politics

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The golden goose is replaced by a mud hen.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This wealth tax is not being pushed by Sacramento Democrats.

Love from labor, spurned by Newsom

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

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

Most Democratic candidates for governor oppose the ballot initiative.

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

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

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

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

Band-Aid for Republican healthcare cuts

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What else you should be reading

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

Until next week,
George Skelton

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

On the last day of January, hundreds of people filled the pews of Immanuel Presbyterian Church in Koreatown to hear not the word of God but the gospel of the Democratic Socialists of America.

It was the local chapter’s bimonthly meeting and also a kickoff event for a year during which they planned to build on an already impressive foothold in L.A. politics. Four of their own are council members and the two up for reelection — Eunisses Hernandez and Hugo Soto-Martínez — received standing ovations after their impassioned speeches. They implored the faithful to believe that anything is politically possible in a year when President Trump is waging war on Los Angeles and one of their own, Zohran Mamdani, is the mayor of New York.

Among the true believers was someone who arrived late that day: L.A.’s original democratic socialist insurgent, Nithya Raman.

She shocked the city’s political class in 2020 by beating Councilmember David Ryu — the first time in 17 years that an incumbent lost their seat. Her upset blazed the way for Hernandez and Soto-Martínez in 2022 and fellow DSAer Ysabel Jurado in 2024. They’ve created a progressive bloc that has helped Mayor Karen Bass implement her agenda, offering Her Honor cover from critics on the left while also pushing for democratic socialist principles such as less police spending and more intervention programs.

Raman kept a low profile at the DSA-LA event, according to attendees. The 44-year-old listened to her colleagues’ speeches and those of other hopefuls, made small talk with fellow members and then left.

There was no hint that afternoon of the political earthquake she uncorked this Saturday, when Raman announced a mayoral run against longtime ally Bass. The council member described the mayor to The Times as an “icon” who nevertheless needs to be replaced because “Los Angeles is at a breaking point.”

I can only imagine Bass — whom Raman publicly endorsed just a month ago — was surprised.

The mayor seems vulnerable, for sure. From her handling of the Palisades fire to crumbling infrastructure to the economy and so much more, critics maintain Bass spent all of last year living up to the old Johnny Mathis and Deniece Williams duet: She did things too much, too little and too late. This was all before sources told The Times last week that Bass ordered an after-action report on the Palisades fire be — no pun intended — watered down to limit legal liability against the city.

Her supporters point to a drop in homelessness and homicides over the last four years as reason enough for Bass to return — but their hosannas haven’t gotten as much traction as an incumbent should be seeing at this point in a reelection campaign. That’s why the proverbial smart money had someone on the right side of L.A.’s Democratic spectrum mounting a strong challenge this year — Councilmembers Monica Rodriguez or Traci Park, L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath or even 2022 challenger Rick Caruso.

While Mamdani’s fall win got local progressives dreaming about one day doing the same in Los Angeles, the prospect of a strong challenger from the left in this mayoral cycle was considered so unlikely that DSA-LA didn’t have candidate Rae Huang — a dues-paying member and Presbyterian minister — speak at the Immanuel gathering since she couldn’t gather enough signatures to make her case for an endorsement in the fall.

Raman has proved effective enough as a council member to win her reelection outright two years ago during the primaries despite a well-funded effort to paint her as a limousine leftist. I admire her brio to take on Bass and respect her place in L.A. political history. I’m glad someone is going to make the mayor work hard to get reelected because no incumbent should ever have an automatic reelection.

But Nithya Raman?

Los Angeles City Councilmember Nithya Raman, left, talks with Mayor Karen Bass at Hazeltine Park in Sherman Oaks during a 2024 rally for Raman’s ultimately successful reelection bid. She’s now challenging Bass in the 2026 mayoral election.

(Mel Melcon/Los Angeles Times)

Presbyterians, such as those who pray at the Koreatown church, have historically believed in predestination, the idea that God has determined everyone’s fate and we can’t do a thing about it. Raman doesn’t belong to the denomination, but perhaps its tenets moved her at Immanuel into believing that another unlikely political revival is in her stars. Because that’s the only way to make sense of Raman’s turn and belief that she can pull off the victory.

Raman’s 4th District is one of the wealthier in the city, a mishmash of Encino rich, Silver Lake hipster and the San Fernando Valley lower middle class — relatively sheltered from the day-to-day struggles of many working class and working poor Angelenos living in L.A. While Soto-Martínez and Hernandez draw their perspective and base from the union and activist left, Raman’s loudest supporters have struck me as folks who might have the passion and money to win over her district but don’t have the street-level knowledge and experience to sell their candidate to all corners of the city.

Raman has walked the progressive walk during her two council terms by getting arrested at sit-ins, showing up to protests and through her City Hall work. But the coalition she needs to topple Bass seems exceedingly hard to build.

She’d have to run under the assumption that enough people on the left think the current mayor is a sellout — or at minimum, just not progressive enough. That conservative and centrist voters so loathe Bass that they’ll hold their nose and vote for a democratic socialist. She’d have to win over Latino voters, who went with Caruso four years ago but who represent only 19% of Raman’s district in a city that’s nearly majority Latino.

Raman would have to peel off labor from Bass, who has counted on and rewarded their support from Sacramento to Washington to City Hall for over two decades. Needs to paint Bass as soft on Trump’s deportation deluge despite her consistently calling him out. Appeal to homeowners who won’t like Raman’s ties to YIMBY-minded folks seeking to shove multistory units anywhere and everywhere. Convince Black voters — who already must reckon with the likely reality that the city will not have three Black council members for the first time since 1963 because the leading candidates to replace outgoing Curren Price are Latinos — that dethroning the city’s first Black female mayor is somehow good for the community’s political future.

And then there’s Raman’s fellow DSA members. The rank-and-file are currently furious at her for recently, unsuccessfully trying to tweak L.A.’s so-called mansion tax. Raman can’t run in the primary with DSA’s endorsement because that process ended last fall. Supporters can petition for a vote on the matter, but that opens her anew to critics who engineered a censure of her during her 2024 reelection campaign for accepting an endorsement by a pro-Israel group while the country was bombing Gaza.

Raman — who can keep her council seat if she doesn’t beat Bass — is about to find out that L.A. isn’t as progressive as people make it out to be.

Los Angeles Councilmember Nithya Raman speaks to a crowd as she hosts an election night event in Edendale in March 2024 in Los Angeles.

(Myung Chun/Los Angeles Times)

She might have visions of a populist movement a la what happened in New York ushering her into City Hall — but she’s no Mamdani and Bass is no Eric Adams. Even fans of Raman I talked to over the weekend are upset that the progressive march that DSA-LA has successfully launched in city and county politics this decade now must deal with a curveball from within. It threatens to distract from efforts for other campaigns in a year when the left needs to concentrate on defeating true opponents — not a fellow traveler like Bass.

Raman must figure this disruption is worth the risk for her legacy and will further strengthen L.A.’s left. Let’s see what voters decide.

When Casey Wasserman boarded Jeffrey Epstein’s private jet for a two-week tour of Africa in 2002, he had little inkling he was embarking on a journey that could imperil his fortune.

The 28-year-old scion of Hollywood mogul Lew Wasserman was already the heir of a multimillion-dollar philanthropic foundation, the owner of a professional football team and the founder of a growing sports marketing firm. But many saw this as just the beginning for Wasserman, who seemed destined to follow his legendary grandfather as a business, political and culture titan.

He found an opportunity to step onto the world stage when former President Clinton invited him on a humanitarian trip to five African countries to promote AIDS/HIV prevention and economic development in nations racked by disease and war.

Wasserman, a prolific Clinton fundraiser whose grandfather helped him win the 1992 presidential election, was joined by others including his then-wife, Laura, actor Kevin Spacey, Epstein and his longtime companion Ghislaine Maxwell.

Casey Wasserman, then a 28-year-old owner of the LA Avengers, is photographed at his office in Beverly Hills in January 2003.

(Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

Revelations around that trip and Wasserman’s risque emails with Maxwell now threaten his legacy.

A trove of documents recently released by the U.S. Department of Justice offer new details about the journey to Africa and Wasserman’s intimate relationship with Maxwell — an entanglement that has jeopardized his leadership of the 2028 Los Angeles Olympic Games.

From left, former U.S. President Bill Clinton, then-AEG CEO of Timothy J. Leiweke and Casey Wasserman attend the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) annual meeting in 2011 in New York City.

(Daniel Berehulak / Getty Images for AEG)

Wasserman boarded Epstein’s jet three years before the family of a 14-year-old girl in Palm Beach, Fla., reported she was molested by Epstein, triggering a decades-long investigation that resulted in Epstein’s 2008 conviction for procuring a child for prostitution and 2019 arrest for sex trafficking underage girls. Wasserman has not been linked to any of Epstein’s wrongdoings.

Wasserman has previously apologized for his correspondence with Maxwell and expressed regret for having any association with both her and Epstein.

In a statement to The Times on Sunday, he said the Africa trip was the only time he met Epstein. “Following that trip, where I never witnessed anything inappropriate, I did not speak to, see him or communicate with him ever again,” he said.

This undated photo released by the U.S. Department of Justice shows Ghislaine Maxwell, a longtime confidant of Jeffrey Epstein and convicted sex offender.

(U.S. Department of Justice via Associated Press)

For Wasserman, now 51, the most damaging of the files highlight his relationship with Maxwell, the Oxford University-educated daughter of British newspaper magnate Robert Maxwell. She was sentenced to 20 years in prison in 2022 for conspiring with Epstein to sexually abuse minors.

“I think of you all the time,” Wasserman wrote to Maxwell about five months after he and his wife left Africa. “So, what do I have to do to see you in a tight leather outfit?”

Maxwell, in turn, offered Wasserman a massage that can “drive a man wild.”

The scandal has roiled Los Angeles, where Wasserman serves as the face of the Olympics. Since the emails were released Jan. 30 by the federal government, some L.A. officials have demanded that he step down from the organizing committee of the LA28 Olympic and Paralympic Games. But he appears to still have the support of Olympic leaders and the LA28 board, at least for now.

Wasserman is one of L.A.’s most influential figures, presiding over a sports marketing and talent agency that represents professional athletes, including star Dodgers pitcher Yoshinobu Yamamoto, and scores of top musicians, such as Kendrick Lamar, Kacey Musgraves, Chappell Roan and Coldplay.

“Wasserman is in trouble,” longtime Los Angeles political observer Sherry Bebitch Jeffe said. “These Games are so important to Los Angeles — economically and politically. This will not be helpful to the city if this drumbeat continues and gets louder.”

Movie studio titan Lew Wasserman’s only grandson entered the world in 1974 as Casey Myers.

His parents, Lynne Wasserman and stockbroker Jack Myers, separated when he was 7. His father wasn’t much of a figure in his life and was later charged with money-laundering. Lew and his wife, Edie, filled the gap.

Lew R. Wasserman, chairman of MCA’s board of directors since 1973, is shown in December 1976 at an unknown location. Wasserman became president and chief executive officer of MCA Inc., later known as Universal Studios Inc., the major entertainment and communications company.

(Associated Press)

“Lew was disappointed he never had a son,” Lew Wasserman’s biographer Dennis McDougal told The Times in 2002. “In his typical fashion, by dint of his power and his money and his overbearing personality, he took what he wanted. He essentially stole Jack Myers’ son. By the time Casey was a teenager, the die was cast. He was Lew’s little boy.”

Like his famous grandfather, Casey was drawn to politics and one figure in particular: Bill Clinton.

In 1992, the then-governor of Arkansas was struggling for traction in his presidential bid and his campaign was heavily in debt when a stately door opened for him in Los Angeles.

Lew Wasserman, the godfather of modern-day Hollywood, was willing to help propel Clinton to the White House.

A larger-than-life figure, Wasserman was a onetime talent agent who clawed his way to the pinnacle of power by building an entertainment colossus with movie production, television, music and theme parks. His MCA Inc., which owned Universal, gave a young Steven Spielberg his break that became “Jaws.”

Lew and Edie Wasserman held a splashy fundraiser for Clinton in August 1992 at their Beverly Hills mansion adorned with Matisse and Degas paintings. Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman and Kirk Douglas were among the stars who attended the $5,000-per-plate dinner.

Lew Wasserman and Edie Wasserman attend a party at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel in Beverly Hills on April 20, 1984.

(WWD / Penske Media via Getty Images)

“Lew figuratively — and literally — put his arm around Clinton, and that was very helpful,” said a former Clinton aide who was not authorized to speak publicly.

Clinton mingled with guests and gave a short speech, according to one former MCA agent who was there. Casey later told the Hollywood Reporter it was his first meeting with Clinton. He was just 18.

The event raised $1 million, according to a 1992 Times article. It also marked the beginning of a lasting friendship between the Wassermans and the Clintons — one that remains to this day, according to people close to the family.

As Wasserman aged, he was determined that his grandson would have the same high-level political access. “Lew loved Casey and he wanted him to meet a lot of the powerful people,” the former Clinton aide said.

At 21, Casey received his multimillion-dollar inheritance and changed his name to Wasserman. Two years later, he played golf with President Clinton at the Hillcrest Country Club.

After Clinton left the White House, the former president asked Lew Wasserman whether he would host a fundraising luncheon to promote the launch of his foundation.

“My grandfather said yes, ‘but only one thing: I will be there, but Casey is going to host at his house,’” Casey later said. “I was 26 at the time, and thankfully my wife — who wasn’t my wife yet — was around to help with the combined pressure of having the just ex-president and my grandparents there.

“We’ve since built an incredible friendship,” Casey said of Clinton. “I’ve been terribly lucky.”

Laura Ziffren and Wasserman Media Group CEO Casey Wasserman attend a luncheon honoring Casey at UCLA’s Pauley Pavilion on Nov. 18, 2015, in Westwood.

(Jesse Grant / Getty Images for National Football Foundation)

Casey Wasserman and his then-wife, Laura, set off for Africa on Epstein’s jet — an aircraft that would one day gain notoriety as the “Lolita Express” — the same year his family’s foundation donated $3 million to the Clinton Library Foundation.

Joining them was an eclectic crew: Clinton and his aides, Secret Service agents, actors Spacey and Chris Tucker, businessman Ronald Burkle, and former Secretary of Transportation Rodney Slater, along with Epstein and Maxwell.

Several unidentified young women were also on the plane.

Kevin Spacey poses for photographers on the red carpet for the film “Father Mother Sister Brother” at the Venice Film Festival in Venice, Italy, in August.

(Alessandra Tarantino / Invision / Associated Press)

According to newly released FBI notes based on a telephone interview with an emergency physician who traveled with the group, about four women ages 20 to 22 were on board. Their names were redacted from the file, but according to the physician, one young woman was a masseuse, another a model and a third described herself as a ballerina.

