public safety

SAN JOSE — Matt Mahan didn’t set out to be a scold and pain in Gavin Newsom’s backside.

He doesn’t mean to sound like a wrathful Republican when he criticizes one-party rule in Sacramento. Or a disgruntled independent when he assails a Democratic establishment that’s become, as he sees it, “a club of insiders who take care of each other” and mostly go along to get along.

Maybe because that’s “my diagnosis of it,” said the 42-year-old San José mayor, “I have tried very consciously to not fall into that trap of just wanting to be liked.”

He is, Mahan insists, a Democrat to his core, his roots sunk deep in the loamy soil of working-class Watsonville, where, over the mountains and light years from Silicon Valley, he grew up the son of a mail carrier and a high school teacher.

That makes his candor all the more bracing, and refreshing, at a time when Democrats are struggling nationally to regain their footing and find a meaningful way forward.

“We have become so caught up in our own rhetoric of helping the little guy that we’ve stopped actually checking to make sure that we are doing that,” Mahan said over lunch at a cantina downtown.

Results, he said, are what matter. Not good intentions.

And certainly not the performative pugilism that some, including the hyper-online Newsom, pass off as leadership. “A sugar high,” Mahan called it.

“I think a lot of Democrats are frustrated and feel powerless, and so that rhetoric has this cathartic effect,” he said. “But I don’t know that it actually, over time, moves us toward success, and I mean not just success in society, but even political success, because ultimately, if you’re not offering solutions, I think you can have a hard time getting to a majority position.”

Mahan comes by his outsider status naturally.

In high school, he rode the bus four hours a day — from Watsonville to San José and back again — to attend a college prep academy on a work-study scholarship. (“My golden ticket,” he called it.) He worked on the grounds crew to help pay his way, and continued on to Harvard, where his dorm mates included Mark Zuckerberg. (The two hung out in college and still talk occasionally.)

After a year in Bolivia, helping family farmers, and a stint teaching middle school, Mahan co-founded a social media company that focused on civic engagement and raising money for nonprofits. He was elected to the San José City Council in 2020. Even before his first term was completed, Mahan launched an upstart bid for mayor.

The front-runner was a member of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, a former San José vice mayor and longtime civic leader. Waging a nothing-to-lose campaign — “we had no endorsements, we had much less money” — Mahan knocked on thousands of doors. He asked voters what they had on their minds.

It turned out to be rudimentary stuff. Potholes. Public safety. A sense they were paying a whole lot of taxes and getting very little in return.

The experience impressed two things upon Mahan: a need for accountability and the importance of voters’ lived experience, as opposed to vague promises, abstract notions and politically fashionable statements.

“I think ultimately political success and policy success comes from offering better ideas and demonstrating impact,” Mahan said, sounding very much like the technocrat he calls himself.

Mahan won the mayor’s race — narrowly, in a major upset — and was reelected two years later in a November 2024 landslide. (The year Mahan was elected, San José voted to shift its mayoral contest to correspond with presidential balloting, which cut his first term in half.)

Soon enough, Mahan found himself at odds with some major Democratic constituencies, including powerful labor unions, which pushed back over wages and a return-to-office policy, and homeless advocates who bristled at Mahan’s focus on short-term housing and threat to arrest homeless people who refused multiple offers of shelter.

“Homelessness can’t be a choice,” Mahan said at a spring news conference announcing the move.

His heresies don’t end there.

Mahan broke with many Democrats by vigorously supporting Proposition 36, the 2024 anti-crime measure that stiffened penalties for repeated theft and crimes involving fentanyl. Despite opposition from Newsom and most of the state’s Democratic leadership, it passed with nearly 70% support; Mahan has since criticized Newsom and the Democratic-run Legislature for stinting on funds needed for implementation.

But his most conspicuous breach involves the governor’s Trumpy transformation into a social media troll.

While the mockery and memes may feel good as snickering payback and certainly stoke the Democratic base — boosting Newsom’s presidential hopes — Mahan suggested they are ultimately counterproductive.

“If we don’t have a politics of solutions and making people’s lives better, I just don’t know where we end up,” he said, as his enchiladas sat cooling before him. “It’s politics practiced in bad faith, where we just … tell people things that test well because they sound nice, and then we just blame the other side for being evil, incompetent, corrupt. … It’s just a race to the bottom.”

He took particular issue with Newsom’s taunting reaction after Bed Bath & Beyond recently announced it won’t open or operate new stores in California.

It wasn’t “a reasoned argument,” Mahan wrote in a scathing opinion piece in the San Francisco Standard. The tart headline: “How about less time breaking the internet and more time fixing California?”

“‘Breaking the internet’ doesn’t solve real-world problems — quite the opposite,” Mahan wrote. “More often than not, it’s just political theater that serves to excuse inaction and ineffective policies.”

He elaborated over lunch.

“You have an employer who’s pointing out real issues that everybody else who’s watching thinks are real issues. Talking about business climate, cost of doing business, public safety issues, retail theft, untreated addiction and mental illness,” Mahan said.

“When we start turning on constituents because we don’t agree with their ideology, or attacking Trump is more important than actually solving problems or listening to the criticism … I think we’re heading down a dangerous road.”

Inevitably, there’s the question: To what end all this poking of thumbs in his fellow Democrats’ eyes?

Mahan has drawn wide notice, in particular from the more pragmatic wing of the party. His back-to-basics approach has yielded some measurable success. A recent study called San José the safest major city in the country and, while the overall homeless population grew slightly, there’s been progress moving people off the streets into city shelters.

