Richardson began testing out mixtures of aromatic oils and chemicals at his pharmacy and produced an ointment that helped his son.

But this was not Vicks VapoRub – at least not yet.

Seeing that his ointment had worked for his son, Richardson started to sell it for 25 cents a jar. The strong-smelling product consisted of menthol, camphor, eucalyptus and several other oils blended together in a petroleum jelly base. The ointment helped open blocked noses, and when rubbed on the chest, the vapour soothed a cough.

Richardson initially named his concoction Vick’s Croup & Pneumonia Salve. An enthusiastic gardener, he thought of the name after seeing an advertisement for seeds of the Vicks plant, whose leaves smell like menthol when crushed. He also borrowed the name from his brother-in-law, Dr Joshua Vick, a trusted doctor in their town of Greensboro. He felt “Vick” was “short, easy to remember and looked good on a label”.

‘Magic’ salve to VapoRub

In 1911, 17 years after the salve was created, Richardson’s son Henry Smith, the one who once suffered from croup, was steering the family business. He renamed the product Vick’s Vaporub Salve from Vick’s Magic Croup Salve, the name under which it had been sold since 1905. That year, the packaging was also changed from transparent glass to the distinctive cobalt blue.

By then, Richardson had also created 21 remedies for various ailments, including Vick’s Little Liver Pills for “constipation and torpid liver”; Turtle Oil Liniment for “sprains, sores and rheumatism”; Tar Heel Sarsaparilla to purify “bad blood”; and Grippe Knockers for the flu. They were sold under the Vick’s Family Remedies company, which he set up in 1905. But none sold as well as the original salve.

So in 1911, Henry discontinued all the other products, renamed the business Vick Chemical Company and began focusing solely on marketing and distributing their signature product. The company began distributing large quantities of free samples while salesmen posted advertisements on streetcars and visited pharmacists, urging them to try the product.

Marketing during the Spanish flu

Seven years later in 1918, the deadliest pandemic in modern history tore across the world. The Spanish flu claimed the lives of 50 million people – more than eight times the number of COVID-19 deaths.

This was when Vick’s VapoRub sales began to soar.

“Its closest rival was Ely’s Creme Balm … something of a copycat product but doesn’t seem to have had the same cachet,” explained Catharine Arnold, author of the book Pandemic 1918.

She added that there were other remedies for respiratory ailments, including coughs, colds and the flu, such as Hale’s Honey of Horehound and Tar. Some products did not stand the test of time, such as “vaporisers”, similar to modern nebulisers, and throat lozenges such as Formamint. It contained the chemical formaldehyde, which is toxic in large amounts.

However, a marketing campaign led by Smith took the Vicks brand onto the global stage.

When the pandemic hit, the company produced a series of six ads. Rather than solely promote Vick’s VapoRub, the series focused on raising awareness about the Spanish flu and included information about symptoms, treatment and tips to avoid getting sick. It urged people not to panic and conveyed that the brand cared about people’s wellbeing at a bleak time. The flu was just another variation of an influenza that strikes every century and is caused by germs that attack the nose, throat and bronchial tubes, the ads said. Vick’s VapoRub would “throw off the grippe germs” and make it easier to breathe, they said.

Years later, the accuracy of this content came under criticism. Still, “at the time, this advertisement must have seemed reassuring, telling readers it was just the same old flu, only, of course, it wasn’t,” Arnold said.

“Spanish flu was an atypical autoimmune virus which attacked the youngest and fittest and caused unusual reactions, such as violent haemorrhaging and the notorious heliotrope cyanosis when people’s skin turned blue.”

However, the advice in the advertisements to rest and stay in bed was “sensible”, she added, because the virus was spread through human contact.

Becoming a household name

Sales skyrocketed, and in October 1918 – seven months after the outbreak of the pandemic – Vick Chemical Company informed pharmacists that huge demand had wiped out its excess stocks. Supplies expected to last four months had run out in three weeks.

Newspaper notices published at that time showed the company had received orders for 1.75 million VapoRub jars in a single week, and the daily turnover of the business was about $186,492. The jars came in three sizes costing 30 cents, 60 cents and $1.20.

“Big shipments are en route to jobbers [wholesalers] by freight and express. Until these arrive, there may be a temporary shortage. All deals postponed. Buy in small lots only,” one notice read.