The physician, the report said, “thought it weird that Epstein flew with his former girlfriend, Maxwell, and four other women that no one knew why they were there as everyone else had a purpose.”

According to the FBI, the physician described the jet layout as a cockpit up front, then a seating area where Clinton and his staff sat, a kitchenette, another seating area with couches and a bedroom in the back with a sliding wooden door.

At one point, the physician told the FBI, one of the unidentified passengers shut Epstein’s bedroom door abruptly, as if they “did not want him to see or hear what was going on in that bedroom.” He also said he witnessed Epstein “grab and rub” an unidentified passenger’s buttocks.

There was no evidence that Wasserman or any other passengers — who largely stayed in the front of the cabin — witnessed any inappropriate behavior.

The group’s first stop was Ghana, where they launched a program with a Peruvian economist that would establish a legal property system for the poor. Next was Nigeria, and then Rwanda and Mozambique, where they visited AIDS clinics. In South Africa, they met Nelson Mandela to recognize a project to cut the country’s youth HIV/AIDS infection rate by half in five years.

Spacey told The Times he joined Clinton on the Africa trip to raise awareness and funds for HIV/AIDS, visit clinics and communities, and spend “an unforgettable day with Nelson Mandela.”

Financier (and future convicted sex offender) Jeffrey Epstein and his longtime confidant Ghislaine Maxwell at Mar-a-Lago in February 2000.

(Davidoff Studios Photography/Getty Images)

“The work — particularly helping ensure HIV-positive pregnant women received life-saving medication — remains one of the most meaningful experiences of my life,” he said in a statement. “It’s unfortunate that such important work has been overshadowed by the fact that the plane was provided by someone I did not know, had no association with, and never saw again.”

The Clinton Foundation did not respond to a request for comment. Clinton is scheduled to testify this month before a congressional committee — a historic appearance by a former president — to detail his dealings with Epstein.

“I have called for the full release of the Epstein files,” Clinton said Friday in a statement. “I have provided a sworn statement of what I know. And just this week, I’ve agreed to appear in person before the committee.”

After the trip, Wasserman and Maxwell kept in touch, sending each other salacious emails from various cities.

“Where are you, I miss you,” Wasserman wrote on April 1, 2003. “I will be in nyc for 4 days starting april 22 … can we book that massage now?”

“Umm — all that rubbing — are you sure you can take it?” Maxwell wrote on April 2. “The thought frankly is leaving me a little breathless. There are a few spots that apparently drive a man wild — I suppose I could practise them on you and you could let me know if they work or not?”

The pair also traded jokes. On April 6, Maxwell told him she was headed to London and could bring him back British staples: KitKat, cheddar cheese or baked beans. He passed.

“Ok, so that combo did not do it for you, what combo would then? she asked.

“You, me and not much else,” Wasserman replied.

In another exchange April 12, Maxwell told him that she was coming to L.A. and planned to stay at the Peninsula hotel in Beverly Hills. Wasserman replied with a smiley face.

A month after the racy exchanges, Laura Wasserman — daughter of Hollywood legal power broker Ken Ziffren, a close friend of Lew Wasserman — gave birth to the couple’s first child, a son.

Casey Wasserman launched his eponymous talent and marketing firm in 2002, a time when sports media were soaring and athletes increasingly were celebrities. He made a calculated decision to bypass the movie business, recognizing that he would always be measured against his grandfather’s success.

Over the next few decades, the Wasserman agency expanded into a major force in entertainment. Through strategic acquisitions, Wasserman now has about 4,000 employees and has branched out into television and music representation, acquiring a diverse portfolio of clients, including the Barenaked Ladies and the Dave Matthews Band.

His influence stretched further in 2014 when then-Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, a close friend, insisted that Wasserman’s fundraising skills and access to movers and shakers made him the perfect figure to lead L.A.’s effort to land the Summer Olympics. Three years later, L.A. secured the role as host of the 2028 Games.

Today, Wasserman is under extraordinary pressure to deliver a spectacular event to uphold the city’s tradition of excellence. The 1984 Games surpassed expectations and even turned a profit, projecting a unified and gleaming image of Los Angeles to the world.

Wasserman takes no salary as chairman of LA28, but he has received benefits, including travel and other expenses. The Games also will showcase, and perhaps boost the fortunes of, his agency’s numerous Olympic athlete clients.

His ties to corporate sponsors, politicians and sports figures have been viewed by civic leaders as crucial to the success of the Games.

Peter Chernin, former president of News Corp., left, and Casey Wasserman, chief executive officer of Wasserman Media Group, walk the grounds after a morning session during the Allen & Co. Media and Technology Conference in Sun Valley, Idaho, in 2015.

(David Paul Morris / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Even before the latest scandal, there were tensions between Wasserman and some Los Angeles politicians who are concerned that financial shortfalls in staging the $7-billion Summer Games will need to be covered by local taxpayers. Other host cities have been left with yawning deficits, prompting local political blowback. LA28 organizers have expressed confidence that the Games will be a success.

The relationship between the city and LA28 was further strained when the Daily Mail, a British tabloid, published allegations in 2024 that Wasserman was a “serial cheater” who’d carried on affairs with young female staff members. Wasserman, who separated from Laura in 2021, denied the allegations.

Wasserman, at the time, was in Paris for the 2024 Games.

The sports mogul — who had helped carry the torch at the 1984 Summer Olympics in L.A. when he was 10 — had been scheduled to join Mayor Karen Bass on the Paris stage during the flag handoff at the glitzy closing ceremony televised around the world.

But Bass, who does not have the personal relationship with Wasserman that her predecessors Garcetti and Antonio Villaraigosa did, instead stepped up to the stage alone. Then she was joined by gold-medal-winning gymnast Simone Biles, and they handed the flag to Tom Cruise.

Wasserman does not appear ready to bow to pressure from politicians, including Los Angeles County Supervisor Janice Hahn, who have called for him to step down as head of LA28.

Casey Wasserman, chair of the 2028 LA Olympics organizing committee, and President Trump look at Olympic medals during a signing ceremony at the White House in August.

(Kent Nishimura / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“This is not about shaming him for his past indiscretions,” Hahn said. “This is about the message we are sending to Epstein survivors and to the world about our values — especially as we work to combat any sex trafficking associated with the Games.”

After the release of the latest Epstein documents, lawyers, art museum executives, a former U.K. ambassador and Slovakia’s national security advisor have resigned, apologized or stepped back from high positions. Britain’s King Charles III stripped his brother Andrew of his prince title and position in the royal family after earlier revelations of his involvement.

“The Epstein files have been so powerful in moving people off the stage,” Bebitch Jeffe said.

But Wasserman appears to still enjoy the support of LA28’s nearly three-dozen-member board, which includes actor Jessica Alba, former movie mogul Jeffrey Katzenberg, Lakers minority owner Jeanie Buss, former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and former Trump White House aide Reince Priebus.

Ultimately, he could weather the Maxwell controversy, hoisting the Olympic flame in 2028 — just like he did as a boy.

LONDON — A prince, an ambassador, senior diplomats, top politicians and other government officials. All brought down by the Jeffrey Epstein files. And all in Europe, rather than the United States.

The huge trove of Epstein documents released by the U.S. Department of Justice has sent shock waves through Europe’s political, economic and social elites — dominating headlines, ending careers and spurring political and criminal investigations.

Former U.K. Ambassador to the United States Peter Mandelson was fired and could go to prison. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer faces a leadership crisis over the Mandelson appointment, and on Sunday, his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, resigned over having advised Starmer to appoint Mandelson.

Senior figures have fallen in Norway, Sweden and Slovakia. And, even before the latest batch of files, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, brother of King Charles III, lost his honors, princely title and taxpayer-funded mansion.

Apart from the former Prince Andrew, none of them faces claims of sexual wrongdoing. They have been toppled for maintaining friendly relationships with Epstein after he became a convicted sex offender.

“Epstein collected powerful people the way others collect frequent flier points,” said Mark Stephens, a specialist in international and human rights law at Howard Kennedy in London. “But the receipts are now in public, and some might wish they’d traveled less.”

The documents were published after a public frenzy over Epstein became a crisis for President Trump’s administration and led to a rare bipartisan effort to force the government to open its investigative files. But in the U.S., the long-sought publication has not brought the same public reckoning with Epstein’s associates — at least so far.

Rob Ford, a professor of political science at the University of Manchester, said that in Britain, “if you’re in those files, it’s immediately a big story.”

“It suggests to me we have a more functional media, we have a more functional accountability structure, that there is still a degree of shame in politics, in terms of people will say: ‘This is just not acceptable, this is just not done,’” he said.

British repercussions

U.K. figures felled by their ties to Epstein include the former Prince Andrew and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, whose charity shut down last week. The former prince paid millions to settle a lawsuit with late Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre, who said she was forced to have sex with Andrew beginning when she was 17, and he is facing pressure to testify in the U.S.

Like others now ensnared, veteran politician Mandelson long downplayed his relationship with Epstein, despite calling him “my best pal” in 2003. The new files reveal contact continued for years after the financier’s 2008 prison term for sexual offenses involving a minor. In a July 2009 message, Mandelson appeared to refer to Epstein’s release from prison as “liberation day.”

Starmer fired Mandelson in September over earlier revelations about his Epstein ties. Now British police are investigating whether Mandelson committed misconduct in public office by passing on sensitive government information to Epstein.

Starmer has apologized to Epstein’s victims and pledged to release public documents that will show Mandelson lied when he was being vetted for the ambassador’s job. That may not be enough to stop furious lawmakers trying to eject the prime minister from office over his failure of judgment, and it has already claimed his top advisor in McSweeney.

American associates

Experts caution that Britain shouldn’t be too quick to pat itself on the back over its rapid reckoning with Mandelson. The U.S. has a better record than the U.K. when it comes to declassifying and publishing information.

But Alex Thomas, executive director of the Institute for Government think tank, said that “there is something about parliamentary democracy,” with its need for a prime minister to retain the confidence of Parliament to stay in office, “that I think does help drive accountability.”

A few high-profile Americans have faced repercussions over their friendly ties with Epstein. Most prominent is former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, who went on leave from academic positions at Harvard University late last year.

Brad Karp quit last month as chair of top U.S. law firm Paul Weiss after revelations in the latest batch of documents, and the National Football League said it would investigate Epstein’s relationship with New York Giants co-owner Steve Tisch, who exchanged sometimes crude emails with Epstein about potential dates with adult women.

Other U.S. Epstein associates have not yet faced severe sanction, including former Trump strategist Stephen K. Bannon, who exchanged hundreds of texts with Epstein; Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who accepted an invitation to visit Epstein’s private island; and tech billionaire Elon Musk, who discussed visiting the island in emails, but says he never made the trip.

Former President Clinton has been compelled by Republicans to testify before Congress about his friendship with Epstein, and Trump has repeatedly faced scrutiny over his own long friendship with the financier. A New York Times review identified more than 5,300 files in the Epstein documents containing over 38,000 references to Trump, his family or his properties. Neither Trump nor Clinton has ever been accused of wrongdoing by Epstein’s victims.

European investigations

The Epstein files reveal the global network of royals, political leaders, billionaires, bankers and academics that the wealthy financier built around him.

Across Europe, officials have had to resign or face censure after the Epstein files revealed relationships that were more extensive than previously disclosed.

Joanna Rubinstein, a Swedish United Nations official, quit after the revelation of a 2012 visit to Epstein’s Caribbean island. Miroslav Lajcak, national security advisor to Slovakia’s prime minister, quit over his communications with Epstein, which included the pair discussing “gorgeous” girls.

Latvia, Lithuania and Poland have set up wide-ranging official investigations into the documents. Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk said a team would scour the files for potential Polish victims and any links between Epstein and Russian secret services.

Epstein took an interest in European politics, in one email exchange with billionaire Peter Thiel calling Britain’s 2016 vote to leave the European Union “just the beginning” and part of a return to “tribalism.”

Grégoire Roos, director of the Europe program at the think tank Chatham House, said the files uncover Epstein’s “far-reaching” network of contacts in Europe, “and the level of access among not just those who were already in power, but those who were getting there.”

“It will be interesting to see whether in the correspondence he had an influence in policymaking,” Roos said.

Norwegian revelations

Few countries have been as roiled by the Epstein revelations as Norway, a Scandinavian nation with a population of less than 6 million.

The country’s economic crimes unit has opened a corruption investigation into former Prime Minister Thorbjorn Jagland — who also once headed the committee that hands out the Nobel Peace Prize — over his ties with Epstein. His lawyer said Jagland would cooperate with the probe.

Also ensnared are high-profile Norwegian diplomat couple Terje Rod-Larsen and Mona Juul, key players in the 1990s Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts. Juul has been suspended as Norway’s ambassador to Jordan after revelations including the fact that Epstein left the couple’s children $10 million in a will drawn up shortly before his death by suicide in a New York prison in 2019.

Norwegians’ respect for their royal family has been dented by new details about Epstein’s friendship with Crown Princess Mette-Marit, who is married to the heir to the throne, Prince Haakon. The files include jokey exchanges and emails planning visits to Epstein properties, teeth-whitening appointments and shopping trips.

The princess apologized Friday “to all of you whom I have disappointed.”

The disclosures came as her son from a previous relationship, Marius Borg Hoiby, stands trial in Oslo on rape charges, which he denies.

Lawless writes for the Associated Press. AP writers David B. Caruso in New York and Danica Kirka in London contributed to this report.

Feb. 9 (UPI) — As strained relations between Canada and the Trump administration enter a second year, the latest statistics and anecdotal evidence indicate the flight of Canadian “snowbirds” from Florida is still negatively affecting its vital tourism economy.

Angry Canadians have been engaged in an unofficial boycott of U.S. travel since early early last year, when a newly re-elected President Donald Trump began to repeatedly voice his desire to annex Canada as the “51st state” and slapped tariffs on broad sectors of the Canadian economy.

And rather than losing steam, the slowdown of Canadian visitors to Florida and elsewhere in United States appears to be holding steady if not picking up speed as the 2025-26 winter tourism season progresses.

Travel statistics recently released by Canadian and Florida officials are continuing to show the effects of the slowdown, which has been blamed not only on political tensions, but also on a weak Canadian dollar and other economic factors.

In November, the number of Canadian-resident return trips from the United States was down 23.6% year-over-year, Statistics Canada reported Jan. 23.

Meanwhile, Visit Florida reported that while overall tourism was up 3.2% year-over-year during the third quarter of 2025, visits by Canadians were down 15% and have plunged 28% when compared to 2019’s pre-pandemic levels.

The third-quarter total of 507,000 Canadian visitors was the lowest for any single quarter since the COVID-19-affected fourth quarter of 2021, when the state logged just 275,000 Canadians visitors.

After Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis initially dismissed reports of the sharp dropoff in Canadian visitors, state tourism officials now say they are planning to reach out to their North American neighbors in hopes of attracting more visitors.