He considered plunging into the race for governor, but the timing wasn’t right. Mahan has two small children and a wife who’s flourishing in her career as an educator. Besides, Mahan said, he’s quite content being mayor of California’s third-most populous city.

“I have a wonderful marriage,” Mahan said. “I have two wonderful kids. I loved working in the private sector. I’ve got a lot of great friends. I’m doing this because I genuinely want to make our city better, and I love the job. But it’s not who I am, and I can separate myself from the job.”

That grounding and perspective, so different from those politicians oozing ambition from every pore, may be Mahan’s best commendation for higher office.

If and when.

OREM, Utah — Authorities said Thursday they have fresh leads in their massive manhunt for a college-age shooter who killed influential right-wing activist Charlie Kirk with a single bullet as he spoke at a Utah college campus.

No suspects were in custody Thursday, more than 20 hours after the shooting, and officials have yet to identify the gunman. However, Robert Bohls, the special agent in charge of the F.B.I.’s Salt Lake City office, said that investigators recovered the weapon they believe was used to kill Kirk — a high-powered bolt-action rifle they found in a wooded area near the campus — as well as the suspect’s footprints and palm prints.

“We are and will continue to work nonstop until we find the person that has committed this heinous crime, and find out why they did it,” Bohls said.

A close ally of President Trump who founded the conservative youth group Turning Point USA, Kirk was killed Wednesday by a single shot fired from the rooftop of a nearby building as he addressed a question about mass shootings at a Utah Valley University campus in Orem.

Investigators are tracking a suspect who appeared to be college age and blended in on campus, Beau Mason, commissioner of the Utah Department of Public Safety, told reporters Thursday morning. They have scoured dozens of feeds from campus security cameras and collected footwear impressions, a palm print and forearm imprints for analysis.

Video of the crowd captured by an attendee shows a lone figure in black dashing across the rooftop of the Losee Center, a building about 150 yards from where Kirk was speaking.

Mason said investigators “are confident in our abilities to track” the shooter and had “good video footage” that they were not ready to release.

“We are working through some technologies and some ways to identify this individual,” he said.

After scouring camera security footage, investigators believe the shooter arrived on campus at about 11:52 am and moved through the stairwells, up to the roof, across the roof to the shooting location, Mason said.

“We were able to track his movements as he moved to the other side of the building, jumped off of the building and fled off of the campus and into a neighborhood,” Mason said. “Our investigators worked through those neighborhoods, contacting anybody they can, with doorbell cameras, witnesses, and have thoroughly worked through those communities trying to identify any leads.”

Bohls said investigators recovered a high-powered, bolt-action rifle in a wooded area where the shooter had fled. A law enforcement source told The Times a Mauser 30-06 was recovered by investigators. Investigators have not said whether the rifle had been traced to an owner.

The Utah Department of Public Safety said Wednesday night its State Crime Lab is working “multiple active crime scenes” — from the site where Kirk was shot to the locations he and the suspect traveled — with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Utah County Attorney’s office, the Utah County Sheriff’s office, and the local police departments.

Hope for a speedy capture of the suspect faded Wednesday night after the F.B.I. released the man its director, Kash Patel, had said was a subject of the investigation. After thanking local and state authorities for taking into custody “the subject for the horrific shooting,” Patel announced that the man had been released after an interrogation by law enforcement.

“Our investigation continues,” Patel said.

Another man who was taken into custody a few hours earlier was later released after being booked by Utah Valley University police on suspicion of obstruction of justice.

Speaking at the Pentagon Thursday at an event commemorating the Sept. 11 attacks, President Trump said he would posthumously award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Kirk.

“Charlie was a giant of his generation, a champion of liberty and an inspiration to millions and millions of people,” Trump said.

The shooter is believed to have fired about 20 minutes after Kirk began speaking Wednesday on a grassy campus courtyard under a white canopy emblazoned with the slogan “PROVE ME WRONG.” The event, attended by about 3,000 people, was the first stop on Kirk’s American Comeback Tour of U.S. campuses.

Some experts who have seen videos believe that the assailant probably had experience with firearms, given the precision with which the single shot was fired from a considerable distance.

Videos shared on social media show Kirk sitting on a chair, taking questions in front of a large crowd of people.

“Do you know how many mass shooters there have been in America over the last 10 years?” an audience member asks.

“Counting or not counting gang violence?” Kirk responds.

Almost immediately, a shot rings out. Kirk falls back, blood gushing his neck. Video show people screaming and fleeing from the event.

The killing — the latest incident in a spate of violent attacks targeting American politicians on the left and the right — led to swift condemnation of political violence from both sides of the ideological divide. But it also led to a blame game.

After President Trump celebrated Kirk as a “patriot who devoted his life to the cause of open debate” and “martyr for truth and freedom,” he said in an evening video broadcast from the Oval Office that “‘radical left” rhetoric was “directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today.”

Trump — who did not mention recent acts of political violence against Democratic lawmakers — called for a crackdown on leftwing groups.

Even as the House of Representatives observed a moment of silence for Kirk Wednesday when he was still in critical condition, the floor descended into chaos when some Democrats pushed back on a Republican legislator’s request that someone lead the group in prayer.

Florida Representative Anna Paulina Luna, a former conservative influencer and close friend of Kirk, pointed angrily at Democrats. “You all caused this,” she shouted.

Kirk, 31, was one of the Republican Party’s most influential power brokers.

The founder of the influential conservative youth organization Turning Point USA, Kirk had a vast online reach: 1.6 million followers on Rumble, 3.8 million subscribers on YouTube, 5.2 million followers on X and 7.3 million followers on TikTok.