The company informed the public that it was working day and night to catch up with demand. The orders received were twice the company’s daily output, and by November 1918, the firm said its factory was running 23.5 hours daily to produce 1.08 million jars weekly.

The product gained worldwide popularity during the pandemic, and according to company data, VapoRub sales grew from $900,000 to $2.9m from 1918 to 1919.

Afterwards, Vick Chemical Company continued to market its product in novel ways. It sent millions of free samples to mailboxes and in 1924 published a 15-page advertisement in the form of a children’s book called The Story of Blix and Blee. The story, written in rhyming verses, was about two elves named Blix and Blee who lived in an empty Vicks VapoRub jar beneath an old jujube tree. One night, they rushed to the rescue of a sick child, little Dickie. The elves convinced the child, who was refusing to take the medicine given by his mother, to use Vicks VapoRub to soothe his cough so he could sleep.

More than 130 years later, Vicks VapoRub is sold in about 70 countries on five continents with more than 3.78 million litres (more than 1 million gallons) of it produced annually. From 2011 to 2016 alone, there were more than a billion units sold worldwide, according to its owner Procter and Gamble.

For Arnold, Vicks VapoRub is part of an American childhood.

“Generations of us grew up with that familiar waxy menthol compound, robes and pyjamas redolent of Vicks during flu season,” she said. “That familiar blue and green label is as much of an American cultural icon as Coca-Cola or Campbell’s soup.”

This article is part of Ordinary Items, Extraordinary Stories, a series about the surprising stories behind well-known items. 

Read more from the series:

How the inventor of the bouncy castle saved lives

How a popular Peruvian soft drink went ‘toe-to-toe’ with Coca-Cola

How a drowning victim became a lifesaving icon

WASHINGTON — Alana Voechting, a 27-year-old nursing student, had never heard of Klarna when she noticed its bright pink logo while checking out at Sephora.com with $165 in skin care products.

Mounting medical debts from chronic health conditions left Voechting with money problems, so she was thrilled to learn the app would allow her to break the purchase price into four installments over six weeks — with no interest, fees or credit inquiries to ding her already subpar credit score.

“It’s like your brain thinks, ‘Oh, I’m getting this product for cheap,’ because you really only look at that first payment, and after that you kind of forget about it,” she said. “So psychologically, it feels like you’re spending so much less when you’re not.”

Soon Voechting began regularly using not just Klarna but also similar services, including Quadpay and Affirm, to buy makeup, clothing, airline tickets and expensive lounge wear she acknowledged she “would not have purchased otherwise.”

Voechting is one of millions of young Americans with scant or subprime credit histories who are using so-called buy-now-pay-later apps every month.

The smartphone-based services are an updated version of the old layaway plan, except users can do it all on their phones and — most appealingly — get their purchase immediately rather than having to wait until they’ve paid for it.

The companies act as intermediaries between retailers and consumers, making most of their profit by charging merchants 2% to 8% of the purchase price, similar to the retailer fees levied by credit card companies.

The apps are taking off among millennials and Generation Z consumers attracted by the ability to bypass traditional credit cards and still delay payments with no interest.

Retailers such as Macy’s and H&M have jumped to partner with the services, which soared in popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Roughly 42% of Americans report using the apps at least once, according to a Credit Karma survey from February.

U.S. regulators are taking a wait-and-see approach, saying they don’t want to stifle a new financial product that could help consumers who might otherwise fall into predatory lending schemes.

But regulators in Europe and Australia, where many of the companies first launched, are increasingly concerned the apps are extending credit irresponsibly.

Using celebrities such as A$AP Rocky and Keke Palmer to portray the services as a hip alternative to the “gotcha” fine print of credit cards, the apps could promote overborrowing in a generation already struggling with high debt and poor credit, consumer advocates warn.

And despite claims that users’ credit ratings won’t be affected and that there are no hidden fees, experts say consumers can still face late charges, overdraft fees and debt collection. Some apps, such as Quadpay, charge a $1 transaction fee on every payment made, regardless of the amount.

“It sounds too good to be true, and it is, in many ways, because there are perils for people who use this,” said Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog.