Visit Florida President and CEO Bryan Griffin told members of the agency’s executive committee Jan. 26 he is setting up a meeting with Canadian officials to “see what we can do” to boost the flow of tourists, the News Service of Florida reported last week.

His task may be a big one, however, as the numbers continue their negative trends and seem likely to stay depressed, or perhaps even worsen, as the year progresses, according to a noted Canadian travel expert.

Frédéric Dimanche, a professor and former director of the Ted Rogers School of Hospitality and Tourism Management at Toronto Metropolitan University, said he’s not seeing any signs of the situation improving.

“I don’t think things have changed, and if you look at the recent Statistics Canada data for car returns and employment and this type of thing, it’s down,” he told UPI. “We’re still down, and what must be kept in mind is that last year was just the beginning of a trend that has since deepened or expanded.”

Dimanche predicted that as more tourism figures are released in the coming months, they will continue to show huge declines in Canadian tourist visits across the United States when compared to 2024.

“You really see how much of a gap there still is when you look back to two years ago,” he said, dubbing the phenomenon a “Trump slump” in which international tourism fell by 5.4% in the United States last year even while jumping by 4% around the rest of the world.

While cautioning that he “has no crystal ball,” Dimanche predicted last year’s trend, with its month-after-month declines, will continue into this year.

“It’s not going to stop because it’s 2026,” he said, noting that it’s not only Trump’s threats to Canadian sovereignty and his tariff policies, but also the strong U.S. dollar, aggressive immigration enforcement activities, perceived safety issues and the potential for social media screening at the border that are combining to “make people are feel very uncomfortable about going to the U.S.”

Gulf Coast tourism hard-hit

The effects of the Canadian tourism slowdown appear to be hitting Florida’s Gulf Coast the hardest, especially in the southwestern part of state in and around Lee and Collier counties, where snowbirds from north of the border have long-established ties with vacation rentals and homes and condos they own.

The issue remains a sensitive and politically fraught one in the region, and questions posed by UPI to local tourism officials and real estate agents who have Canadian customers, as well as to Canadian snowbird organizations, were met with “no comment” or were not responded to.

However, there is statistical and anecdotal evidence to suggest that southwestern Florida is feeling a keen economic impact during this winter tourism season.

Media interviews and online comments by Canadian travelers indicate the backlash to Trump’s policies is continuing unabated, with traffic at tourism-dependent Gulf Coast businesses down and Canadian homeowners rushing to sell their vacation properties.

Among the firsthand evidence of the plight faced by Gulf Coast businesses comes from Collier County, which includes such favorite Canadian tourism destinations as Naples and Marco Island. Tourism is the county’s largest industry, supporting nearly 30,000 jobs and generating more than $2.8 billion in direct economic impact annually.

County officials reported last month that November’s overall international tourism traffic fell by 10.8% compared with the year-earlier figure, including a 14.8% decline in Canadian visitors, who numbered just 12,000. Their share of the county’s overall tourism pie dropped from 5.9% from 6.7%.

Those numbers come on top of a “choppy” and “soft” local tourism economy since 2024, due not only to the decline in visits from Canada, but also broader economic trends such as stubborn inflation and lack of consumer confidence.

Sharon Lockwood, area general manager of the JW Marriott Marco Island Beach Resort, told the Collier County Board of Commissioners in September the slowdown is making a dent in the industry.

“I can tell you firsthand, I have lost some significant group business from Canada over the last two years, year and a-half, but most importantly in 2025 for future business,” she said. “So I’m going to be out looking for new business.”

The hotelier said she couldn’t justify hiring new workers.

“I don’t have enough hours for the individuals that I’m currently employing,” Lockwood said, adding, “Restaurants [on Marco Island] are closing down one or two days a week because they cannot afford the payroll to stay open full-time. It has not been that way since I’ve been down here.”

Meanwhile, there is unmistakable evidence that significant numbers of Canadian homeowners in Florida and elsewhere in the United States are seeking to put their homes on the market as they look to exit what they feel has become politically hostile territory.

More than half (54%) of Canadians who currently own residential property in the United States said last summer they were planning to sell within the next year, with most of them (62%) citing the actions of the Trump administration as the main reason, according to a survey conducted by real estate firm Royal LePage.

“Places like Florida, Arizona and California stand to lose millions in economic activity each year — and thousands of neighbors — if Canadian owners pull their capital from U.S. housing markets,” Royal LePage president and CEO Phil Soper said in a release.

Along the Gulf Coast, those Canadians are selling into a oversaturated market that is expected to take hard price hits during 2026, with likely declines of 10.2% in Cape Coral, 8.9% in North Port and 3.6% in Tampa, according to projections from Realtor.com.

In April, Budge Huskey, CEO of Premier Sotheby’s International Realty in Naples, Fla., called Canadians “integral to our housing market, especially along the Gulf Coast, contributing to community vibrancy, tourism, and property tax revenue,” noting in an opinion piece published in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune that they account for 11% of all foreign homebuyers in the United States, with Florida consistently ranked as their top destination.

“Yet, recent trade tensions have chipped away at that relationship,” he wrote. “Beyond the economic impact, rhetoric and policy decisions perceived as antagonistic have left many Canadians feeling unwelcome.

“In neighborhoods across our markets, including likely your own, it’s not uncommon to see ‘for sale’ signs on properties owned by Canadians who have decided they’ve had enough.”

Huskey implored all Floridians “to remind our northern neighbors just how much they are respected and appreciated.”

Dimanche said the trend toward Canadians selling their Florida homes is not only related to Trump, but also to economic concerns.

“One of the factors is that the Canadian dollar is still weak compared to the U.S. dollar, even though the U.S. dollar has gone down slightly the past couple of weeks,” he said.
“The Canadian dollar is very low, so that makes things a lot more expensive for the Canadians.

“The second thing is the price of home insurance has gone up and keeps going up in Florida,” he added. “This is related to global warming, which triggers hurricanes and rising sea levels. A lot of people may not be concerned about climate change in the U.S., but the insurers are paying attention to this and they make you pay for it.”

Politics, hostility determining factors

Some Canadian snowbirds are telling reporters and posting online that they are looking to move on from Florida due to politics and being made to feel unwelcome.

The Canadian Snowbird Association, a nonprofit group advocating for the interests of Canadians who live part of the year in the United States, declined to comment to UPI on how their members are viewing the political and economic tensions as the winter season continues.

But one member who posted about it in the organization’s “Bird Talk” forum in December summed up the feelings of many others who have made comments on social media.

“We believe in democracy and are leery of the current situation as snowbirds to Florida,” they wrote. “We are seriously considering not going south this winter. As we own a home there, we have also thought of selling. We are very sad as in the past 12 years, we have loved our winters south.

“Almost all our neighbors, family and friends have mentioned to us that we should not go; they won’t be going or visiting us. If we didn’t own, we absolutely would not go. And are close to being positive in not going even though we own a home there. We feel we must take a stand for democracy!”

The forum moderator responded that “hundreds of thousands of Canadians are going south for the winter. We suspect that many of them are doing it quietly,” while blaming the media “for negative stories and gets lots of attention when they amplify the rhetoric.

“Do what is right for you, your family and your conscience. Enjoy your winter and travel well!”

One Canadian couple, Gwen and Paul Edmond of Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, told CTV News last month they are selling their home at a seniors’ complex in Largo, Fla., after spending five months a year in Florida since 2011.

“We are not happy with the change in government, as many aren’t. We will just leave it at that, I guess. It feels very unsettled there,” Gwen Edmond said.

Dhaka, Bangladesh – On Wednesday evening in Dhaka, Shafiqur Rahman, the emir (chief) of the Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, unveiled an ambitious election manifesto. A key promise: If his party wins the country’s February 12 election, it would lay the ground for Bangladesh to quadruple its gross domestic product (GDP) to $2 trillion by 2040.

Addressing politicians and diplomats, the 67-year-old Rahman pledged investment in technology-driven agriculture, manufacturing, information technology, education and healthcare, alongside higher foreign investment and increased public spending.

Economists in Dhaka have cast doubt on whether sweeping promises can be financed, describing the manifesto as heavy on slogans but short on detail. But for Jamaat’s leadership, the manifesto is less about fiscal arithmetic than signalling intent, say analysts.

For years, critics have tried to portray Jamaat, Bangladesh’s largest Islamist party, as driven too much by religious doctrine to be able to govern a young, diverse, forward-looking population. The manifesto, by contrast, presents a party long excluded from power as a credible alternative – and as a force that sees no contradiction between its religious foundations and the modern future that Bangladeshis aspire to.

His audience was telling too.

Until recently, Bangladesh’s business elites and foreign diplomats either kept their distance from Jamaat or engaged with it discreetly. Now, they are doing so openly.

Over the past few months, European, Western, and even Indian diplomats have sought meetings with Rahman, a figure who, until not long ago, was seen by many internationally as almost politically untouchable.

For a leader whose party has been banned twice, including by ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s administration, the coming election is raising a question few would have dared to ask even a year ago: Could Shafiqur Rahman become Bangladesh’s next prime minister?

‘I will fight for the people’

The shift in how Jamaat and its leader are being viewed is at least partly to do with a political vacuum that has opened up in Bangladesh.

The July 2024 uprising that ousted Sheikh Hasina did more than end her long rule. It upended the country’s political order, hollowing out the familiar duopoly that for decades defined Bangladeshi politics – the rivalry between Hasina’s Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP).

With the Awami League effectively barred from the political field and the BNP the only big party left standing, a vacuum emerged. Many initially assumed it would be filled by the student-led National Citizen Party (NCP). Instead, Jamaat – long pushed to the margins – moved to occupy the space.

As Bangladesh heads towards a high-stakes election in less than two weeks, Jamaat has now emerged as one of the country’s two most prominent political forces. Some pre-election polls now place it in direct competition with the BNP.

At the centre of that transformation is Rahman, according to Ahsanul Mahboob Zubair, Jamaat’s assistant secretary-general and a longtime associate of the party chief.

Zubair, who worked closely with Rahman when he led Jamaat in the country’s Sylhet region, said the resurgence is the result of years of grassroots social work and political survival under repression.

Rahman, a soft-spoken former government doctor, took over as Jamaat’s chief in 2019, at a time when the party was banned under Hasina. In December 2022, he was arrested in the middle of the night on charges of supporting militancy and was released only after 15 months when he secured bail.

In March 2025, months after the student-led protest had overthrown Hasina and an interim government under Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus had taken office, Rahman’s name was dropped from the list of accused in the case.

Since then, his carefully calibrated, emotional public appearances have drawn wide attention.

At a massive rally in Dhaka last July, Rahman collapsed twice on stage due to heat-related illness but returned to finish his speech, defying doctors’ advice.

“As long as Allah grants me life, I will fight for the people,” he told the crowd, barely sitting on the stage, supported by the doctors. “If Jamaat is elected, we will be servants, not owners. No minister will take plots or tax-free cars. There will be no extortion, no corruption. I want to tell the youth clearly – we are with you.”

Reinventing Jamaat’s image

Supporters describe Shafiqur Rahman as approachable and morally grounded – a leader who prefers disaster zones to drawing rooms, and projects calm in a country exhausted by confrontation.

Now in his third term as chief, Rahman commands firm authority inside the party.

“He is a good and pious man. Everyone in the party trusts him,” said Lokman Hossain, a Jamaat supporter in Dhaka. He said that over the past year and a half, the party has reached far more people than before, with Rahman’s appeal beyond Jamaat’s traditional base playing a central role.

Rahman’s challenge, however, is no longer purely electoral – it is reputational.

As new supporters drift towards Jamaat, he is attempting to reframe how the party is seen: less as an Islamic force defined by doctrine and history, and more as a vehicle for clean governance, discipline and change.

Whether this reinvention is substantive or merely cosmetic will define both Rahman’s leadership and Jamaat’s future, say analysts.

Any attempt to recast Jamaat’s public image, however, runs up against the unresolved legacy of 1971. For decades, the party’s role during Bangladesh’s war of independence – when it sided with Pakistan – and the subsequent trials and executions of several senior leaders have shaped perceptions of Jamaat at home and abroad.

Rahman has approached that history with caution. He has avoided detailed admissions but has recently acknowledged what he calls Jamaat’s “past mistakes”, asking forgiveness if the party caused harm.

The language marks a subtle shift from outright denial, while stopping short of naming specific actions or responsibilities. Supporters say this reflects political realism rather than evasion – an attempt to move the party beyond its dark chapter. Critics, by contrast, see the ambiguity as deliberate, arguing it softens Jamaat’s image without confronting the substance of its past.

“He knows what those mistakes were,” said Saleh Uddin Ahmed, a United States-based Bangladeshi academic and political analyst. “But stating them explicitly would destabilise his leadership inside the party.”

Ahmed nonetheless considers Rahman more moderate than Jamaat’s previous leaders, noting his relative willingness to discuss unresolved historical questions and address issues such as women’s rights – topics the party long avoided. “This opening up is also happening because of increased public and media scrutiny,” Ahmed said. “People are asking questions now, and Jamaat has to respond.”

Jamaat’s effort to reach voters beyond its traditional base and reassure foreign audiences, while retaining the loyalty of its conservative supporters, has created a persistent tension – one that has often resulted in dual messaging.

That balancing act has been evident in public statements by senior leaders. Abdullah Md Taher, one of Rahman’s closest aides, in an interview with Al Jazeera, said Jamaat is a moderate party, adding that it would not impose or strictly adhere to Islamic law.

The party has also, for the first time in its history, nominated a Hindu candidate.

Yet when addressing conservative supporters, the party continues to emphasise its Islamic identity, with some backers encouraging votes for Jamaat as an act of religious merit – a practice the rival BNP has criticised as the misuse of religious sentiment.

The strategy appears to have helped Jamaat re-enter political conversations that were once closed to it. At the same time, it has sharpened doubts about how far Rahman is willing – or able – to go in reinterpreting the party’s past and ideology as he courts a broader electorate.

Those limits are most visible in Jamaat’s stance on women and leadership. They came into sharp focus during his Al Jazeera interview in which Shafiqur Rahman said it was not possible for a woman to hold the party’s top position – a remark that reignited longstanding criticism of Jamaat’s gender politics, despite its attempts to project a more inclusive image.

“Allah has made everyone with a distinct nature. A man cannot bear a child or breastfeed,” Rahman said. “There are physical limitations that cannot be denied. When a mother gives birth, how will she carry out these responsibilities? It is not possible.”

Critics argue that the stance exposes the limits of Jamaat’s claims of moderation.

Mubashar Hasan, an adjunct researcher at the Humanitarian and Development Research Initiative at Western Sydney University in Australia and author of Narratives of Bangladesh, also questioned Jamaat’s internal culture, noting that even female leaders who publicly endorse such views operate within a male-dominated hierarchy. He was referring to the party’s large number of female supporters and members, including women within its Majlis-e-Shura, the highest decision-making body. “It reflects a structure where women follow what men say in that party,” he said.

