WASHINGTON — The mission of President Trump’s extraordinary deployment of U.S. Marines and National Guardsmen to Los Angeles depends on whom you ask — and that may be a problem for the White House as it defends its actions in court on Thursday.
The hearing, set before U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco, will set off a rare test over the legality of a military deployment on American soil.
While California has asked for a temporary restraining order against the government, a judicial decree ordering a full withdrawal would be extraordinary, scholars said. But so, too, was the deployment itself, raising the stakes for the judge entering Thursday’s hearing.
Breyer, a veteran of the bench appointed by President Clinton and the younger brother of Stephen Breyer, the former Supreme Court justice, could instead define the parameters of acceptable troop activity in a mission that has been murky from its start over the weekend.
In an interview, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta told The Times that he was told that Trump’s mission set for both the Marines and the National Guard in Los Angeles “is to protect federal property, functions and personnel.”
“The property part may well be compliant with the Posse Comitatus Act,” Bonta said, referring to a landmark law passed after the Civil War prohibiting the use of U.S. troops to engage in local law enforcement.
“If all the Marines do is protect buildings, that might be compliant,” he added. “But it needs to be made clear that they cannot go out into the community to protect federal functions or personnel, if that means the ‘functions’ of civil immigration enforcement conducted by the ‘personnel,’ ICE. That means they’ll be going to Home Depots, and work sites, and maybe knocking on doors.”
Newsletter
You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
George Skelton and Michael Wilner cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know in 2024. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
Vague mission set
Trump told reporters Tuesday that without federal involvement, “Los Angeles would be burning down right now,” suggesting their role was to confront violent rioters throughout the city. But that same day, Air Force Gen. Gregory Guillot told The Times that Marines sent to L.A. County were limited in their authority and without arrest power, deployed only to defend federal property and personnel. The Los Angeles Police Department continues to lead the response to the protests.
Still a third potential mission set emerged within 24 hours, when Immigration and Customs Enforcement posted a photo on Facebook indicating that National Guardsmen were accompanying its agents on the very immigration raids that generated protests in the first place. And White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told The Times that the president’s primary motivation behind the federal show of force was to send a message to protesters — an effort to deter agitators in the crowd from resorting to violence.
Clarifying the true nature and purpose of the deployment — whether to protect federal property, to supplement ICE raids, to quell unrest, or all of the above — will prove critical to the administration’s success on Thursday. Breyer denied California’s request for an emergency restraining order on Tuesday, instead giving both sides 48 hours to prepare their case for the hearing.
“He’s the most well-regarded district judge in the United States,” said Robert Weisberg, a professor at Stanford Law School. “He will be very meticulous in asking all of these questions.”
‘Posse Comitatus’
Unprecedented though Trump’s actions may be, signs of caution or restraint in his decision to refrain from invoking the Insurrection Act could ultimately salvage his mission in court, experts said.
The Insurrection Act is the only tool at a president’s disposal to suspend Posse Comitatus and deploy active-duty Marines on U.S. soil. While Trump and his aides have made a coordinated public effort to reference the L.A. protesters as insurrectionists, he has, so far, stopped short of invoking the act.
The president instead invoked Title 10 of the U.S. Code, which grants him the authority to federalize the National Guard. Even still, California argues that Trump has overstepped the law, which still requires directives to the Guard “be issued through the governors of the States.” And the White House has suggested that Title 10 authority also justifies the Marine deployment.
“We expect an order from the court making clear what’s lawful and what’s unlawful, and part of that is making clear that the deployment of the National Guard by Trump is unlawful,” Bonta said.
“And so he might just strike down that deployment,” he added, “returning the National Guard to the command of its appropriate commander-in-chief, the governor.”
Ahilan Arulanantham, co-director of the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, said that Title 10 “requires a ‘rebellion or danger of rebellion,’ and inability of regular law enforcement authorities to execute the laws.”
“I would be shocked if a court determined that those conditions were met by what is actually happening in L.A. at the moment, as those of us living here know,” Arulanantham added.