During the 2024 election, he rallied his online followers to support Trump, prompting conservative podcast host Megyn Kelly to say: “It’s not an understatement to say that this man is responsible for helping the Republicans win back the White House and the U.S. Senate.”

Just after Trump was elected for a second time to the presidency in November, Kirk frequently posted to social media from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, where he had firsthand influence over which MAGA loyalists Trump named to his Cabinet.

Kirk was known for melding his conservative politics, nationalism and evangelical faith, casting the current political climate as a state of spiritual warfare between a righteous right wing and so-called godless liberals.

At a Turning Point event on the Salt Lake City campus of Awaken Church in 2023, he said that gun violence was worth the price of upholding the right to bear arms.

“I think it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the 2nd Amendment to protect our other God-given rights,” he said. “That is a prudent deal. It is rational.”

Kirk also previously declared that God was on the side of American conservatives and that there was “no separation of church and state.” In a speech to Trump supporters in Georgia last year, he said that “the Democrat Party supports everything that God hates” and that “there is a spiritual battle happening all around us.”

Multiple videos from the scene show graphic details about the killing of conservative commentator and political organizer Charlie Kirk at a university in Utah on Wednesday.

Authorities are now poring over the video as part of the investigation into Kirk’s killing. They are still looking for the gunman after briefly detaining and then freeing two people of interest.

Charlie Kirk speaks before he is fatally shot during an event Wednesday at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah.

(Tess Crowley / Deseret News / AP)

The shooting

Kirk drew a large crowd to the event at Utah Valley University. He was gunned down at 12:20 p.m. while talking about mass shootings.

“Do you know how many mass shooters there have been in America over the last 10 years?” an audience member asks.

“Counting or not counting gang violence?” Kirk responds.

Almost immediately, Kirk is shot in the neck. One video shows blood pouring from the wound as he falls over. As the crowd realizes what has taken place, people are heard screaming and running away.

“This incident occurred with a large crowd around. There was one shot fired, one victim,” Beau Mason, commissioner of the Utah Department of Public Safety, said on Wednesday afternoon. “While the suspect is at large, we believe this was a targeted attack toward one individual.”

Members of the crowd screamed and ran after a gunshot was heard and Kirk toppled from his chair.

(Tess Crowley / Deseret News / AP)

The shooter is believed to have fired from the roof of a building at Kirk as he participated in the public event in the student courtyard, where around 3,000 people were gathered, according to the Department of Public Safety.

A source familiar with the investigation told The Times that a bullet struck Kirk’s carotid artery.

Moments later, many in the crowd begin running.

Jeffrey Long, chief of the university’s Police Department, said six of the force’s officers, including some plainclothes officers embedded in the crowd, were working with members of Kirk’s personal security team to manage safety at the event.

The shooter

Several videos show a person who appears to be dressed in black moving on the roof of university’s Losee Center moments before the gunfire.

Mason, of the Utah Department of Public Safety, said authorities were analyzing campus security video that showed a suspect in dark clothing who might have shot at Kirk from a roof.

The gunman is believed to have killed Kirk from at least 200 yards away using some type of sniper rifle, law enforcement sources told The Times.

Allison Hemingway-Witty cries after the shooting.

(Tess Crowley / Deseret News / AP)

Some experts who have seen videos believe that the assailant probably had experience with firearms, given the precision with which the single shot was fired from a considerable distance.

Witness Seth Teasdale told the Salt Lake Tribune that the gunshot was so loud it echoed across the pavilion where Kirk was speaking.

Brynlee Holms told the Tribune the shot was “super loud,” which added to the panic in the crowd.

“I just heard a clear shot, ‘Boom!’ And that was it,” another witness told KUTV.

Police detained George Zinn and Zachariah Qureshi as suspects and later released them after determining they had no ties to the shooting, according to the Department of Public Safety. The manhunt for the shooter continues.

What is not shown

No videos have surfaced showing the gunman firing the shot or fleeing the scene.

Mason said authorities were reviewing closed-circuit television video. “We’re analyzing it, but it is security camera footage, so you can kind of guess what the quality of that is,” Mason said. “We do know [the suspect was] dressed in all dark clothing. We don’t have a much better description.”

Utah Gov. Stephen Cox called the attack “a political assassination” and said Wednesday was “a dark day for our state” and “a tragic day for our nation.”

Law enforcement was working “multiple active crime scenes” including the area Kirk was shot as well as the locations where the suspect and victim traveled, according to the Public Safety Department. They did not provide any further information on the suspect.

The FBI created a tip line to gather information that may lead to the shooter’s arrest.

President Trump has threatened to deploy the National Guard to Chicago, New York, Seattle, Baltimore, San Francisco and Portland, Ore., to fight what he says is runaway crime. Yet data show most violent crime in those places and around the country has declined in recent years.

Homicides through the first six months of 2025 were down significantly compared with the same period in 2024, continuing a post-pandemic trend across the U.S.

Trump, who has already taken federal control of police in Washington, D.C., has maligned the six Democratic-run cities that all are in states that opposed him in 2024. But he hasn’t threatened sending in the Guard to any major cities in Republican-leaning states.

John Roman, a data expert who directs the Center on Public Safety & Justice at the University of Chicago, acknowledged violence in some urban neighborhoods has persisted for generations. But he said there’s no U.S. city where there “is really a crisis.”

“We’re at a remarkable moment in crime in the United States,” he said.

Public sees things differently

Trump might be tapping somewhat into public perception when he describes cities such as Chicago as a “killing field.” The vast majority of Americans, 81%, see crime as a “major problem” in large cities, according to a survey released this week by the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, though there is much less support, 32%, for federal control of police.