The criticism carries particular weight given the movement that helped reopen political space for Jamaat itself. The July 2024 uprising against Hasina, analysts note, saw extensive participation by women, often at the front lines of protest. “Women were part of that movement as much as men, if not more,” Hasan said. “Undermining them now gives Jamaat a deeply problematic outlook.”

Political historians argue this is not a new contradiction but a longstanding one. Since contesting elections under its own symbol in 1986, Jamaat has never fielded a woman candidate for a general parliamentary seat, relying instead on reserved quotas.

“This isn’t a temporary position or a tactical lapse,” said political historian and author Mohiuddin Ahmad.“It reflects the party’s ideological structure, and that structure has not fundamentally changed.”

The ‘grandfather’ expanding Jamaat’s reach

Yet among Jamaat supporters – particularly younger ones – the issue is often filtered through loyalty to Rahman himself rather than doctrine.

During his recent nationwide campaign, young supporters can frequently be heard calling Shafiqur Rahman “dadu” – grandfather. White-bearded, soft-spoken and visibly attentive to supporters, Rahman fits the image.

“He connects with young people through his words,” said Abdullah Al Maruf, a Gen Z law student from Chattogram and a Jamaat supporter. “There is something about his recent work that feels like the relationship between a grandfather and his grandchildren. Where BNP leaders often belittle young people, Shafiqur speaks to them with respect.”

Maruf added that Rahman’s appeal extends beyond Jamaat’s traditional base. “Outside the usual Jamaat circle, he is more popular than previous Jamaat leaders,” he said.

Zubair, Jamaat’s assistant secretary-general, described the party’s outreach beyond traditional voters – such as the decision to nominate a Hindu candidate – not as a tactical move but one rooted in Jamaat’s constitutional framework rather than political expediency.

“Our constitution allows any Bangladeshi, regardless of religion, to be part of the party if they support our political, economic and social policies,” he said. “Supporting our religious doctrine is not a requirement for political participation.”

Jamaat leaders argue the move reflects a broader effort to shift the party’s public image – from one defined primarily by theology to one centred on governance and accountability. “We are emphasising corruption-free politics, discipline and public service,” Zubair said. “People have seen our leaders stand with them during floods, during COVID, and during the July uprising. That is why support is growing.”

Krishna Nandi, the party’s Hindu candidate from the city of Khulna, agrees. “When families fall into poverty, Jamaat-linked welfare networks step in without asking about religion or political loyalty. This culture of service explains why many citizens see Jamaat not as a party of slogans but as a party of discipline, structure and responsibility,” Nandi wrote for Al Jazeera.

The Jamaat’s outreach has also extended well beyond domestic audiences. Zubair said the party’s leadership has held meetings with Indian diplomats in Dhaka who paid a courtesy visit to Shafiqur when he was ill. Jamaat figures were invited to India’s 77th Republic Day reception at the Indian High Commission last month – an unprecedented step.

European and Western diplomats, he added, have also sought engagements with Rahman in recent months. That shift has been mirrored in Washington. In a leaked audio recording reported by The Washington Post, a US diplomat was quoted as saying American officials wanted to “be friends” with the Jamaat, asking journalists whether members of the party’s influential student wing might be willing to appear in their programmes.

As Jamaat’s international engagement expands – and as it emerges as a serious electoral force alongside frontrunner BNP – many general supporters express confidence in Rahman’s leadership.

“He is a patriot,” said Abul Kalam, a voter in Rahman’s Dhaka constituency. “Whether as prime minister or opposition leader, he will lead us well.”

What lies next for the party is unclear. But analysts say that irrespective of the outcome of the elections, Rahman’s stature within Jamaat – and beyond, in Bangladesh – appears resolute.

“Shafiqur Rahman is an experienced politician and is frequently in the headlines,” Ahmad, the political historian, said. “His political thinking is not yet fully clear, but his grip over the party is evident.”

LDP looks set to secure 316 seats in Japan’s 500-member house, marking its best result since its founding in 1955.

Japan’s Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has promised to cut taxes and keep her cabinet intact as she celebrated her Liberal Democratic Party’s (LDP) landslide victory in Sunday’s general election.

Takaichi’s pledge on Monday came as projections by the NHK broadcaster showed the conservative LDP securing 316 seats in the 500-member National Assembly and winning a “historic” two-thirds majority in the lower house.

The results marked the best result for the LDP since its founding in 1955, surpassing the previous record of 300 seats won in 1986 under then-Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone.

LDP’s junior partner Japan Innovation Party won 36 seats, while the main opposition Centrist Reform Alliance managed to keep only 49 of the 172 seats it previously held.

Analysts credited the LDP’s triumph to the extraordinary popularity of Takaichi, who is Japan’s first female leader, and say it will allow her to pursue significant changes in Japan’s security, immigration and economic policies.

In a televised interview with NHK on Monday, Takaichi said she will emphasise policies meant to make Japan strong and prosperous.

She told NHK that she will push for the reduction of consumption taxes as promised by the LDP. During the campaign, the governing party had said it would ease household living costs by suspending the 8 percent food sales tax for two years.

“Most parties are in favour of reducing the consumption tax, such as reducing the tax on food items to zero, or to 5 percent, or reducing the tax on all items to 5 percent,” Takaichi said.

“The LDP has also campaigned for a consumption tax cut. I strongly want to call for the establishment of a supra-party forum to speed up discussion on this, as it is a big issue.”

Takaichi also indicated that she will not make any changes in her cabinet, calling it a “good team”.

The head of Japan’s top business lobby, Keidanren, also welcomed the result, saying it will help in restoring political stability.

“Japan’s economy is now at a critical juncture for achieving sustainable and strong growth,” Yoshinobu Tsutsui said.

United States President Donald Trump, who endorsed Takaichi ahead of the election, congratulated Takaichi in a post on social media and wished her “Great Success”.

South Korea’s President Lee Jae Myung also offered his congratulations and said he hoped to see her soon in Seoul.

The leaders of India, Italy and Taiwan also welcomed Takaichi’s win.

Al Jazeera’s Patrick Fok, reporting from Tokyo, said the message from Taiwan’s President William Lai Ching-te to Takaichi could upset China.

“Remember that Takaichi triggered Chinese anger after suggesting that Japan might intervene in the event of a Chinese attack on Taiwan,” he said, referring to the diplomatic storm the Japanese leader set off last year shortly after taking office.

“How she handles that relationship between Tokyo and Beijing is likely to define Japan’s foreign policy,” Fok added.

China regards Taiwan as part of its territory and has been keeping a close eye on Takaichi and the results of the polls.

The strong mandate for Takaichi could also accelerate her plans to bolster military defence, which Beijing has cast as an attempt to revive Japan’s militaristic past.

“Beijing will not welcome Takaichi’s victory,” said David Boling, principal at the Asia Group, a firm that advises companies on geopolitical risk.

“China now faces the reality that she is firmly in place – and that its efforts to isolate her completely failed,” Boling told the Reuters news agency.

While Los Angeles mayor is the marquee race and has already generated plenty of drama, with surprises coming down to the wire of last Saturday’s filing deadline, many other seats will also be contested in the June 2 primary.

A host of candidates arrived at the City Clerk’s Office last week to file paperwork to run for city attorney, city controller, eight City Council seats and two L.A. Unified school board seats.

Some may not get on the ballot — each candidate must gather 500 legitimate voter signatures by March 4, which is relatively easy in citywide races but harder in council and school board districts. In each race, if no candidate gets more than 50% of the vote in June, the top two finishers will compete in a November runoff.

City Attorney Hydee Feldstein Soto is facing three challengers — deputy attorney general Marissa Roy, human rights attorney Aida Ashouri and Deputy Dist. Atty. John McKinney.

City Controller Kenneth Mejia has one opponent — Zach Sokoloff, senior vice president for asset management at studio owner Hackman Capital Partners, after former State Sen. Isadore Hall dropped out.

In District 3, which covers the southwestern San Fernando Valley including Woodland Hills, Tarzana and Reseda, City Councilmember Bob Blumenfield is terming out, leaving the field open.

The five candidates hoping to replace him are Jon Rawlings, a member of the Tarzana Neighborhood Council; Timothy Gaspar, founder of Gaspar Insurance; Lehi White, a small-business owner; Barri Worth Girvan, former director of community affairs for L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath; and media executive Christopher Robert “C.R.” Celona.

City Councilmember Curren Price’s downtown and South L.A. district is also up for grabs. Twelve candidates, including Price’s Deputy Chief of Staff Jose Ugarte, have entered the race to represent District 9 after he terms out.

Price is facing public corruption charges and was ordered last month to stand trial.

In addition to Ugarte, the candidates are Estuardo Mazariegos, co-director of Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment; Jo Uraizee, a social worker; Adriana Cabrera, president of the Central Alameda Neighborhood Council; Jorge Nuño, a social entrepreneur; Martha Sánchez, a professor at Los Angeles Mission College and a therapist; Elmer Roldan, executive director of Communities in Schools of Los Angeles; Michelle Washington, a social worker; Jorge Hernandez Rosas, an educator and therapist; Chris Martin, a civil rights attorney; Enrique Hernandez-Garcia, a college student; and Nathan Juarez, a cashier.

In the other five City Council races, challengers will try to unseat incumbents.

Eight people are seeking to oust Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez to represent District 1, which stretches from Glassell Park and Highland Park to Chinatown and Pico Union.

The District 1 challengers who filed last week are Maria Lou Calanche, a former member of the Los Angeles Police Commission and founder of the nonprofit Legacy LA; Raul Claros, founder of the CD1 Coalition, which organizes community cleanup days; Jesse Rosas, a tax preparer and businessman; Joseph Lucey, a businessman; Nelson Grande, an executive consultant and former president of Avenida Entertainment Group; Sylvia Robledo, a small-business owner and former council aide; Rosa Requeno, a community activist; and Annalee Harr.

In District 5, Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky is defending her seat against six Angelenos who filed paperwork last week in hopes of representing a West L.A. district that includes Bel-Air, Westwood and Hancock Park.

Her challengers are publicist Dory Frank; Ashkan “Alex’’ Nazarian, co-founder of AAA Diamond and Jewelry; city employee Peter Gerard Kearns; real estate professional Eddie Ha; tenant rights attorney Henry Mantel; and small-business accountant Morgan Oyler.

In the northeastern San Fernando Valley, four challengers are looking to take the reins from Councilmember Monica Rodriguez and represent District 7 — regional recruiting manager Tony Rodriguez (no relation), hospitality worker Michael Daniel Ebenkamp, worker advocate Ernesto Ayala and business owner Daniel Lerma.

In the 11th District, Councilmember Traci Park faces Faizah Malik, a civil rights attorney, and Jeremy Wineberg, an entrepreneur and Pacific Palisades resident, in the contest to represent Westside communities including Brentwood, Pacific Palisades and Venice.

Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez in the 13th District, which includes Hollywood and East Hollywood as well as parts of Silver Lake, Echo Park and Westlake, has seven challengers — military veteran Gilbert Vitela Jr.; Rich Sarian, an urban community planner and vice president of strategic initiatives for the Social District; Dylan Kendall, an entrepreneur and founder of Grow Hollywood; Colter Carlisle, vice president of the East Hollywood Neighborhood Council; community safety advocate Sebastian Davis; creative director Kristen Suszek; and district improvement advocate Gregory Downer.

In the 15th District, which includes San Pedro and other harbor-area communities as well as Watts, Councilmember Tim McOsker is running against two challengers — community organizer Jordan Rivers and homeless shelter director Phillip Crouch Jr.

Three Los Angeles Unified school board members will defend their seats in the June 2 primary.

In District 2, Rocío Rivas faces challenges from public school teacher Raquel Zamora and executive and education advocate Joseph Quintana.

District 4 incumbent Nick Melvoin will run against Ankur Patel, a teacher and outreach director, and Benjamin-Shalom “Bo” Rodriguez, an educator, artist and professor.

School Board Member Kelly Gonez faces a single challenger for her District 6 seat — retired aerospace engineer John “J.P.” Perron.

City News Service contributed to this report.

MINNEAPOLIS — For days, Luis Ramirez had an uneasy feeling about the men dressed as utility workers he’d seen outside his family’s Mexican restaurant in suburban Minneapolis.

They wore high-visibility vests and spotless white hard hats, he noticed, even while parked in their vehicle. His search for the Wisconsin-based electrician advertised on the car’s doors returned no results.

On Tuesday, when their Nissan returned to the lot outside his restaurant, Ramirez, 31, filmed his confrontation with the two men, who hide their faces as he approaches and appear to be wearing heavy tactical gear beneath their yellow vests.

“This is what our taxpayer money goes to: renting these vehicles with fake tags to come sit here and watch my business,” Ramirez shouts in the video.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement did not respond to inquiries about whether the men were federal immigration officers. But encounters like Ramirez’s have become increasingly common.

As the sweeping immigration crackdown in Minnesota continues, legal observers and officials say they have received a growing number of reports of federal agents impersonating construction workers, delivery drivers and, in some cases, anti-ICE activists.

Not all of those incidents have been verified, but they have heightened fears in a state already on edge, adding to legal groups’ concerns about the Trump administration’s dramatic reshaping of immigration enforcement tactics nationwide.

“If you have people afraid that the electrical worker outside their house might be ICE, you’re inviting public distrust and confusion on a much more dangerous level,” said Naureen Shah, the director of immigration advocacy at the American Civil Liberties Union. “This is what you do if you’re trying to control a populace, not trying to do routine, professional law enforcement.”

A ‘more extreme degree’ of deception

In the past, immigration authorities have sometimes used disguises and other deceptions, which they call ruses, to gain entry into homes without a warrant.

The tactics became more common during President Trump’s first term, attorneys said, prompting an ACLU lawsuit accusing immigration agents of violating the Constitution by posing as local law enforcement during home raids. A recent settlement restricted the practice in Los Angeles. But ICE deceptions remain legal elsewhere in the country.

Still, the undercover operations reported in Minnesota would appear to be a “more extreme degree than we’ve seen in the past,” said Shah, in part because they seem to be happening in plain sight.

Where past ruses were aimed at deceiving immigration targets, the current tactics may also be a response to Minnesota’s sprawling networks of citizen observers that have sought to call attention to federal agents before they make arrests.

At the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building in Minneapolis, the city’s central hub of ICE activity, activists told the Associated Press they had seen agents leaving in vehicles with stuffed animals on their dashboards or Mexican flag decals on their bumpers. Pickups with lumber or tools in their beds were also frequently spotted.

In recent weeks, federal agents have repeatedly shown up to construction sites dressed as workers, according to Jose Alvillar, a lead organizer for the local immigrant rights group, Unidos MN.