Yet, by relying on Title 10 authorities and by refraining from invoking the Insurrection Act, Trump could save himself from a definitive loss in court that would probably be upheld by the Supreme Court, Weisberg said.
“I do think that Trump is trying to take just one step at a time,” Weisberg said, “and that he contemplates the possibility of invoking the Insurrection Act, but it’s premature.”
“There’s always the possibility he’s being rational,” he added.
Another front in California vs. Trump
For Bonta, the case before Breyer is just the latest in a series of legal battles California has brought against the Trump administration — cases that have compelled the White House to lay out evidence, based on truth and facts, before seasoned judges.
Moments before Bonta spoke with The Times, Leavitt told reporters in a briefing that “the majority of the behavior that we have seen taking place in Los Angeles” has been perpetrated by “mobs of violent rioters and agitators.”
“It’s completely untrue and completely unsurprising,” Bonta responded. “It’s what the Trump administration — the press secretary, the secretary of Defense and the secretary of Homeland Security — it’s what they’ve been on a full 24-hour campaign to try to do, to manufacture and construct a reality that’s not actually true.”
The LAPD and L.A. County Sheriff’s Department, Bonta noted, have dealt with worse in the past, not just during major historic events such as the Rodney King riots of 1992 or the George Floyd protests of 2020, but after relatively routine annual events, such as the NBA Finals or the Super Bowl.
“There is absolutely no doubt that the National Guard was unnecessary here,” Bonta said, adding, “They’re using words like insurrection and emergency and rebellion and invasion, because those are the words in the statutes that would trigger what they really want. They want the president to be able to seize more power.”
Rioters attacked a leisure centre hosting people fleeing what police called ‘racist thuggery’ in the town of Ballymena.
Riots have erupted for a third consecutive night in Northern Ireland, with police condemning the violence as “racist thuggery” that erupted following an alleged sexual assault.
A few dozen masked rioters in the primary flashpoint of Ballymena attacked police, but the unrest was on a smaller scale in the town on Wednesday night compared with previous days.
Youths threw rocks, fireworks and Molotov cocktails at officers in riot gear as armoured vehicles blocked roads in the town. Police also deployed water cannon for the second night in a row, but the clashes were far smaller than the previous nights, when five people were arrested and more than 30 police officers were injured. Much of the crowd had left the streets before midnight.
Small pockets of violence also erupted in the town of Larne, located 30km (18 miles) west of Ballymena, where masked youths smashed the windows of a leisure centre before starting fires in the lobby, footage widely shared on social media showed.
Gordon Lyons, the communities minister in Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, had earlier said a number of people seeking refuge from the anti-immigrant violence in Ballymena had been temporarily moved to the leisure centre.
Lyons’s post drew sharp criticism from other political parties for identifying the location where the families had taken shelter. Youths also set fires at a roundabout in the town of Newtownabbey, according to police, while debris was also set alight at a barricade in the town of Coleraine.
UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said he “utterly condemns” the violence which had left 32 police officers injured after the second night of disturbances.
Fire burns near a demonstrator as riots continued in Ballymena, Northern Ireland, on June 11, 2025 [Clodagh Kilcoyne/Reuters]
Northern Ireland’s First Minister Michelle O’Neill and Deputy First Minister Emma Little-Pengelly appeared together on Wednesday to voice their condemnation.
O’Neill told reporters in Belfast: “It’s pure racism, there is no other way to dress it up” while Little-Pengelly described the scenes in Ballymena as “unacceptable thuggery”.
Racially motivated
Violence initially flared on Monday in Ballymena – a town of 30,000 people located 44km (28 miles) from the capital Belfast with a relatively large migrant population – after a peaceful vigil was held for a teenage girl who was the victim of an alleged sexual assault on Saturday.
Two 14-year-old boys accused of carrying out the attack appeared in court on Monday. Communicating in court via a Romanian interpreter, the pair denied the charges, according to local media reports.