The public was reminded this week that shootings remain a frequent event in the U.S. In Minneapolis, which has seen homicides and most other crime fall, a shooter killed two children attending a Catholic school Mass on Wednesday and wounded 17 a day after three people died in separate shootings elsewhere in the city.

Still, over time, the picture is encouraging, according to numbers from AH Datalytics, which tracks crimes across the country using law enforcement data for its Real-Time Crime Index.

Aggravated assaults — which includes nonfatal shootings — through June were down in Chicago, Portland, Seattle, Baltimore and San Francisco and were virtually unchanged in New York. Reports of rape were up in New York and Chicago during the first half of the year, but down in the other cities, including a 51% drop in San Francisco.

The crime index also showed that property crimes, such as theft, burglary and motor vehicle theft, were mostly down in those six cities in the first six months of 2025. Theft crimes rose from 2020-24 in four of the six cities analyzed by AP.

Cities defend safety strategies

Trump exaggerated and misstated facts about crime in Washington when his administration took over the D.C. police department and flooded the capital with federal agents and the National Guard. He referred to Baltimore, 40 miles away, as a “hellhole” during a Cabinet meeting and has said he might “send in the ‘troops.’ ”

“I’m not walking in Baltimore right now,” Trump said.

Yet Baltimore has shown drops in major crime, according to the crime index. Homicides and rapes were down 25% or more in the first half of 2025 compared with the same period in 2024. Homicides were down for three consecutive years through 2024 and were 35% lower when compared with 2018.

“Deploying the National Guard for municipal policing purposes is not sustainable, scalable, constitutional, or respectful,” Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, a Democrat, said on social media site X.

Baltimore has found ways to reduce violence by offering mentorship, social services and job opportunities to young people likely to commit crimes, said Michael Scott, director of the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing at Arizona State University and a former police chief in Florida.

“That approach has resulted in more significant reductions in shootings and homicides than any other strategy I’ve seen in the over 50 years I’ve been in the field,” Scott said.

Vice President JD Vance told a Wisconsin crowd on Thursday that governors and mayors should ask the Trump administration for help.

“The president of the United States is not going out there forcing this on anybody,” Vance said of using the National Guard, “though we do think that we have the legal right to clean up America’s streets if we want to.”

Tales of different cities

Trump doesn’t seem to disparage big cities in states that favor Republicans. Charlotte, N.C., had 105 homicides in 2024 compared with 88 in 2023. The rate of vehicle thefts per 100,000 people more than doubled there from 2020-24. Indianapolis had a homicide rate of 19 per 100,000 residents in 2024 — more than four times higher than New York’s.

Amy Holt, 48, who recently moved to Charlotte from a gated community in northern Virginia, said someone tried to steal her husband’s car in their new city. She also found bullets on the ground while walking with dogs.

There’s no discussion about sending the National Guard to Charlotte. Holt believes most cities should be trusted to be in charge of public safety, adding that troops in uniforms would be “alarming” and “scary.”

Democratic-elected officials in cities targeted by Trump have publicly rejected suggestions that their residents need the National Guard. “Crime is at its lowest point in decades, visitors are coming back, and San Francisco is on the rise,” Mayor Daniel Lurie said.

Experts question just how effective the National Guard would be and where troops would be deployed in cities.

“It’s going to make residents think: Things must be much worse than I realize to have the military in my neighborhood. What’s going on?” Scott said. “It’s more likely to generate undue fear and apprehension than it will lead to perceptions of reassurance and safety.”

White and Keller write for the Associated Press. White reported from Detroit and Keller reported from Albuquerque, N.M. AP video journalist Erik Verduzco in Charlotte, N.C., contributed to this report.

Just how unsafe are American streets?

To hear President Trump tell it, killers lurk in every shadow not already filled by rapists and thieves.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom isn’t nearly as dire, pointing out that crime numbers are down.

But “numbers mean little to people,” Newsom lamented during a press gaggle in his office Thursday, where he ruthlessly trolled Trump with a flags-and-all setup that appeared to mock the president’s marathon Cabinet meeting earlier in the week.

Yes, folks, midterm elections are coming and crime is high — in our consciousness if not in reality. Although violent crime and some property crimes have declined in most California cities (and in many major cities across the country), the perils of city living remain stubbornly stuck in our collective psyches.

This angst has augured in another get-tough era of crime suppression, culminating with the fulfillment of Trump’s authoritarian fantasy of National Guard troops patrolling in Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and potentially more cities to come.

Newsom is now offering up what many have framed as a counterpunch to Trump’s military intervention: A surge of California Highway Patrol officers in strategic locations across the state, basically Newsom-controlled cop boots on the ground to mirror Trump’s troops.

But looking at Newsom’s deployment of more CHP officers as no more than a reaction to Trump misses a larger debate on what really makes our communities safer. Understanding what makes cops different from soldiers — and Newsom’s move different from Trump’s — is ultimately understanding the difference between repression and public safety, force and finesse.

Newsom has been using the CHP to supplement local police departments for years. In 2023, when the Tenderloin area of San Francisco was plagued by open drug use, making it the favorite right-wing example of a failed Democratic-run city, Newsom sent this state force in to help clean it up (though that work continues). The next year, he sent it into Oakland and Bakersfield, both places where auto theft, retail crime and side shows were rampant.

Now, he’s expanding the CHP’s role in local policing to include Los Angeles, San Diego, the Inland Empire and some Central Valley cities including Fresno and Sacramento.

In each of those places, mobile teams of around a dozen officers, all of whom will volunteer for the job, will target specific crimes, criminals or problem areas. These officers won’t just be patrolling or responding to calls like the local force, but hitting targets identified by data or intelligence, or making their presence known in high-crime neighborhoods.