The apps offer different repayment options, but the most common links to a user’s debit card and makes automatic withdrawals every two weeks. Problems quickly arise when there is not enough money in the account, potentially resulting in charges by both the user’s bank and the app.

Voechting said that for the most part she has been able to control her spending and keep track of when her payments will be withdrawn, a challenge when dealing with multiple purchases and multiple apps.

But this year, she missed a payment with Quadpay on a $120 order from Beautycounter because she failed to change her payment information in the app after receiving a new debit card.

Sixty days later, she was informed the installment would go to collections unless she paid off the full remaining balance of $54, plus a $10 late fee. Voechting promptly gathered the money, fearing more damage to her credit.

Services boast that users’ activity and debt are not regularly reported to major credit bureaus. That’s appealing to consumers under pressure or already cut off from traditional lenders.

But not reporting on-time payments also means that users don’t see their credit scores increase as they demonstrate a track record of responsible borrowing, a crucial hurdle for younger consumers.

And the apps may report missed or late payments for some payment plans, which can hurt users’ credit scores, according to a clause buried deep in terms and conditions agreements for Quadpay, Affirm and Klarna.

The Credit Karma survey found about 38% of buy-now-pay-later customers had missed at least one payment, and 72% of those users reported seeing their credit score drop afterward, though many factors can cause fluctuations.

Buy-now-pay-later users also don’t benefit from many protections applied to credit cards.

For instance, if a credit card company refuses to offer credit to a potential customer, it must disclose why the application was declined. No such rules apply to the apps, which authorize every purchase on a case-by-case basis. That means users have no assurance a transaction will be approved.

“They don’t know what the issue is,” said Angela Hunt, 31, of Hampton, Va., part of a Facebook group devoted to Klarna, in which members frequently complain they are denied approval for purchases in a seemingly random manner.

App users also don’t enjoy the same billing-dispute protections they would with other payment methods, so returning merchandise, resolving fraudulent charges and requesting refunds can be difficult.

In January, Brittany Conn, 30, was moving into a new apartment in Melbourne, Fla., and used Klarna on Wayfair to buy a bed frame, headboard and bookcase for $450.

The bookcase never arrived, so she reached out to Klarna to get a partial refund. Multiple agents promised a supervisor would contact her, but the call never came. When she tried to publicly request help on Klarna’s Facebook page, she said, her comments were deleted.

If Conn had made her purchase with a credit card, the lender would have been forced to respond immediately, launch an investigation and explain its final determination within two billing cycles. During the process, she would be entitled to withhold payment on the disputed amount.

It took Conn, who works in customer service, nearly two months and many emails and online chats to get her money back. She filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau.

“It was just an uphill battle, just email after email and chat after chat, and it got to a point where my chats weren’t being answered anymore,” she said.

According to the Better Business Bureau, Klarna — the largest buy-now-pay-later app in the U.S. with 15 million customers in 2020 — received 676 complaints in the last 12 months.

Quadpay received 979. Affirm had 227, and Afterpay and Sezzle saw more than 100 complaints each.

By comparison, Discover, a well-established credit card brand with more than 55 million customers, saw 532 complaints with the Better Business Bureau in the same period.

The rise in users — and complaints — has brought more scrutiny to the apps.

Credit card giant Capital One barred its customers worldwide last year from linking its cards to fund buy-now-pay-later purchases, citing the lack of consumer protections.

Class-action lawsuits in California, Connecticut and New York allege plaintiffs suffered from large bank overdraft fees due to automatic withdrawals, undisclosed late fees and deceptive marketing.

Consumer complaints prompted regulators in other countries to crack down. Sweden enacted a law last year that bans online checkout portals from making the apps the default payment option.

Australian financial experts wrote a report in November that found 20% of app users surveyed “cut back on or went without essentials” to make their payments on time. The United Kingdom released a nearly 70-page report in February concluding that “urgent and timely” regulatory changes were needed.

U.S. regulators say they are aware of the services but are exercising caution.

“We’re really interested in use cases of buy-now-pay-later where perhaps a consumer that would otherwise go to a payday lender and pay a very high cost for a loan might be able to use it,” said John McNamara, principal assistant director of markets at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

In July, the CFPB released a blog post titled “Should you buy now and pay later?” warning consumers that the apps can charge late fees, report to credit bureaus and do not offer the same protections as other credit products.