“We’ve seen an increase in the cowboy tactics,” he said, though he noted the raids had not resulted in arrests. “Construction workers are good at identifying who is a real construction worker and who is dressing up as one.”

Using vintage plates

Since the start of the operation in Minnesota, local officials, including Democratic Gov. Tim Walz, have said ICE agents had been seen swapping license plates or using bogus ones, a violation of state law.

Candice Metrailer, an antiques dealer in south Minneapolis, believes she witnessed such an attempt firsthand.

On Jan. 13, she received a call from a man who identified himself as a collector, asking if her store sold license plates. She said it did. A few minutes later, two men in street clothes entered the shop and began looking through her collection of vintage plates.

“One of them says, ‘Hey, do you have any recent ones?’” Metrailer recalled. “Immediately, an alarm bell went off in my head.”

Metrailer stepped outside while the men continued browsing. A few doors down from the shop, she saw an idling Ford Explorer with blacked-out windows. She memorized its license plate, then quickly plugged it into a crowdsourced database used by local activists to track vehicles linked to immigration enforcement.

The database shows an identical Ford with the same plates had been photographed leaving the Whipple building seven times and reported at the scene of an immigration arrest weeks earlier.

When one of the men approached the register holding a white Minnesota plate, Metrailer said she told him that the store had a new policy against selling the items.

Metrailer said she had reported the incident to Minnesota’s attorney general. A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for comment.

A response to obstruction

Supporters of the immigration crackdown say the volunteer army of ICE-tracking activists in Minneapolis has forced federal agents to adopt new methods of avoiding detection.

“Of course agents are adapting their tactics so that they’re a step ahead,” said Scott Mechkowski, former deputy director of ICE enforcement and operations in New York City. “We’ve never seen this level of obstruction and interference.”

In nearly three decades in immigration enforcement, Mechkowski said he also hadn’t seen ICE agents disguising themselves as uniformed workers in the course of making arrests.

Last summer, a Homeland Security spokesperson confirmed a man wearing a high-visibility construction vest was an ICE agent conducting surveillance. In Oregon, a natural gas company published guidance on how customers could identify their employees after reports of federal impersonators.

In the days since his encounter, Ramirez, the restaurant worker, said he has been on high alert for undercover agents. He recently stopped a locksmith who he feared might be a federal agent, before realizing he was a local resident.

“Everybody is on edge about these guys, man,” Ramirez said. “It feels like they’re everywhere.”

Offenhartz writes for the Associated Press.

President Trump’s administration can continue to detain immigrants without bond, marking a major legal victory for the federal immigration agenda and countering a slew of recent lower court decisions across the country that argued the practice is illegal.

A panel of judges on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday evening that the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to deny bond hearings to immigrants arrested across the country is consistent with the Constitution and federal immigration law.

Specifically, Circuit Judge Edith H. Jones wrote in the 2-1 majority opinion that the government correctly interpreted the Immigration and Nationality Act by asserting that “unadmitted aliens apprehended anywhere in the United States are ineligible for release on bond, regardless of how long they have resided inside the United States.”

Under past administrations, most noncitizens with no criminal record who were arrested away from the border had an opportunity to request a bond hearing while their cases wound through immigration court. Historically, bond was often granted to those without criminal convictions who were not flight risks, and mandatory detention was limited to recent border crossers.

“That prior Administrations decided to use less than their full enforcement authority under” the law “does not mean they lacked the authority to do more,” Jones wrote.

The plaintiffs in the two separate cases filed last year against the Trump administration were both Mexican nationals who had lived in the United States for more than 10 years and weren’t flight risks, their attorneys argued. Neither man had a criminal record, and both were jailed for months last year before a lower Texas court granted them bond in October.

The Trump White House reversed that policy in favor of mandatory detention in July, reversing almost 30 years of precedent under both Democrat and Republican administrations.

Friday’s ruling also bucks a November district court decision in California, which granted detained immigrants with no criminal history the opportunity to request a bond hearing and had implications for noncitizens held in detention nationwide.

Circuit Judge Dana M. Douglas wrote the lone dissent in Friday’s decision.

The elected members of Congress who passed the Immigration and Nationality Act “would be surprised to learn it had also required the detention without bond of two million people,” Douglas wrote, adding that many of the people detained are “the spouses, mothers, fathers, and grandparents of American citizens.”

She went on to argue that the federal government was overriding the lawmaking process with the Department of Homeland Security’s new immigration detention policy that denies detained immigrants bond.

“Because I would reject the government’s invitation to rubber stamp its proposed legislation by executive fiat, I dissent,” Douglas wrote.

Douglas’ opinion echoed widespread tensions between the Trump administration and federal judges around the country, who have increasingly accused the administration of flouting court orders.

U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi celebrated the decision as “a significant blow against activist judges who have been undermining our efforts to make America safe again at every turn.”

“We will continue vindicating President Trump’s law and order agenda in courtrooms across the country,” Bondi wrote on the social media platform X.

Riddle writes for the Associated Press.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s chief of staff has quit over the appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the United States after files revealed the extent of Mandelson’s relationship with the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

“After careful reflection, I have decided to resign from the government. The decision to appoint Peter Mandelson was wrong. He has damaged our party, our country and trust in politics itself,” Starmer’s top aide Morgan McSweeney said in a statement on Sunday.

“I advised the Prime Minister to make that appointment and I take full responsibility for that advice,” he added.

Labour members of parliament had called for McSweeney’s resignation after new evidence about Mandelson’s relationship with Epstein was revealed in the latest tranche of documents and photos from the investigation into the American financier were released by the US Department of Justice. The lawmakers blamed McSweeney for the appointment of Mandelson and the damage caused by the publication of the crude exchanges between him and Epstein.

McSweeney, 48, who was a protege and friend of Mandelson, was accused by some Labour lawmakers and his political opponents of failing to ensure that there were proper background checks when the ambassador was appointed.

In a statement on Sunday, Starmer said it had been “an honour” to work with McSweeney, who had held the role of chief of staff since October 2024.

Mandelson’s payout

Mandelson was sacked by Starmer in September over his friendship with Epstein and last week also quit the Labour Party and House of Lords, the upper chamber of the UK Parliament. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office said it is reviewing an exit payment made to him after he was fired.

Mandelson, a pivotal figure in British politics and the Labour Party for decades, received an estimated payout of between 38,750 pounds and 55,000 pounds ($52,000 to $74,000) after only seven months in the job, according to a report in the Sunday Times newspaper.

Documents released on January 30 by the US Justice Department appeared to show that Mandelson had also allegedly leaked confidential UK government information to Epstein when he was a British minister, including during the 2008 financial crisis.

The Foreign Office said in a statement that it has launched a review into Mandelson’s severance payment “in light of further information that has now been revealed and the ongoing police investigation”.

Mandelson’s lawyers have said he “regrets, and will regret until his dying day, that he believed Epstein’s lies about his criminality”.

“Lord Mandelson did not discover the truth about Epstein until after his death in 2019,” said a spokesperson for the law firm Mishcon de Reya, which represents Mandelson.

“He is profoundly sorry that powerless and vulnerable women and girls were not given the protection they deserved,” the law firm added.

Starmer’s political future in peril?

The departure of McSweeney has thrown the future direction of the government into doubt, less than two years after the Labour Party won one of the largest parliamentary majorities in modern British history.

With polls showing Starmer is already hugely unpopular with voters, some in his own party are openly questioning his judgement and future, and it remains to be seen whether McSweeney’s exit will be enough to silence his critics.

Cabinet minister Pat McFadden earlier insisted Starmer should remain in office despite his “terrible mistake” in appointing Mandelson.

The close Starmer ally told broadcasters the party should stick with the prime minister.

“He [Starmer] should be realistic and accept that this has been a terrible story, that this appointment was a terrible mistake,” McFadden, the work and pensions secretary, told BBC television.

He said the real blame lay “squarely with Peter Mandelson”, who put himself forward for the job despite knowing the extent of his relationship with Epstein.

But according to a report by the Sunday Telegraph, Starmer’s deputy, David Lammy, has become the first cabinet minister to appear to distance himself from Starmer.

The deputy prime minister had not been in favour of appointing Mandelson due to his known links to Epstein, the report quoted friends of Lammy as saying.

MINNEAPOLIS — Alberto Castañeda Mondragón says his memory was so jumbled after a beating by immigration officers that he initially could not remember he had a daughter and still struggles to recall treasured moments like the night he taught her to dance.

But the violence he endured last month in Minnesota while being detained is seared into his battered brain.

He remembers Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents pulling him from a friend’s car on Jan. 8 outside a St. Paul shopping center and throwing him to the ground, handcuffing him, then punching him and striking his head with a steel baton. He remembers being dragged into an SUV and taken to a detention facility, where he said he was beaten again.

He also remembers the emergency room and the intense pain from eight skull fractures and five life-threatening brain hemorrhages.

“They started beating me right away when they arrested me,” the Mexican immigrant recounted last week to the Associated Press, which recently reported on how his case contributed to mounting friction between federal immigration agents and a Minneapolis hospital.

Castañeda Mondragón, 31, is one of an unknown number of immigration detainees who, despite avoiding deportation during the Trump administration’s enforcement crackdown, have been left with lasting injuries following violent encounters with ICE officers. His case is one of the excessive-force claims the federal government has thus far declined to investigate.

He was hurt so badly he was disoriented for days at Hennepin County Medical Center, where ICE officers constantly watched over him.

A dubious claim

The officers told nurses Castañeda Mondragón “purposefully ran headfirst into a brick wall,” an account his caregivers immediately doubted. A CT scan showed fractures to the front, back and both sides of his skull — injuries a doctor told AP were inconsistent with a fall.

“There was never a wall,” Castañeda Mondragón said in Spanish, recalling ICE officers striking him with the same metal rod used to break the windows of the vehicle he was in. He later identified it as an ASP, a telescoping baton routinely carried by law enforcement.

Training materials and police use-of-force policies across the U.S. say such a baton can be used to hit the arms, legs and body. But striking the head, neck or spine is considered potentially deadly force.

“The only time a person can be struck in the head with any baton is when the person presents the same threat that would permit the use of a firearm — a lethal threat to the officer or others,” said Joe Key, a former Baltimore police lieutenant and use-of-force expert who testifies in defense of police.

Once he was taken to an ICE holding facility at Ft. Snelling in suburban Minneapolis, Castañeda Mondragón said officers resumed beating him. Recognizing that he was seriously hurt, he said, he pleaded with them to stop, but they just “laughed at me and hit me again.”

“They were very racist people,” he said. “No one insulted them, neither me nor the other person they detained me with. It was their character, their racism toward us, for being immigrants.”

The Department of Homeland Security, which includes ICE, did not respond to repeated requests for comment over the last two weeks on Castañeda Mondragón’s injuries.

It is unclear whether his arrest was captured on body-camera video or if there might be additional recordings from security cameras at the detention center.

In a recent bid to boost transparency, Homeland Security announced a broad rollout of body cameras for immigration officers in Minneapolis as the government draws down ICE’s presence there.

ICE deportation officer William J. Robinson did not say how Castañeda Mondragón’s skull was smashed in a Jan. 20 declaration filed in federal court. During the intake process, it was determined he “had a head injury that required emergency medical treatment,” he wrote in the filing.

The declaration also stated that Castañeda Mondragón entered the U.S. legally in March 2022, and that the agency determined only after his arrest that he had overstayed his visa. A federal judge later ruled his arrest had been unlawful and ordered him released from ICE custody.

‘Hope they don’t kill you’

A video posted to social media captured the moments immediately after Castañeda Mondragón’s arrest as four masked men walk him handcuffed through a parking lot. The video shows him unsteady and stumbling, held up by ICE officers.

“Don’t resist!” shouts the woman who is recording. “‘Cause they ain’t gonna do nothing but bang you up some more.

“Hope they don’t kill you,” she adds.

“And y’all gave the man a concussion,” a male bystander shouts.

The witness who posted the video declined to speak with AP or provide consent for the video’s publication, but Castañeda Mondragón confirmed he is the handcuffed man seen in the recording.

At least one ICE officer later told staff at the medical center that Castañeda Mondragón “got his [expletive] rocked,” according to court documents filed by a lawyer seeking his release and nurses who spoke with AP.

AP interviewed a doctor and five nurses about Castañeda Mondragón’s treatment at Hennepin County Medical Center and the presence of ICE officers inside the hospital. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss patient care and feared retaliation. AP also consulted an outside physician, who affirmed the injuries were inconsistent with an accidental fall or running into a wall.

Minnesota state law requires health professionals to report to law enforcement any wounds that could have been perpetrated as part of a crime.

A hospital spokeswoman declined to say last week whether anyone at the facility had done so. However, after the Jan. 31 publication of AP’s initial story about Castañeda Mondragón’s beating and arrest, hospital administrators opened an internal inquiry seeking to determine which staff members have spoken to the media, according to internal communications viewed by AP.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz posted a link to AP’s prior story about Castañeda Mondragón, but his office has not said whether state authorities would pursue answers.

“Law enforcement cannot be lawless,” Walz wrote in the post on X. “Thousands of aggressive, untrained agents of the federal government continue to injure and terrorize Minnesotans. This must end.”

Castañeda Mondragón’s arrest came a day after the slaying of Renee Good, the first  of  two fatal shootings of U.S. citizens in Minneapolis by immigration officers, triggering widespread public protests.

Calls for accountability

Minnesota congressional leaders and other elected officials, including St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her, called last week for an investigation of Castañeda Mondragón’s injuries.

The Ramsey County attorney’s office, which oversees St. Paul, urged Castañeda Mondragón to file a police report to prompt an investigation. He said he plans to file a complaint. A St. Paul police spokesperson said the department would investigate “all alleged crimes that are reported to us.”

While the Trump administration insists ICE limits its operations to immigrants with violent rap sheets, Castañeda Mondragón has no criminal record.

“We are seeing a repeated pattern of Trump Administration officials attempting to lie and gaslight the American people when it comes to the cruelty of this ICE operation in Minnesota,” U.S. Sen. Tina Smith, a Minnesota Democrat, said in a statement.

Rep. Kelly Morrison, another Democrat and a doctor, recently toured the Whipple Building, the ICE facility at Ft. Snelling. She said she saw severe overcrowding, unsanitary conditions and an almost complete lack of medical care.

“If any one of our police officers did this, you know what just happened in Minnesota with George Floyd, we hold them accountable,” said Democratic Rep. Betty McCollum, whose district includes St. Paul.

A native of Veracruz, Mexico, Castañeda Mondragón came to Minnesota nearly four years ago on a temporary work visa and found jobs as a driver and roofer. He uses his earnings to support his elderly father, who is disabled and diabetic, and his 10-year-old daughter.