Here’s where Trump’s military approach has an overlap with Newsom’s — and where the two men might agree: It is true that a visible show of armed authority deters crime. Whether it’s the National Guard or the Highway Patrol, criminals, both petty and violent, tend to avoid them.

“We go in and saturate an area with high visibility and view patrol,” said Sean Duryee, commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, standing at Newsom’s side. “The people that have a problem with that are the criminal community.”

The approach seems to be working. I can throw the numbers at you — 400 firearms seized in San Bernardino, Bakersfield, Oakland; 4,000 stolen vehicles recovered in Oakland; more than 9,000 arrests statewide.

But numbers really don’t matter. It genuinely is how a community feels about its safety. Across California, many if not the majority of small and mid-sized law enforcement departments are understaffed. Even big departments such as Los Angeles struggle to hire and retain officers. There are simply not enough cops — or resources such as helicopters or K9 teams — to do the work in too many places, and citizens feel it.

Using these small strike teams of CHP officers fills the gap of both manpower and expertise. And by aiming that usage precisely at troubled spots, it can make underserved communities feel safer, and crime-ridden communities actually be safer.

Tinisch Hollins is the head of Californians for Safety and Justice, an advocacy group that works to end over-incarceration and promote public safety beyond just making arrests. She is “obviously not a huge proponent of sending law enforcement into communities like that,” she said.

But she lived in San Francisco when homicides topped 100 per year, and now lives in the Bay Area city of Vallejo, where the local police have been so understaffed and plagued by scandal that local leaders declared a state of emergency.

She has seen how the CHP has “made an impact” in the Bay Area.

“There are some very effective things happening,” Hollins said.

That buy-in from community, especially skeptical community, is a massive departure from the militarization of Trump, and also hints at the deeper difference between troops and cops.

California has been on the cutting-edge of law enforcement reform for years, though it is a conversation that has fallen from favor and headlines in the Trump era.

In the wake of the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police, California outlawed controversial carotid restraints that can cut off breathing. The state put in place a method for decertifying officers found guilty of serious misconduct. It increased age and education standards for becoming a peace officer, increased transparency requirements and put more oversight on the use of military equipment by civilian forces, just to name a few reforms.

Most significantly, Newsom is championing a new vision of incarceration and rehabilitation modeled after successful efforts in Norway and other places that centers on the simple truth that arresting people does not end crime.

Most people who are convicted and incarcerated will return to our streets after a few years at most, and if the state does not change their outlook and opportunities, they will also likely return to crime — making us no safer than the day they were first put into cuffs.

But for a time, it seemed to some as if these reforms with their focus away from enforcement and toward alternatives to incarceration had gone too far. Images of marauding groups of retail thieves invading stores filled the news, and reasonably caused anxiety — leading to Californians passing the still-unfunded, tough-on-crime Proposition 36 that sought to create stiffer penalties for some drug and property crimes, along with mandated treatment for addiction, but which could also take money from rehabilitation programs.

As much as Trump, Newsom’s use of the CHP is the response to that pushback on reform, an acknowledgment that enforcement remains a key piece of the crime-stopping dilemma.

But Hollins points out that the rehabilitation aspect, the most innovative and arguably important aspect of California’s approach to crime, is getting lost in the current political climate.

“It’s not just arresting people that brings crime down,” she said. “The [penal] system isn’t going to deal with the drivers of the crime.”

This is where Newsom needs to do better, both on the ground and in his explanations. It may not be popular to talk about rehabilitation, and certainly Trump will seize on it as weak, but it is what works, and what makes the California method different from the MAGA view of crime.

For Trump, the be-all and end-all is the arrest, and the subsequent cruel glee of punishment. He has called for harsher and longer penalties for even minor crimes, and recently demanded the blanket use of the death penalty in all murder cases charged in Washington, D.C. His is the authoritarian view that fear and repression will make us safer.

“We lost grip with reality, the idea that the military can be out there in every street corner the United States of America,” Newsom said Thursday.

Or should be.

Soldiers on our streets just make even law-abiding citizens less free, and ultimately does little to fix the problems of poverty and opportunity that often start the cycles of crime.

This is the showdown happening right now on American streets, and ultimately the showdown between the Democratic view of crime prevention and Trump’s — soldiers or cops, the easy spectacle of compliance induced by the barrel of a gun or a complicated and imperfect system of community and law enforcement working together.

WASHINGTON — President Trump took executive action Monday threatening to cut federal aid to cities and counties that offer cashless bail to criminal defendants, a move that could place Democratic jurisdictions throughout the country under further financial strain.

Trump’s first executive order specifically targeted the practice of cashless bail in the District of Columbia, where the president has sent National Guard troops to patrol the streets. His second action directed the Justice Department to draw up a list of jurisdictions that have “substantially eliminated cash bail as a potential condition for crimes that pose a clear threat to public safety and order” — a list that would then be subject to federal funding cuts, the White House said.

“That was when the big crime in this country started,” Trump said. “That was when it happened. Somebody kills somebody, they go and don’t worry about it — no cash, come back in a couple of months, we’ll give you a trial. You never see the person again.”

“They thought it was discriminatory to make people put up money because they just killed three people lying in the street,” he added. “We’re ending it.”

Trump does not have the power to unilaterally change D.C. law. But administration officials hope the threat of significant financial pressures on the city will force local lawmakers to change it themselves.

Similarly, his second order could ultimately result in cuts to federal grants and contracts with Los Angeles County, where courts use cash bail only in the most serious criminal cases.

Studies have not shown a correlation between cashless bail policies and an increase in crime.