Laura Udis, who manages installment loan programs at the CFPB, said the apps are subject to the Dodd-Frank act, passed in 2010 after the subprime mortgage crisis to prevent unfair, deceptive and abusive practices by lenders. She said the law “should be flexible enough to apply to any particular credit situation, including new innovations like buy-now-pay-later.”

But the services have found loopholes in regulation.

For instance, the Truth in Lending Act, which requires lenders disclose the terms and costs of services, states that payment plans of fewer than five installments are not subject to ad disclosure requirements as long as they avoid certain terms.

Consumer advocates say that explains why many apps are structured as four installments. And the companies help merchants avoid terminology that would trigger greater disclosures.

Affirm offers its merchant partners a guide. Quadpay has a variety of promotions for merchants to download that won’t trigger disclosures.

An advertisement for Afterpay and United Kingdom-based retailer Boohoo at a company-sponsored party.

(Caroline McCredie / Getty Images )

An Affirm spokesperson said the company provides information to users at checkout, including disclosures that would be required by the Truth in Lending Act, to ensure customers are informed. A Quadpay spokesperson said the company makes “every effort to help consumers by providing fair, flexible and transparent payment terms.”

Ira Rheingold, executive director of the National Assn. of Consumer Advocates, said it may take time for regulators to sort out how lending laws apply to the services, and whether new ones are needed.

“I think there are different ways that regulators can deal with them,” he said. “And I think that there’s some places where they’ll be far behind and some places where they won’t be.”

Lawmakers show no signs of getting involved. Spokespeople for multiple congressional committees said they were not considering regulating the apps.

California’s regulators are among the few U.S. watchdogs that have taken substantive actions against the services. In 2019, the state’s Department of Business Oversight, now the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, sued Sezzle, Afterpay, Quadpay and Klarna for making illegal loans.

Each of the companies ultimately settled and had to get licensed, refund fees collected from Californians and pay fines.

“Today, the buy-now-pay-later companies we license in California are required to take into consideration a borrower’s ability to repay the loan and are subject to strict rate and fee caps,” department spokesperson Maria Luisa Cesar said.

As regulators and lawmakers determine how best to keep up with the growth of the apps, their popularity endures. Voechting, Hunt and Conn all said they will continue to use them.

“It’s kind of nice to be able to say, ‘Oh, you know, I can’t afford to buy this right upfront, but I can split it up into four payments and afford it that way,’” Conn said.

Before the apps, Conn would spend weeks saving money for special purchases. The apps allow her to get products immediately.

Said Conn: “Why not just buy it?”

It’s been a dramatic couple of weeks in the wide world of sports rights, as media companies locked down a slew of deals that remake the way that fans watch their favorite athletic competitions.

On Monday came a big one: David Ellison, the new owner of Paramount, came into the ring punching hard with a $7.7-billion deal for the streaming and TV rights to UFC matches. In the seven-year pact with UFC owner TKO Group Holdings, the Ellison-led Paramount will pay an average of $1.1 billion annually — about twice what Walt Disney Co. was paying to air the mixed martial arts league on ESPN.

It’s a signal that Ellison is willing to spend big bucks on content that he and his fresh executive team think will make Paramount+ a more formidable competitor to Netflix, Amazon’s Prime Video, HBO Max and others. Paramount+ will have the rights to stream 13 marquee “numbered” UFC events and 30 fight nights, while certain numbered events will be simulcast on the company’s broadcast network, CBS.

Now those sightings of the tech scion-turned Hollywood mogul speaking with President Trump at UFC fights make even more sense, as do Ellison and Paramount’s recent peripheral dealings with superagent Ari Emanuel, TKO’s executive chair. In a key part of the deal, UFC will move away from showcasing fights through its pay-per-view model, which should dramatically increase the reach of a sport with strong appeal among young men.

The deal is also the latest sign that the streaming wars are far from over, at least when it comes to sports broadcasts. Last week, the NFL inked a deal to take a 10% stake in ESPN as part of a complex arrangement that will give Bob Iger-led Disney control of the NFL cable properties, including the NFL Network and the linear RedZone channel. The ESPN stake is estimated to be worth more than $2 billion.