On the day of his arrest, he was running errands with a friend when they suddenly found themselves surrounded by ICE agents. The agents began breaking the windows and opening the doors of the vehicle. He said the first person who hit him “got ugly with me for being Mexican” and not having documents showing his immigration status.

About four hours after his arrest, court records show, Castañeda Mondragón was taken to an emergency room in the suburb of Edina with swelling and bruising around his right eye and bleeding. He was then transferred to Hennepin County Medical Center in Minneapolis, where he told staff he had been “dragged and mistreated by federal agents,” before his condition deteriorated, court records show.

A week into his hospitalization, caregivers described him as minimally responsive. As his condition slowly improved, hospital staff handed him his cellphone, and he spoke with his child in Mexico, whom he could not remember.

“I am your daughter,” she told him. “You left when I was 6 years old.”

His head injuries erased past experiences that for his daughter are unforgettable, including birthday parties and the day he left for the United States. She’s been trying to revive his memory in daily calls.

“When I turned 5, you taught me how to dance for the first time,” she reminded him recently.

“All these moments, really, for me, have been forgotten,″ he said.

He showed gradual improvement and, to the surprise of some who treated him, was released from the hospital on Jan. 27.

Long recovery lies ahead

He faces a long recovery and an uncertain future. Questions loom about whether he will be able to continue to support his family back in Mexico. “My family depends on me,” he said.

Though his bruises have faded, the effects of his traumatic brain injuries linger. In addition to the problems with his memory, he also has issues with balance and coordination that could prove debilitating for a man whose work requires going up and down ladders. He said he is unable to bathe himself without help.

“I can’t get on a roof now,” he said.

Castañeda Mondragón, who does not have health insurance, said doctors have told him he needs ongoing care. Unable to earn a living, he is relying on support from co-workers and members of the Minneapolis-St. Paul community who are raising money to help provide food, housing and medical care. He has launched a GoFundMe.

Still, he hopes to stay in the U.S. and to provide again someday for his loved ones. He differentiates between people in Minnesota, where he said he has felt welcome, and the federal officers who beat him.

“It’s immense luck to have survived, to be able to be in this country again, to be able to heal, and to try to move forward,” he said. “For me, it’s the best luck in the world.”

But when he closes his eyes at night, the fear that ICE officers will come for him dominates his dreams. He is now terrified to leave his apartment, he said.

“You’re left with the nightmare of going to work and being stopped,” Castañeda Mondragón said, “or that you’re buying your food somewhere, your lunch, and they show up and stop you again. They hit you.”

Brook, Biesecker, Mustian and Attanasio write for the Associated Press and reported from Minneapolis, Washington, New York and Seattle, respectively.

You may have missed it, what with President Trump’s endless pyrotechnics, but California voters will decide in November who succeeds Gavin Newsom, the highest-profile governor since the Terminator returned to Hollywood.

Unfortunately for those attempting to civically engage, the current crop of contenders is, shall we say, less than enthralling.

In alphabetical order (because there is seriously no prohibitive front-runner), the major candidates are Xavier Becerra, Chad Bianco, Ian Calderon, Steve Hilton, Matt Mahan, Katie Porter, John Slavet, Tom Steyer, Eric Swalwell, Tony Thurmond, Antonio Villaraigosa and Betty Yee.

Whew! (Pause to catch breath.)

Armed with that knowledge, you can now go out and win yourself a few bar bets by asking someone to name, say, even two of those running.

Meantime, fear not. Your friendly columnists Mark Z. Barabak and Anita Chabria have surveyed the field, weighed the odds, pondered California’s long history and concluded … they have absolutely no clue what will happen in the June 2 primary, much less who’ll take the oath of office come next January.

Here, they discuss the race that has Californians sitting on neither pins nor needles.

Chabria: Mark, I do this for a living and I’m having trouble summoning up any interest in this race — yet, anyway.

Part of my problem is that national events are so all-consuming and fast-moving that it’s hard to worry about potholes. I admit, I appreciate that our White House-contending governor is fighting the big fight. But remind me again, what’s a governor supposed to do?

Barabak: End homelessness. Elevate our public schools to first-class rank. Make housing and college tuition affordable. Eliminate crime. End disease and poverty. Put a chicken in every pot. Make pigs fly and celestial angels sing. And then, in their second year …

Seriously, there’s a pretty large gap between what voters would like to see happen and what a governor — any governor — can plausibly deliver. That said, if our next chief executive can help bring about meaningful improvement in just a few of those areas, pigs and angels excepted, I’d venture to say a goodly number of Californians would be pleased.

Broadly speaking, my sense when talking to voters is they want our next governor to push back on Trump and his most egregious excesses. But not as a means of raising their national profile or positioning themselves for a run at the White House. And not to the exclusion of bettering their lives by paying attention to the nitty and the gritty, like making housing and higher education more readily available and, yes, fixing potholes.

Chabria: All that is fair enough. As the mom of two teens, I’d especially like to see our university system be more affordable and accessible, so we all have our personal priorities. Let’s agree to this starting point: The new governor can’t just chew gum and walk. She or he must be able to eat a full lunch while running.

But so far, candidates haven’t had their policy positions break through to a big audience, state-focused or not — and many of them share broadly similar positions. Let’s look at the bits of daylight that separate them because, Republicans aside, there aren’t canyon-size differences among the many candidates.

San José Mayor Matt Mahan, the newest entry in the race, is attempting to position himself as a “can’t-we-all-just-get-along” centrist. How do you think that will go over with voters?

Barabak: You’re having me tiptoe uncomfortably close to the Make A Prediction Zone, which I assiduously avoid. As I’ve said before, I’m smart enough to know what I don’t know. (Many readers will doubtless question the underlying premise of the former if not the latter part of that statement.)

I think there is at least a potential for Mahan to tap into a desire among voters to lower the hostilities just a bit and ease up on our constant partisan war-footing.

You might not know it if you marinate in social media, or watch the political shout-fest shows where, as in nature, the loudest voices carry. But there are a great many people working two or even three jobs, ferrying their kids to soccer practice, worrying about paying their utility and doctor bills, caring for elderly parents or struggling in other ways to keep their heads above water. And they’re less captivated by the latest snappy clap-back on TikTok than looking for help dealing with the many challenges they face.

I was struck by something Katie Porter said when we recently sat down for a conversation in San Francisco. The former Orange County congresswoman can denigrate Trump with the best of ‘em. But she said, “I am very leery of anyone who does not acknowledge that we had problems and policy challenges long before Donald Trump ever raised his orange head on the political horizon.”

California’s homelessness and affordability crises were years in the making, she noted, and need to be addressed as such.

I heard Antonio Villaraigosa suggest something similar in last week‘s gubernatorial debate, when the former Los Angeles mayor noted the state has spent billions of dollars in recent years trying to drastically reduce homelessness with, at best, middling results. “We cannot be afraid to look in the mirror,” he said.

That suggests to me Mahan is not the only candidate who appreciates that simply saying “Trump = Bad” over and over is not what voters want to hear.

Chabria: Certainly potholes and high electricity bills existed before Trump. But if the midterms don’t favor Democrats, the next governor will probably face a generational challenge to protect the civil rights of residents of this diverse state. It’s not about liking or disliking Trump, but ensuring that our governor has a plan if attacks on immigrants, the LBGTQ+ community and citizens in general grow worse.

I do think this will matter to voters — but I agree with you that candidates can’t simply rage against Trump. They have to offer some substance.

Porter, Swalwell and Becerra, who have the most national experience and could be expected to articulate that sort of vision, haven’t done much other than to commit to the fight. Steyer and Thurmond want to abolish ICE, which a governor couldn’t do. Mahan has said focusing on state policy is the best offense.

I don’t think this has to be a charisma-driven vision, which is what Newsom has so effectively offered. But it needs to bring resoluteness in a time of fear, which none of the candidates to my mind have been able to project so far.

But this all depends on election results in November. If Democrats take Congress and are able to exert a check to this terrible imbalance, then bring on the asphalt and fix the roads. I think a lot of what voters want from a governor won’t fully be known until after November.

Barabak: The criticism of this collective field is that it’s terminally boring, as if we’re looking to elect a stand-up comic, a chanteuse or a juggler. I mean, this is the home of Hollywood! Isn’t it the birthright of every California citizen to be endlessly entertained?

At least that’s what the pundits and political know-it-alls, stifling yawns as they constantly refresh their feeds on Bluesky or X, would have you believe.

Voters elected Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger as governor — that’s two movie stars in the state’s 175-year history — and, from the way the state is often perceived, you’d think celebrity megawattage is one of the main prerequisites for a chief executive.

But if you look back, California has seen a lot more George Deukmejian, Pete Wilson and Gray Davis types, which is to say bland-persona governors whom no one would mistake for box-office gold.

It seems to me no coincidence that Schwarzenegger, who arrived as a political novelty, was replaced by Jerry Brown, who was as politically tried-and-true as they come. That political pendulum never stops swinging.

Which suggests voters will be looking for someone less like our gallivanting, movie matinee governor and someone more inclined to keep their head down in Sacramento and focus on the state and its needs.

Who will that be? I wouldn’t wage a nickel trying to guess. Would you care to?

Chabria: I certainly don’t care to predict, but I’ll say this: We may not need or get another Terminator. But one of these candidates needs to put some pepper flakes in the paste if they want to break out of the pack.

Feb. 7 (UPI) — The first meeting of the newly formed Board of Peace is planned in the nation’s capital on Feb. 19 after 26 member nations received invitations from U.S. officials on Friday.

The United States created the Board of Peace during the World Economic Forum last month in Davos, Switzerland, which is focused on promoting global peace.

Its first meeting would be on Feb. 19 at the White House, and four nations so far, plus the United States, plan to send representatives, Axios reported.

The date is problematic for some member states because it coincides with the state of the Muslim holiday of Ramadan, which starts on Feb. 17 and runs through March 19.

The Board of Peace was formed to ensure a lasting cease-fire and peace in Gaza, which has been enduring violence between Hamas and Israeli forces as each accuses the other of cease-fire violations that led to retaliatory attacks.

Gaza mediators in Turkey, Egypt and Qatar have weighed disarming Hamas, but the Israel Defense Forces on Tuesday reported finding 110 mortar rounds, rockets and other military hardware wrapped in UNRWA blankets and hidden among humanitarian aid supplies in southern Gaza.

The IDF on Friday struck a residential building in Khan Yunis it said held a Hamas arms depot.

Before launching the strike, IDF officials warned civilians to leave and did not strike it until after determining all non-combatants had left.

Such incidents are among those that the Board of Peace is tasked with preventing while moving forward with the next phase of a peace agreement signed last year that is designed to permanently end the violence and fighting in Gaza and much of the Middle East.

Some have criticized the Board of Peace’s creation, saying it undercuts the United Nations and its mission of trying to ensure global peace.

President Donald Trump and others have said the United Nations is ineffective and has become more of a political organization instead of a peacemaker.

In recent weeks, Marin County Registrar Natalie Adona has been largely focused on the many mundane tasks of local elections administrators in the months before a midterm: finalizing voting locations, ordering supplies, facilitating candidate filings.

But in the wake of unprecedented efforts by the Trump administration to intervene in state-run elections, Adona said she has also been preparing her staff for far less ordinary scenarios — such as federal officials showing up and demanding ballots, as they recently did in Georgia, or immigration agents staging around polling stations on election day, as some in President Trump’s orbit have suggested.

“Part of my job is making sure that the plans are developed and then tested and then socialized with the staff so if those situations were to ever come up, we would not be figuring it out right then and there. We would know what to do,” Adona said. “Doing those sort of exercises and that level of planning in a way is kind of grounding, and makes things feel less chaotic.”

Natalie Adona faced harassment from election deniers and COVID anti-maskers when she served as the registrar of voters in Nevada County. She now serves Marin County and is preparing her staff for potential scenarios this upcoming election, including what to do if immigration agents are present.

(Jess Lynn Goss / For The Times)

Across California, local elections administrators say they have been running similar exercises to prepare for once unthinkable threats — not from local rabble-rousers, remote cyberattackers or foreign adversaries, but their own federal government.

State officials, too, are writing new contingency plans for unprecedented intrusions by Trump and other administration officials, who in recent days have repeated baseless 2020 election conspiracies, raided and taken ballots from a local election center in Fulton County, Ga., pushed both litigation and legislation that would radically alter local voting rules, and called for Republicans to seize control of elections nationwide.

California’s local and state officials — many of whom are Democrats — are walking a fine line, telling their constituents that elections remain fair and safe, but also that Trump’s talk of federal intervention must be taken seriously.

Their concerns are vastly different than the concerns voiced by Trump and other Republicans, who for years have alleged without evidence that U.S. elections are compromised by widespread fraud involving noncitizen voters, including in California.

But they have nonetheless added to a long-simmering sense of fear and doubt among voters — who this year have the potential to radically alter the nation’s political trajectory by flipping control of Congress to Democrats.

An election worker moves ballots to be sorted at the Orange County Registrar of Voters in Santa Ana on Nov. 5, 2024.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

Trump has said he will accept Republican losses only if the elections are “honest.” A White House spokesperson said Trump is pushing for stricter rules for voting and voter registration because he “cares deeply about the safety and security of our elections.”

Rick Hasen, an election law expert and director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project at UCLA Law, said some of what Trump says about elections “is nonsensical and some is bluster,” but recent actions — especially the election center raid in Georgia — have brought home the reality of his threats.

“Some worry that this is a test run for trying to seize ballot boxes in 2026 and prevent a fair count of the votes, and given Trump’s track record, I don’t think that is something we can dismiss out of hand,” Hasen said. “States need to be making contingency plans to make sure that those kinds of things don’t happen.”

The White House dismissed such concerns, pointing to isolated incidents of noncitizens being charged with illegally voting, and to examples of duplicate registrations, voters remaining on rolls after death and people stealing ballots to vote multiple times.

“These so-called experts are ignoring the plentiful examples of noncitizens charged with voter fraud and of ineligible voters on voter rolls,” said Abigail Jackson, the White House spokesperson.

Experts said fraudulent votes are rare, most registration and roll issues do not translate into fraudulent votes being cast, and there is no evidence such issues swing elections.

A swirl of activity

Early in his term, Trump issued an executive order calling for voters nationwide to be required to show proof of U.S. citizenship, and for states to be required to disregard mail ballots received after election day. California and other states sued, and courts have so far blocked the order.

This past week, Trump said outright that Republicans should “take over” elections nationwide.

The Justice Department has sued California Secretary of State Shirley Weber and her counterparts in other states for refusing to hand over state voter rolls — the lawsuit against Weber was tossed — and raided and seized ballots from the election office of Fulton County, long a target of right-wing conspiracy theories over Trump’s 2020 election loss.

President Trump walks behind former chairperson of the Republican National Committee Michael Whatley as he prepares to speak during a political rally in Rocky Mount, N.C., on Dec. 19.