As of October 2023, nearly everyone accused of misdemeanors or nonviolent felonies in Los Angeles County is either cited and released or freed on certain conditions after their case is reviewed by a judge. The judge can offer other conditions for release, including electronic monitoring or home supervision by probation officials.

“A person’s ability to pay a large sum of money should not be the determining factor in deciding whether that person, who is presumed innocent, stays in jail before trial or is released,” then-Presiding Judge Samantha Jessner said at the time.

The county reached out to the court on how Trump’s executive order may affect the county’s bail policies and had not heard back.

The county policy has proved controversial with some cities saying they believed the lack of cash bail would make their communities less safe. Twelve cities within the county sued unsuccessfully to block the cashless bail reform, arguing it would lead to higher crime rates and violated the court’s responsibilities to uphold public safety. Sheriff Robert Luna told the supervisors in 2023 that some communities were alarmed at the “lack of consequences for those who commit crimes.”

The sheriff’s office and the public defender’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The county had initially begun a zero-bail system during the pandemic to prevent crowding in jails. A report to the Board of Supervisors found instances of re-arrest or failure to appear in court remained relatively stable despite the change.

In the fall of 2022, six people sued the county and city, arguing they spent five days in custody solely because they could not afford bail, leaving them in “dismal” conditions. Demanding cash bail created a “wealth-based detention system,” the plaintiffs alleged. The suit led to a preliminary injunction barring the city and county from enforcing cash bail requirements for some people who had yet to be arraigned.

Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill in 2018 to end cash bail across California. Voters nixed it after the bail bond industry spearheaded a campaign to send the measure to voters. The referendum was defeated in 2020 with 56% voting “no.”

Trump also signed an executive action directing the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute individuals for burning the American flag, calling it an act of incitement, despite standing Supreme Court precedent that doing so is an expression of free speech.

They were the latest steps in a spree of executive actions from Trump ostensibly targeting crime in the United States, following Trump’s deployment of Marines and the National Guard to Los Angeles in June and his federalization of the National Guard in D.C. earlier this month.

He has threatened to launch similar operations with federal forces to New York and Chicago, despite local officials telling the Trump administration that the deployments are not necessary.

“They probably do want it,” Trump said. “If we didn’t go to Los Angeles, you would literally have had to call off the Olympics. It was so bad.”

Ahead of the 2028 Olympics, to be held in Los Angeles, American cities should be “spotless,” Trump added.

Wilner reported from Washington, Ellis from Los Angeles.

WASHINGTON — The State Department said Thursday that it’s reviewing the records of more than 55 million foreigners who hold valid U.S. visas for potential revocation or deportable violations of immigration rules.

In a written answer to a question posed by the Associated Press, the department said that all U.S. visa holders are subject to “continuous vetting” with an eye toward any indication that they could be ineligible for the document.

Should such information be found, the visa will be revoked and, if the visa holder is in the United States, he or she would be subject to deportation.

The department said it was looking for indicators of ineligibility, including visa overstays, criminal activity, threats to public safety, engaging in any form of terrorist activity, or providing support to a terrorist organization.

“We review all available information as part of our vetting, including law enforcement or immigration records or any other information that comes to light after visa issuance indicating a potential ineligibility,” the department said.

Since President Trump took office in January, his administration has thus far focused on deporting migrants illegally in the United States as well as holders of student and visitor exchange visas. The State Department’s new language suggests that the re-vetting process, which officials acknowledge is time-consuming, is far more widespread.

The administration has steadily imposed more and more restrictions and requirements on visa applicants, including requiring all visa seekers to submit to in-person interviews.

But the review of all visa holders appears to be a significant expansion of what had initially been a re-vetting process focused mainly on students who have been involved in pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel activity.

Officials say the reviews will include all the visa holders’ social media accounts, law enforcement and immigration records in their home countries, along with any actionable violations of U.S. law committed while they were in the United States.

“As part of the Trump Administration’s commitment to protect U.S. national security and public safety, since Inauguration Day the State Department has revoked more than twice as many visas, including nearly four times as many student visas, as during the same time period last year,” the department said.

Earlier this week, the department said that since Trump returned to the White House, it has revoked more than 6,000 student visas for overstays and violations of local, state and federal law, the vast majority of which were assault, driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs and support for terrorism.

It said that about 4,000 of those 6,000 were due to actual infractions of laws and that approximately 200–300 visas were revoked for terrorism-related issues, including providing support for designated terrorist organizations or state sponsors of terrorism.

Lee writes for the Associated Press.

They called them the “worst of the worst.” For more than a month and a half, the Trump administration has posted a barrage of mugshots of L.A. undocumented immigrants with long rap sheets.

Officials have spotlighted Cuong Chanh Phan, a 49-year-old Vietnamese man convicted in 1997 of second–degree murder for his role in slaying two teens at a high school graduation party.

They have shared blurry photos on Instagram of a slew of convicted criminals such as Rolando Veneracion-Enriquez, a 55-year-old Filipino man convicted in 1996 of sexual penetration with a foreign object with force and assault with intent to commit a felony. And Eswin Uriel Castro, a Mexican convicted in 2002 of child molestation and in 2021 of assault with a deadly weapon.

But the immigrants that the Department of Homeland Security showcase in X posts and news releases do not represent the majority of immigrants swept up across Los Angeles.

As the number of immigration arrests in the L.A. region quadrupled from 540 in April to 2,185 in June, seven out of 10 immigrants arrested in June had no criminal conviction — a trend that immigrant advocates say belies administration claims that they are targeting “heinous illegal alien criminals” who represent a threat to public safety.