This highly anticipated blockbuster deal further aligns the financial interests of the most powerful TV sports brand with what is by far the nation’s most popular sports league, which accounts for the vast majority of most-watched programs every year. The agreement is part of Iger and ESPN chair Jimmy Pitaro’s strategy to bulk up the content offering available through the network’s upcoming stand-alone streaming service, which will cost $30 a month when it launches later this month.

Separately, ESPN is staying in business with TKO, having agreed to pay $1.6 billion over five years to stream WWE events including WrestleMania, Royal Rumble and SummerSlam. Analysts say that should ease some of the pain of losing UFC to Ellison and Paramount. The WWE events are moving to ESPN’s service from their current streaming home, NBCUniversal’s Peacock. Disney’s fees will be nearly twice those of NBCUniversal.

Disney will use the new ESPN service to make its wider streaming offering more attractive, bundling it with Disney+ and Hulu.

All this is happening amid a broader overhauling of the sports media landscape in the streaming age that has made life more confusing for fans as fewer people subscribe to all-in-one cable and satellite TV bundles.

NFL games, for example, run on a broad array of streaming services, including Paramount+, Prime Video (for Thursday night games), and, in the case of Christmas Day matchups, Netflix. The league, which has significant leverage, is widely expected to exercise its option to renegotiate media rights deals starting in 2029.

Apple is expected to win the rights to Formula One racing telecasts, adding to its sports portfolio that includes MLB games and Major League Soccer. The NBA last year got itself a big pay bump, securing media rights deals with NBCUniversal, Amazon and Disney worth $77 billion over 11 years.

As these shifts take place, the media industry is about to go through a major test: How many people are willing to pay for a lot of — but not all — the sports content they want to watch, and what will they be willing to fork over?

The entertainment and media companies say they are aiming these services at cord-cutters and cord-nevers, people who don’t pay for a more-or-less traditional package of TV channels but still want to watch sports.

The question is whether such people actually exist.

Despite its branding power and its significant share of sports rights, ESPN’s direct-to-consumer app will have limited appeal. Many analysts estimate that the offering will attract 2 million subscribers in the short term.

For most of the kind of dedicated sports fans who might be interested in streaming ESPN, a digital bundle such as YouTube TV ($83 a month) probably makes more sense than cobbling together individual brands.

Recognizing the limitations, the media companies are taking another stab at consolidating their sports streaming offerings at a discount. On Monday, Disney and Fox Corp. said they would offer a bundle of the ESPN streamer and the new Fox One — which includes live sports, news and entertainment — for $40 a month. On its own, Fox One will be priced at $20 a month.

A previous attempt at a more inclusive offering — a proposed joint venture called Venu Sports from Disney, Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery — was abandoned after a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction against the media giants in an antitrust lawsuit from FuboTV. The saga ended up with Disney making a deal to take a 70% stake in Fubo and merge it with its Hulu Live TV service.

But the question for all services and mini-bundles remains the same: Who are they really for?

Stuff we wrote

Number of the week

Filmmaker Zach Cregger won the weekend with his acclaimed new horror movie “Weapons,” which topped expectations with $43.5 million in ticket sales through Sunday in the U.S. and Canada.

Cregger’s follow-up to his surprise hit “Barbarian” is the latest win for Warner Bros., marking six successful openings in a row (after “A Minecraft Movie,” “Sinners,” “Final Destination Bloodlines,” “F1 the Movie” and “Superman”). Not bad, considering the studio’s leaders were rumored to be on the chopping block earlier this year.

Doing solid business was Disney’s “Freakier Friday,” a body-swap comedy sequel reuniting Jamie Lee Curtis and Lindsay Lohan more than 20 years after the first one, itself a remake of a 1976 movie. The new installment opened with $28.6 million domestically.

After this and “The Naked Gun,” I’m certainly not going to declare that Hollywood big-screen comedies are back, but the genre is not completely lost either, as long as there’s intellectual property attached.

Finally …

Watch: Marc Maron has a new HBO stand-up special, “Panicked.” As always, it’s funny, acerbic, insightful and sometimes deep.

Listen: On Aug. 14, the estate of Woody Guthrie will release a collection of home recordings, including a version of “This Land Is Your Land” and his take on “Deportee.” Absolutely fascinating.