(Andrew Caballero-Reynolds / AFP via Getty Images)

Longtime Trump advisor and ally Stephen K. Bannon suggested U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents will be dispatched to polling locations in November, reprising old fears about voter intimidation. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said she couldn’t rule that out, despite it being illegal.

Democrats have raised concerns about the U.S. Postal Service mishandling mail ballots in the upcoming elections, following rule changes for how such mail is processed. Republicans have continued pushing the SAVE America Act, which would create new proof of citizenship requirements for voters. The U.S. Supreme Court is considering multiple voting rights cases, including one out of Louisiana that challenges Voting Rights Act protections for Black representation.

Charles H. Stewart, director of the MIT Election Data + Science Lab, said the series of events has created an “environment where chaos is being threatened,” and where “people who are concerned about the state of democracy are alarmed and very concerned,” and rightfully so.

But he said there are also “a number of guardrails” in place — what he called “the kind of mundane mechanics that are involved in running elections” — that will help prevent harm.

California prepares

California leaders have been vociferous in their defense of state elections, and said they’re prepared to fight any attempted takeover.

“The President regularly spews outright lies when it comes to elections in this country, particularly ones he and his party lose,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement. “We will continue to correct those lies, rebuild much-needed trust in our democratic institutions and civic duties, and defend the U.S. Constitution’s grant to the states authority over elections.”

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley Weber take questions after announcing a lawsuit to protect voter rights in 2024.

(Damian Dovarganes / Associated Press)

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said in an interview that his office “would go into court and we would get a restraining order within hours” if the Trump administration tries to intervene in California elections, “because the U.S. Constitution says that states predominantly determine the time, place and manner of elections, not the president.”

Weber told The Times that the state has “a cadre of attorneys” standing by to defend its election system, but also “absolutely amazing” county elections officials who “take their job very seriously” and serve as the first line of defense against any disruptions, from the Trump administration or otherwise.

Dean Logan, Los Angeles County’s chief elections official, said his office has been doing “contingency planning and tabletop exercises” for traditional disruptions, such as wildfires and earthquakes, and novel ones, such as federal immigration agents massing near voting locations and last-minute policy changes by the U.S. Postal Service or the courts.

“Those are the things that keep us up at night,” he said.

Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder Dean Logan said the county no longer has ballots from the 2020 election.

(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

Logan said he is not currently concerned about the FBI raiding L.A. County elections offices because, while Fulton County still had its 2020 ballots on hand due to ongoing litigation, that is not the case for L.A. County, which is “beyond the retention period” for holding, and no longer has, its 2020 ballots.

However, Logan said he does consider what happened in Georgia a warning that the Trump administration “will utilize the federal government to go in and be disruptive in an elections operation.”

“What we don’t know is, would they do that during the conduct of an election, before an election is certified?” Logan said.

Kristin Connelly, chief elections officer for Contra Costa County, said she’s been working hard to make sure voters have confidence in the election process, including by giving speeches to concerned voters, expanding the county’s certified election observer program, and, in the lead-up to the 2024 election, running a grant-funded awareness campaign around election security.

Connelly — who joined local elections officials nationwide in challenging Trump’s executive order on elections in court — said she also has been running tabletop exercises and coordinating with local law enforcement, all with the goal of ensuring her constituents can vote.

“How the federal government is behaving is different from how it used to behave, but at the end of the day, what we have to do is run a mistake-free, perfect election, and to open our offices and operation to everybody — especially the people who ask hard questions,” she said.

Lessons from the past

Several officials in California said that as they prepare, they have been buoyed by lessons from the past.

Before being hired by the deep-blue county of Marin in May, Adona was the elected voting chief in rural Nevada County in the Sierra foothills.

In 2022, Adona affirmed that Trump’s 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden was legitimate and enforced a pandemic mask mandate in her office. That enraged a coalition of anti-mask, anti-vaccine, pro-Trump protesters, who pushed their way into the locked election office.

Protesters confronted Adona and her staffers, with one worker getting pushed down. They stationed themselves in the hallway, leaving Adona’s staff too terrified to leave their office to use the hallway bathroom, as local, state and federal authorities declined to step in.

“At this point, and for months afterwards, I felt isolated and depressed. I had panic attacks every few days. I felt that no one had our back. I focused all my attention on my staff’s safety, because they were clearly nervous about the unknown,” Adona said during subsequent testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In part because she knows what can go wrong, Adona said her focus now is on preparing her new staff for whatever may come, while following the news out of Georgia and trying to maintain a cool head.

“I would rather have a plan and not use it than need a plan and not have one,” she said.

Clint Curtis, the clerk and registrar of voters in Shasta County — which ditched its voting machines in 2023 amid unfounded fraud allegations by Trump — said his biggest task ahead of the midterms is to increase both ballot security and transparency.

Since being appointed to lead the county office last spring, the conservative Republican from Florida has added more cameras and more space for election observers — which, during the recent special election on Proposition 50, California’s redistricting measure, included observers from Bonta’s and Weber’s offices.

He has also reduced the number of ballot drop boxes in the vast county from more than a dozen to four. Curtis told The Times he did not trust the security of ballots in the hands of “these little old ladies running all over the county” to pick them up, and noted there are dozens of other county locations where they can be dropped off. He said he invited Justice Department officials to observe voting on Proposition 50, though they didn’t show, and welcomes them again for the midterms.

“If they can make voting safer for everybody, I’m perfectly fine with that,” he said. “It always makes me nervous when people don’t want to cooperate. Whatcha hiding? It should be: ‘Come on in.’”

Election workers inspect ballots after extracting them from envelopes on election night at the Los Angeles County Ballot Processing Center on Nov. 5, 2024, in the City of Industry.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

Weber, 77 and the daughter of an Arkansas sharecropper whose family fled Southern racism and threats of violence to reach California, said that while many people in the U.S. are confronting intense fear and doubt about the election for the first time, and understandably so, that is simply not the case for her or many other Black people.

“African Americans have always been under attack for voting, and not allowed to vote, and had new rules created for them about literacy and poll taxes and all those other kinds of things, and many folks lost their lives just trying to register to vote,” Weber said.

Weber said she still recalls her mother, who had never voted in Arkansas, setting up a polling location in their home in South L.A. each election when Weber was young, and today draws courage from those memories.

“I tell folks there’s no alternative to it. You have to fight for this right to vote. And you have to be aware of the fact that all these strategies that people are trying to use [to suppress voting] are not new strategies. They’re old strategies,” Weber said. “And we just have to be smarter and fight harder.”

Feb. 7 (UPI) — Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced that the Pentagon would end its academic partnership with Harvard University over what he called a “woke” institution that is not welcoming to the U.S. military.

In a video posted on Friday to X, Hegseth said the Department of Defense would end its partnership and work with the private university — which dates to before the American Revolution — over its alleged “wokeness.”

The move, according to a statement from the Pentagon, is “because attendance at the school no longer meets the needs of the [Department of Defense] or the military services.”

Calling the decision “long overdue,” Hegseth said that all professional military education, fellowships and certificate programs at Harvard will be formally ended starting with the 2026-2027 school year.

Members of the military who are already attending classes there, however, will be permitted to finish their courses of study, the Pentagon said.

Noting that the U.S. military has had “an important and often positive relationship” with the university for more than 250 years, Hegseth said that “Harvard is no longer a welcoming institution to military personnel or the right place to develop them.”

“Too many of our officers came back looking too much like Harvard — heads full of globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks,” he said, adding that “the school has become a factory for woke ideology and a breeding ground for anti-American radicals.”

Hegseth alleged that Harvard research programs work with the Chinese Communist Party, university leadership has encouraged celebrations of Hamas and allowed attacks on Jewish students, and that the university “promotes discrimination based on race.”

Harvard University has been involved in some way with the U.S. military in an official capacity since 1775 when George Washington used the university as a military base, according to The Harvard Gazette.

Washington basing about 1,000 soldiers in Harvard Yard followed Harvard students and faculty who had “given their lives for the burgeoning nation” in war efforts for 150 years preceding the Revolutionary War, the university said.

Since President Donald Trump was inaugurated back into office in January 2025, Harvard has been one of several universities to draw his administration’s ire.

This has included everything from protests against the war between Israel and Hamas, academic programs and federal investments it deemed waste and their introduction of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs to improve student and faculty life.

Hegseth noted in the statement about Harvard that DOD plans to evaluate all existing graduate education programs for active-duty members of the military at all Ivy League and other universities.

“The goal is to determine whether or not they actually deliver cost-effective strategic education for future senior leaders when compared to, say, public universities or our military graduate programs,” he said.

Somalian President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud has slammed Israel’s “interference” in his country, saying its recognition of the breakaway region of Somaliland has further increased instability and weakened international order.

In an exclusive interview with Al Jazeera broadcast on Saturday, Mohamud said Somalia “will never allow” the establishment of an Israeli base in Somaliland and will “confront” any such move.

He also warned that the proposed Israeli base could be used as a springboard to attack neighbouring countries.

Mohamud’s comments came amid a regional outcry over Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision in December to recognise Somaliland, a breakaway part of Somalia comprising the northwestern portion of what was once the British Protectorate.

The territory sits astride one of the world’s most critical maritime choke routes, flanked by multiple conflicts in the Horn of Africa and the Middle East.

Israel’s move made it the first country in the world to recognise Somaliland as an independent state and came months after The Associated Press news agency reported that Israeli officials had contacted parties in Somaliland to discuss using the territory for forcibly displacing Palestinians amid Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Israel and Somaliland have denied the claims, but a Somaliland official from the country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation told Israel’s Channel 12 in January that an Israeli military base is “on the table and being discussed”, though its establishment depends on the terms.

Somalia has denounced Israel’s move as an attack on its territorial integrity and unity, a position backed by most African and Arab leaders, and urged Netanyahu to withdraw the recognition.

But Somaliland’s leader, Abdirahman Mohamed Abdullahi, known as Cirro, has welcomed Israel’s diplomatic move, praising Netanyahu for his “leadership and commitment to promoting stability and peace” in the region.

‘We will defend ourselves’

In his interview with Al Jazeera, Mohamud described Israel’s diplomatic manoeuvre as a “reckless, fundamentally wrong and illegal action under international law”.

He also pledged to fight back against any Israeli military presence in Somaliland.

“We will fight in our capacity. Of course, we will defend ourselves,” he said. “And that means that we will confront any Israeli forces coming in, because we are against that and we will never allow that.”

The Israeli recognition represents a dramatic shift in Somaliland’s fortunes after years of diplomatic isolation.

The region seceded from Somalia during a brutal civil war that followed decades under the hardline government of Siad Barre, whose forces devastated the north. While large parts of Somalia descended into chaos, Somaliland stabilised by the late 1990s.

Somaliland has since developed a distinct political identity, with its own currency, flag and parliament. But its eastern regions remain disputed by communities that do not back the separatist programme in the capital, Hargeisa.

In recent years, Somaliland developed ties with the United Arab Emirates – a signatory to the Abraham Accords with Israel – and Taiwan as it sought international acceptance.

In his interview, Mohamud said Israel’s move “interfering with Somalia’s sovereign and territorial integrity” also “undermines stability, security and trade in a way that affects the whole of Africa, the Red Sea and the wider world”.

He added that Israel’s deadly use of force against Palestinians in Gaza cannot be separated from what is happening in Somaliland, adding that it reflects the weakening of the foundations of global governance.

“Key among the global concerns is the weakening of the established rules-based international order. That order is not intact any more,” Mohamud said.

He warned that institutions created after World War II “are under grave threat”, as “the mighty is right” increasingly replaces adherence to international law.

The United States, meanwhile, has yet to signal a major shift on the question of Somaliland.

But in August, US President Donald Trump – who has previously lobbed insults at Somalia and Mohamud – suggested he was preparing to move on the issue when asked about Somaliland during a White House news conference.

“Another complex one, but we’re working on that one – Somaliland,” he said.

No single party is expected to secure a clear majority in Sunday’s vote, raising the spectre of political instability.

Polls have opened in Thailand in a closely watched general election, with progressive reformers, military-backed conservatives and populist forces vying for control.

Polling stations opened at 8am local time (01:00 GMT) on Sunday and were set to close at 5pm (10:00 GMT).

More than 2.2 million voters had already cast ballots during an early voting period that began on February 1, according to the Election Commission.

The battle for support from Thailand’s 53 million registered voters comes against a backdrop of slow economic growth and heightened nationalist sentiment.

While more than 50 parties are contesting the polls, only three – the People’s Party, Bhumjaithai, and Pheu Thai – have the nationwide organisation and popularity to gain a winning mandate.

With 500 parliamentary seats at stake and surveys consistently showing no party likely to win an outright majority, coalition negotiations appear inevitable. A simple majority of elected lawmakers will select the next prime minister.

The progressive People’s Party, led by Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut, is favoured to win the most seats. But the party’s reformist platform, which includes promises to curb the influence of the military and the courts, as well as breaking up economic polices, remains unpalatable to its rivals, who may freeze it out by joining forces to form a government.

The party is the successor to the Move Forward Party, which won the most seats in the House of Representatives in 2023, but was blocked from power by a military appointed Senate and later dissolved by the Constitutional Court over its call to reform Thailand’s strict royal insult laws.

The Bhumjaithai, headed by caretaker Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul, is seen as the main defender and preferred choice of the royalist-military establishment.

Anutin has only been the prime minister since last September, after serving in the Cabinet of former Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, who was forced out of office for an ethics violation regarding the mishandling of relations with Cambodia. Anutin dissolved parliament in December to call a new election after he was threatened with a no-confidence vote.

He has centred his campaign on economic stimulus and national security, tapping into nationalist fervour stoked by deadly border clashes with neighbouring Cambodia.

The third major contender, Pheu Thai, represents the latest incarnation of political movements backed by jailed former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, and trades on the populist policies of the Thai Rak Thai party, which held power from 2001 until 2006, when it was ousted by a military coup.

The party has campaigned on economic revival and populist pledges like cash handouts, nominating Thaksin’s nephew, Yodchanan Wongsawat, as its lead candidate for prime minister.

Sunday’s voting also includes a referendum asking voters whether Thailand should replace its 2017 military-drafted constitution.

Pro-democracy groups view a new charter as a critical step towards reducing the influence of unelected institutions, such as the military and judiciary, while conservatives warn that it could lead to instability.

Move comes after council tried to oust PM Fils-Aime and the US recently deployed warship to waters near Haiti’s capital.

Haiti’s Transitional Presidential Council has handed power to US-backed Prime Minister Alix Didier Fils-Aime after almost two years of tumultuous governance marked by rampant gang violence that has left thousands dead.

The transfer of power between the nine-member transitional council and 54-year-old businessman Fils-Aime took place on Saturday under tight security, given Haiti’s unstable political climate.