According to a Los Angeles Times analysis of ICE data from the Deportation Data Project, the proportion of immigrants without criminal convictions arrested in seven counties in and around L.A. has skyrocketed from 35% in April, to 46% in May, and to 69% from June 1 to June 26.

Austin Kocher, a geographer and research assistant professor at Syracuse University who specializes in immigration enforcement, said the Trump administration was not being entirely honest about the criminal status of those they were arresting.

Officials, he said, followed a strategy of focusing on the minority of violent convicted criminals so they could justify enforcement policies that are proving to be less popular.

“I think they know that if they were honest with the American public that they’re arresting people who cook our food, wash dishes in the kitchen, take care of people in nursing homes, people who are just living in part of the community … there’s a large segment of the public, including a large segment of Trump’s own supporters, who would be uncomfortable and might even oppose those kinds of immigration practices.”

In Los Angeles, the raids swept up garment worker Jose Ortiz, who worked 18 years at the Ambiance Apparel clothing warehouse in downtown L.A., before being nabbed in a June 6 raid; car wash worker Jesus Cruz, a 52-year-old father who was snatched on June 8 — just before his daughter’s graduation — from Westchester Hand Wash; and Emma De Paz, a recent widow and tamale vendor from Guatemala who was arrested June 19 outside a Hollywood Home Depot.

Such arrests may be influencing the public’s perception of the raids. Multiple polls show support for Trump’s immigration agenda slipping as masked federal agents increasingly swoop up undocumented immigrants from workplaces and streets.

ICE data shows that about 31% of the immigrants arrested across the L.A. region from June 1 to June 26 had criminal convictions, 11% had pending criminal charges and 58% were classified as “other immigration violator,” which ICE defines as “individuals without any known criminal convictions or pending charges in ICE’s system of record at the time of the enforcement action.”

The L.A. region’s surge in arrests of noncriminals has been more dramatic than the U.S. as a whole: Arrests of immigrants with no criminal convictions climbed nationally from 57% in April to 69% in June.

Federal raids here have also been more fiercely contested in Southern California — particularly in L.A. County, where more than 2 million residents are undocumented or living with undocumented family members.

“A core component of their messaging is that this is about public safety, that the people that they are arresting are threats to their communities,” said David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, a Libertarian think tank. “But it’s hard to maintain that this is all about public safety when you’re going out and arresting people who are just going about their lives and working.”

Trump never said he would arrest only criminals.

Almost as soon as he retook office on Jan. 20, Trump signed a stack of executive orders aimed at drastically curbing immigration. The administration then moved to expand arrests from immigrants who posed a security threat to anyone who entered the country illegally.

Yet while officials kept insisting they were focused on violent criminals, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt issued a warning: “That doesn’t mean that the other illegal criminals who entered our nation’s borders are off the table.”

As White House chief advisor on border policy Tom Homan put it: “If you’re in the country illegally, you got a problem.”

Still, things did not really pick up until May, when White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller ordered ICE’s top field officials to shift to more aggressive tactics: arresting undocumented immigrants, whether or not they had a criminal record.

Miller set a new goal: arresting 3,000 undocumented people a day, a quota that immigration experts say is impossible to reach by focusing only on criminals.

“There aren’t enough criminal immigrants in the United States to fill their arrest quotas and to get millions and millions of deportations, which is what the president has explicitly promised,” Bier said. “Immigration and Customs Enforcement says there’s half a million removable noncitizens who have criminal convictions in the United States. Most of those are nonviolent: traffic, immigration offenses. It’s not millions and millions.”

By the time Trump celebrated six months in office, DHS boasted that the Trump administration had already arrested more than 300,000 undocumented immigrants.

“70% of ICE arrests,” the agency said in a news release, “are individuals with criminal convictions or charges.”

But that claim no longer appeared to be true. While 78% of undocumented immigrants arrested across the U.S. in April had a criminal conviction or faced a pending charge, that number had plummeted to 57% in June.

In L.A., the difference between what Trump officials said and the reality on the ground was more stark: Only 43% of those arrested across the L.A. region had criminal convictions or faced a pending charge.

Still, ICE kept insisting it was “putting the worst first.”

As stories circulate across communities about the arrests of law-abiding immigrants, there are signs that support for Trump’s deportation agenda is falling.

A CBS/YouGov poll published July 20 shows about 56% of those surveyed approved of Trump’s handling of immigration in March, but that dropped to 50% in June and 46% in July. About 52% of poll respondents said the Trump administration is trying to deport more people than expected. When asked who the Trump administration is prioritizing for deporting, only 44% said “dangerous criminals.”

California Gov. Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass have repeatedly accused Trump of conducting a national experiment in Los Angeles.

“The federal government is using California as a playground to test their indiscriminate actions that fulfill unsafe arrest quotas and mass detention goals,” Diana Crofts-Pelayo, a spokesperson for Newsom told The Times. “They are going after every single immigrant, regardless of whether they have a criminal background and without care that they are American citizens, legal status holders and foreign-born, and even targeting native-born U.S. citizens.”

When pressed on why ICE is arresting immigrants who have not been convicted or are not facing pending criminal charges, Trump administration officials tend to argue that many of those people have violated immigration law.

“ICE agents are going to arrest people for being in the country illegally,” Homan told CBS News earlier this month. “We still focus on public safety threats and national security threats, but if we find an illegal alien in the process of doing that, they’re going to be arrested too.”

Immigration experts say that undermines their message that they are ridding communities of people who threaten public safety.

“It’s a big backtracking from ‘These people are out killing people, raping people, harming them in demonstrable ways,’ to ‘This person broke immigration law in this way or that way,’” Bier said.

The Trump administration is also trying to find new ways to target criminals in California.

It has threatened to withhold federal funds to California due to its “sanctuary state” law, which limits county jails from coordinating with ICE except in cases involving immigrants convicted of a serious crime or felonies such as murder, rape, robbery or arson.

Last week, the U.S. Justice Department requested California counties, including L.A., provide data on all jail inmates who are not U.S. citizens in an effort to help federal immigration agents prioritize those who have committed crimes. “Although every illegal alien by definition violates federal law,” the U.S. Justice Department said in a news release, “those who go on to commit crimes after doing so show that they pose a heightened risk to our Nation’s safety and security.”

As Americans are bombarded with dueling narratives of good vs. bad immigrants, Kocher believes the question we have to grapple with is not “What does the data say?”

Instead, we should ask: “How do we meaningfully distinguish between immigrants with serious criminal convictions and immigrants who are peacefully living their lives?”

“I don’t think it’s reasonable, or helpful, to represent everyone as criminals — or everyone as saints,” Kocher said. “Probably the fundamental question, which is also a question that plagues our criminal justice system, is whether our legal system is capable of distinguishing between people who are genuine public safety threats and people who are simply caught up in the bureaucracy.”

The data, Kocher said, show that ICE is currently unable or unwilling to make that distinction.

“If we don’t like the way that the system is working, we might want to rethink whether we want a system where people who are simply living in the country following laws, working in their economy, should actually have a pathway to stay,” Kocher said. “And the only way to do that is actually to change the laws.”

In the rush to blast out mugshots of some of the most criminal L.A. immigrants, the Trump administration left out a key part of the story.

According to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, its staff notified ICE on May 5 of Veneracion’s pending release after he had served nearly 30 years in prison for the crimes of assault with intent to commit rape and sexual penetration with a foreign object with force.

But ICE failed to pick up Veneracion and canceled its hold on him May 19, a day before he was released on parole.

A few weeks later, as ICE amped up its raids, federal agents arrested Veneracion on June 7 at the ICE office in L.A. The very next day, DHS shared his mugshot in a news release titled “President Trump is Stepping Up Where Democrats Won’t.”

The same document celebrated the capture of Phan, who served nearly 25 years in prison after he was convicted of second-degree murder.

CDCR said the Board of Parole Hearings coordinated with ICE after Phan was granted parole in 2022. Phan was released that year to ICE custody.

But those details did not stop Trump officials from taking credit for his arrest and blaming California leaders for letting Phan loose.

“It is sickening that Governor Newsom and Mayor Bass continue to protect violent criminal illegal aliens at the expense of the safety of American citizens and communities,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement.

California and a coalition of 17 other states threw their support Monday behind a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of recent federal immigration enforcement raids in Los Angeles, asking a federal court to issue a temporary restraining order against such operations while their legality is challenged.

The states’ action adds substantial heft to a lawsuit filed last week by advocacy groups and detained individuals, who accused the federal government of violating the rights of Los Angeles residents by sending masked immigration agents to detain people in certain L.A. neighborhoods based on little more than the color of their skin.

It came the same day that heavily armed agents in tactical gear swept through MacArthur Park in Los Angeles in a stunning show of force that further rattled local residents and drew outrage from local officials.

In their amicus filing, the states wrote that masked and unidentified ICE and CBP agents were stopping people in L.A. communities without any legitimate cause, and that such stops have “shattered [the] rhythms of everyday life” and diminished public safety in those neighborhoods.

“Masked immigration agents conducting unannounced enforcement actions through the community and, in all too many instances, stopping residents without so much as a reasonable suspicion of unlawful conduct have left people afraid to leave their homes …,” the states argued. “The cumulative effect of defendants’ unlawful actions — including unconstitutional stops — has had devastating impacts on California’s peace and prosperity, and has turned once bustling neighborhoods into ghost towns.”

The states said the immigration enforcement tactics have had a “chilling effect” that has reached far beyond undocumented people, leading to the detention of U.S. citizens and others legally in the country.

The states wrote that the “secretive approach” to such raids — with agents heavily masked and in plainclothes — “has not only created a culture of fear, but has also needlessly impeded local law enforcement.”

Federal officials have vigorously defended their actions as part of President Trump’s promised agenda to conduct mass deportations. Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement last week that “any claims that individuals have been ‘targeted’ by law enforcement because of their skin color are disgusting and categorically FALSE.”

Trump administration officials also have defended federal agents wearing masks, saying it was to protect themselves and their families from threats to their safety. They declined to comment on the operation in MacArthur Park.

The Trump administration has specifically targeted L.A. for its “sanctuary” policies, and administration officials have suggested that heavy immigration enforcement activity will continue in the city for the foreseeable future.

In announcing the states’ filing Monday, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said the recent actions of ICE and CBP agents in Los Angeles were “part of a cruel and familiar pattern of attacks on our immigrant communities by an administration that thrives on fear and division,” and that his office would be fighting back.

“Let me be crystal clear: These raids are not about safety or justice. They are about meeting enforcement quotas and striking fear in our communities,” he said. “We won’t be silent. We won’t back down. We will continue to hold the federal government accountable when it violates the Constitution and federal law.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement that every person in California is protected by the Constitution against “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and that the recent actions of federal agents in L.A. have threatened “the fabric of our democracy, society, and economy.”

“Instead of targeting dangerous criminals, federal agents are detaining U.S. citizens, ripping families apart, and vanishing people to meet indiscriminate arrest quotas without regard to due process and constitutional rights that protect all of us from cruelty and injustice,” Newsom said.

Joining Bonta in the states’ filing were the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.