“Mr Prime Minister, in this historic moment, I know that you are gauging the depth of the responsibility you are taking on for the country,” council President Laurent Saint-Cyr told Fils-Aime, who is now the country’s only politician with executive power.

In late January, several members of the council said they were seeking to remove Fils-Aime, leading the United States to announce visa revocations for four unidentified council members and a cabinet minister.

Days before the council was dissolved, the US deployed a warship and two US coastguard boats to waters near Haiti’s capital, Port-au-Prince, where gangs control 90 percent of the territory.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stressed “the importance” of Fils-Aime’s continued tenure “to combat terrorist gangs and stabilise the island”.

The council’s plan to oust Fils-Aime for reasons not made public appeared to fall to the wayside as it stepped down in an official ceremony on Saturday.

Fils-Aime now faces the daunting task of organising the first general elections in a decade.

Election this year unlikely

The Transitional Presidential Council was established in 2024 as the country’s top executive body, a response to a political crisis stretching back to the 2021 assassination of President Jovenel Moise.

It quickly devolved into infighting, questions over its membership, and allegations of corruption falling overwhelmingly short of its mission to quell gang violence and improve life for Haitians.

Just six months after being formed, the body removed Prime Minister Garry Conille, selecting Fils-Aime as his replacement.

Despite being tasked with developing a framework for federal elections, the council ended up postponing a planned series of votes that would have selected a new president by February.

Tentative dates were announced for August and December, but many believe it is unlikely an election and a run-off will be held this year.

Last year, gangs killed nearly 6,000 people in Haiti, according to the United Nations. About 1.4 million people, or 10 percent of the population, have been displaced by the violence.

The UN approved an international security force to help police restore security, but more than two years later, fewer than 1,000 of the intended troops – mostly Kenyan police – have been deployed. The UN says it aims to have 5,500 troops in the country by the middle of the year, or by November at the latest.

SAN FRANCISCO — As California struggles with homelessness and healthcare cuts, some activists are taking on an unexpected cause: fighting for billionaires.

About a dozen people took part in the “March for Billionaires” on Saturday morning in San Francisco to raise awareness about the plight of the ultrarich. Although some assumed the event was satire, organizer Derik Kauffman said it was a sincere protest against a potential new tax on the state’s wealthiest residents.

“We must not judge billionaires as a class but by their individual merits,” he said, speaking outside the San Francisco Civic Center. “There are good billionaires and bad billionaires, just like there are good people and bad people. California is extraordinarily lucky that this is where people come to start companies and build fortunes and we should do our best to keep it that way.”

The Billionaire Tax Act is a proposed state ballot initiative that would levy a one-time, 5% tax on the state’s billionaires to help offset recent federal cuts that have affected healthcare and food-assistance programs. The tax would apply to their overall net worth but would exclude pensions, real estate and retirement accounts.

Supporters say it would benefit the majority of the state’s residents and help ensure billionaires pay their fair share. Opponents — including Gov. Gavin Newsom — argue it will cause billionaires and the businesses they own to flee the state, taking jobs and tax dollars with them.

Kauffman echoed those concerns Saturday and said everyone should want billionaires to remain in California.

“This tax will drive billionaires out; it already has,” he said. “The founders of Google — they left the state and they are taking their money with them.”

Google is still headquartered in California, but other companies tied to Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin recently lef the state, including T-Rex Holdings, which moved from Palo Alto to Reno last year.

San Francisco Jan. 7, 2026 Two counter-protesters mockingly impersonated billionaires by playing characters they dubbed “Oli Garch” and “Trilly O’Naire.”

(Katie King / Los Angeles Times)

The event attracted a few dozen humorous counterprotesters.

Razelle Swimmer carried around a puppet of the Swedish Chef from the Muppets, brandishing knives and wearing an apron that said “Eat the Rich.” Swimmer told The Times she doesn’t believe billionaires need more protections.

“If they aren’t willing to pay more taxes, then I don’t really care if they leave,” she said.

Other counterprotesters mockingly impersonated billionaires by donning crowns or top hats. A man and woman, playing characters called Oli Garch and Trilly O’Naire, said they worried what would happen if the tax passed.

“There is a small chance that my helicopter won’t be able to have a sauna in it just because apparently some kids want dental work or something,” said the woman, as she adjusted her tiara.

At one point, a man wearing a gold crown and carrying a sign that said “Let them eat cake” ran through the crowd shouting, “Keep the poors away from me.”

The Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West, the main backer of the tax proposal, needs to collect about 875,000 signatures by June 24 in order to get the measure on the November ballot.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office, which offers guidance to the Legislature about budgetary issues, has cautioned that the tax might lead to only short-term benefits.

“It is likely that some billionaires decide to leave California,” the agency stated in a recent analysis. “The income taxes they currently pay to the state would go away with their departure. The reduction in state revenues from these kinds of responses could be hundreds of millions of dollars or more per year.”

California has roughly 200 billionaires, the most of any state. Their collective wealth was $2.2 trillion in October, up from $300 billion in 2011, according to a December report from law and economics professors at UC Berkeley, UC Davis and the University of Missouri.

The researchers concluded that billionaires in the United States pay less in taxes, relative to income, than the average American.

“It is estimated that, including all taxes at all levels of government, billionaires paid only 24% of their true economic income in taxes in years 2018-20 while the U.S.-wide average was 30%,” the report states.

As Thailand prepares to vote on Sunday in a nationwide election, the country’s months-long border dispute with Cambodia continues to cast a shadow over election proceedings.

Brief but deadly armed clashes in May last year on a disputed section of the Thai-Cambodia border escalated into the deadliest fighting in a decade between the two countries, killing dozens of people and displacing hundreds of thousands.

Fallout from the conflict toppled the government of Thailand’s Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra – daughter of the billionaire populist leader Thaksin Shinawatra – before bringing Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul to power in September.

Now, while the fighting may have ceased, the conflict remains an emotive topic for Thais and a means for Anutin to rally support for his conservative Bhumjaithai Party as a no-nonsense prime minister, unafraid to flex his country’s military muscle when required, analysts say.

“Anutin’s party is positioning itself as the party that’s really willing to take the initiative on the border conflict,” said Napon Jatusripitak, an expert in Thai politics at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute in Singapore.

“It’s a party that has taken the strongest stance on the issue and the most hawkish,” Napon said of the recent military operations.

Anutin had good reason to focus on the conflict with Cambodia in his election campaign. The fighting created a surge in nationalist sentiment in Thailand during two rounds of armed conflict in July and December, while the clashes also inflicted reputational damage on Anutin’s rivals in Thai politics.

Chief among those who suffered on the political battlefield was the populist Pheu Thai Party, the power base of Thailand’s former prime minister Thaksin and his family.

Pheu Thai sustained a major hit to its popularity in June when a phone call between its leader, then-Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn, and the strongman of Cambodian politics, Hun Sen, was made public.

In the June 15 call, Paetongtarn referred to Hun Sen, an erstwhile friend of her father, as “uncle” and promised to “take care” of the issue after the first early clashes between Thai and Cambodian troops, according to Reuters news agency.

For factions in Thailand’s politics and Thai people, Paetongtarn’s deference to Hun Sen was beyond the pale of acceptable behaviour for a prime minister, especially as she appeared to also criticise Thailand’s military – a major centre of power in a nation of more than 70 million people.

Hun Sen later admitted to leaking the call and claimed it was in the interest of “transparency,” but it led to the collapse of Paetongtarn’s government. She was then sacked by the constitutional court at the end of August last year, paving the way for Anutin to be voted in as Thailand’s leader by parliament the following month.

The border conflict with Cambodia has given a major boost to Thailand’s armed forces at a time of “growing popular discontent with the military’s involvement in politics, and with the conservative elite”, said Neil Loughlin, an expert in comparative politics at City St George’s, University of London.

Anutin’s government focused its political messaging when fighting on the border re-erupted in early December. Days later, he dissolved parliament in preparation for the election.

“Bhumjaithai has leaned into patriotic, nationalist messaging,” said Japhet Quitzon, an associate fellow with the Southeast Asia programme at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, DC.

“Anutin himself has promised to protect the country at campaign rallies, signalling strength in the face of ongoing tensions with Cambodia. He has vowed to retaliate should conflict re-emerge and will continue protecting Thai territorial integrity,” Quitzon said.

‘War against the scam army’

During the fighting, Thailand took control of several disputed areas on the border and shelled Cambodian casino complexes near the boundary, which it claimed were being used by Cambodia’s military.

Bangkok later alleged some of the casino complexes, which have ties to Cambodian elites, were being used as centres for online fraud – known as cyber scams – a major problem in the region, and that Thai forces were also carrying out a “war against the scam army” based in Cambodia.

Estimates by the World Health Organization say the conflict killed 18 civilians in Cambodia and 16 in Thailand, though media outlets put the overall death toll closer to 149, before both sides signed their most recent ceasefire in late December.

While the fighting has paused for now, its impact continues to reverberate across Thai politics, said the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute’s Napon.

Pheu Thai is still reeling from the leaked phone call between Paetongtarn and Hun Sen, while another Thai opposition group, the People’s Party, has been forced to temper some of its longstanding positions demanding reform in the military, Napon said.

“[The People’s Party] vowed to abolish the military’s conscription and to cut the military’s budget, but what the border conflict with Cambodia did was to elevate the military’s popularity to heights not seen in longer than a decade since the 2014 coup,” Napon told Al Jazeera.

“Its main selling point used to be reform of the military, but after the conflict it seems to be a liability,” Napon continued.

The party has now shifted its criticism from the military as an institution to specific generals, and turned its focus back to reviving the economy, which is expected to grow just 1.8 percent this year, according to the state-owned Krungthai Bank.

In the past two weeks, that messaging seems to be hitting home, Napon said, with the People’s Party once again leading at the polls despite a different platform from 2023.

“It will be very different from the previous election,” Napon said.

“Right now, there’s no military in the picture, so it’s really a battle between old and new,” he added.

Los Angeles City Councilmember Nithya Raman is running for mayor, shaking up the field of candidates one final time.

Raman said she will challenge Mayor Karen Bass, her onetime ally, campaigning on issues of housing and homelessness, transparency and “safety in our streets.”

In an interview, Raman called Bass “an icon” and someone she deeply admires. But she said the city needs a change agent to address its problems.

“I have deep respect for Mayor Bass. We’ve worked closely together on my biggest priorities and her biggest priorities, and there’s significant alignment there,” said Raman, who lives in Silver Lake. “But over the last few months in particular, I’ve really begun to feel like unless we have some big changes in how we do things in Los Angeles, that the things we count on are not going to function anymore.”

Saturday’s announcement — hours before the noon filing deadline for the June 2 primary election — capped a chaotic week in L.A. politics, with candidates and would-be candidates dropping in and out of the race to challenge Bass, who is seeking a second four-year term.

Raman would immediately pose a formidable challenge to Bass. She was the first council member to be elected with support from the Democratic Socialists of America, which scored an enormous victory last fall with the election of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

Councilmember Nithya Raman jumps in the race for mayor, challenging former ally Karen Bass in the June primary.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

At the same time, Raman has deep ties to leaders in the YIMBY movement, who have pushed for the city to boost housing production by upzoning single-family neighborhoods and rewriting Measure ULA, the so-called mansion tax, which applies to property sales of $5.3 million or more.

Raman’s eleventh-hour announcement caps what has been the most turbulent candidate filing period for an L.A. mayoral election in at least a generation. She launched her bid less than a day after another political heavyweight, L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, decided against a run.

Until Raman’s surprise entry, the field had seemed to be clear of big-name challengers. Former L.A. schools superintendent Austin Beutner ended his campaign on Thursday, citing the death of his 22-year-old daughter. That same day, real estate developer Rick Caruso reaffirmed his decision not to run.

Bass campaign spokesperson Douglas Herman did not immediately provide comment.

Raman’s announcement comes as Bass continues to face sharp criticism over the city’s handling of the Palisades fire, which killed 12 people and destroyed thousands of homes. Unlike some of the candidates, Raman has not publicly criticized Bass about the city’s preparation for, or response to, the disaster.

Bass, 72, faces more than two dozen opponents from across the political spectrum.

Reality TV star Spencer Pratt, a Republican, has received praise from an array of Trump supporters, including Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and U.S. Sen. Rick Scott, of Florida. Pratt has focused heavily on the city’s handling of the fire, which destroyed his home.

Spencer Pratt poses for a portrait in Pacific Palisades.

(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)

Democratic socialist Rae Huang is running against the mayor from her political left. Huang has called for more public housing and for a reduction in the number of police officers, with the cost savings poured into other city services.

Brentwood tech entrepreneur Adam Miller, who has described himself as a lifelong Democrat, said the city is on a downward trajectory and needs stronger management. The 56-year-old nonprofit executive plans to tap his personal wealth to jump-start his campaign.

Also in the race is Asaad Alnajjar, an employee of the Bureau of Street Lighting who sits on the Porter Ranch Neighborhood Council. Alnajjar has already lent his campaign $80,000.

At City Hall, Raman’s entrance into the mayor’s race is a bombshell, particularly given her relationship with Bass.

Mayor Karen Bass addresses the crowd at the Shine LA event at Hansen Dam Recreation Area in Lake View Terrace, Calif., on Saturday.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

In December 2022, not long after taking office, Bass launched her Inside Safe program, which moves homeless people indoors, in Raman’s district.

Two years later, while running for reelection, Raman prominently featured Bass on at least a dozen of her campaign mailers and door hangers. Raman’s campaign produced a video ad that heavily excerpted Bass’ remarks endorsing her at a Sherman Oaks get-out-the-vote rally.

Raman, whose district stretches from Silver Lake to Reseda, ultimately won reelection with 50.7% of the vote. In the years that followed, she continued to praise Bass’ leadership.

In November, while appearing at a DSA election night watch party for Mamdani, Raman told The Times that Bass is “the most progressive mayor we’ve ever had in L.A.”

Last month, Bass formally announced that she had secured Raman’s endorsement, featuring her in a list of a dozen San Fernando Valley political leaders who backed her reelection campaign.

Raman ran for office in 2020, promising to put in place stronger tenant protections and provide a more effective, humane approach to combating homelessness. On her campaign platform, she called for the transformation of the LAPD into a “much smaller, specialized armed force” — but never specified what exactly that would mean.

A woman takes a photo with her phone at the C. Erwin Piper Technical Center on Saturday.

(Christina House / Los Angeles Times)

Since then, the LAPD has lost about 1,300 officers — a decrease of about 13%. The City Council has put in place new eviction protections for tenants, while also capping the size of rent increases in the city’s “rent stabilized” apartments, which were mostly built before October 1978.

Raman does not face the same political risks as Horvath, who had already been running for reelection in her Westside and San Fernando Valley district. Horvath, had she run for mayor, would have had to forfeit her seat on the county Board of Supervisors.

If Raman loses, she would still hold her council seat, since she does not face reelection until 2028.