Police said the trouble began when people in masks broke away from the vigil and began “build[ing] barricades, stockpiling missiles and attacking properties”.
Tensions remained high throughout Tuesday, with residents saying “foreigners” were being targeted. Two Filipino families fled their home in the town after their car was set on fire, the Reuters news agency reported.
Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) Chief Constable Jon Boutcher warned that the rioting “risks undermining” the criminal justice process in the sexual assault allegations.
Some Ballymena residents have begun marking their front doors to indicate their nationality to avoid attack, according to the Belfast Telegraph newspaper.
Northern Ireland Assistant Chief Constable Ryan Henderson also said the violence was “clearly racially motivated” and “targeted at our minority ethnic community”.
WITH Father’s Day just around the corner, Morrison’s deal on Terry’s Chocolate Oranges has come at the perfect time.
The major supermarket has slashed the price of the beloved chocolate favourite and shoppers can choose from two different flavours.
2
Terry’s Chocolate Oranges are popular chocolate around the worldCredit: Facebook
Morrisons is selling the 90g ball in both the original and mint flavours for £1.50, for those with a member’s card.
The full price of the tasty treat is usually £2 and the reduced price is also cheaper than what Sainsbury’s and Tesco sell it for, which is £1.95 at both supermarkets.
Even with a Tesco Clubcard, Terry’s Chocolate Orange 90g costs £1.75, making the Morrisons offer cheaper.
Terry’s Chocolate Orange is a much-loved icon in the confectionery world and has been available to buy since 1932.
Earlier this year, a TikTok account @belongwealth posted a video blowing viewers away, divulging a little-known secret about the household name.
The clip revealed that the iconic brand had another delicious product predating the chocolate orange.. the chocolate apple.
The poster gave some context to the history of the product, saying: “In 1926, Terry’s Chocolate Works, a family run factory in York, released a dessert chocolate apple.
“It did pretty well, so in 1932 they released a dessert chocolate orange, which did really well.”
According to the TikToker, the chocolate apple did not have the longevity of the orange ball we know and love today because duringWorld War 2, the Terry’s chocolate factory was taken over to use as a base for building aircraft blades.
After the war, the factory was returned to the Terry’s.
But due to rationing and limitations on cocoa imports, the company phased out the less popular chocolate apple and focused on the much-loved orange.
How to save money on chocolate
We all love a bit of chocolate from now and then, but you don’t have to break the bank buying your favourite bar.
Consumer reporter Sam Walker reveals how to cut costs…
Go own brand – if you’re not too fussed about flavour and just want to supplant your chocolate cravings, you’ll save by going for the supermarket’s own brand bars.
Shop around – if you’ve spotted your favourite variety at the supermarket, make sure you check if it’s cheaper elsewhere.
Websites like Trolley.co.uk let you compare prices on products across all the major chains to see if you’re getting the best deal.
Look out for yellow stickers – supermarket staff put yellow, and sometimes orange and red, stickers on to products to show they’ve been reduced.
They usually do this if the product is coming to the end of its best-before date or the packaging is slightly damaged.
Buy bigger bars – most of the time, but not always, chocolate is cheaper per 100g the larger the bar.
So if you’ve got the appetite, and you were going to buy a hefty amount of chocolate anyway, you might as well go bigger.
Currently, theTerry’s websitelists the classic milk chocolate orange, dark chocolate orange, mint orange, plain milk chocolate, toffee crunch orange and exploding candy orange.
2
Morrisons has a great deal on two flavours of Terrys Chocolate OrangeCredit: Getty Images – Getty
Not only lawmakers, but the Legislature’s nonpartisan, independent chief policy analyst.
The Legislative Analyst‘s Office has recommended that legislators hold off voting on what the governor seeks because they’re being pressed to act without enough time to properly study the complex matter.
Delta towns and farmers, environmental groups and the coastal salmon fishing industry are fighting the project and the governor’s latest move to expedite construction.
If there are any supporters at the state Capitol outside the governor’s office for his fast-track proposal, they’re not speaking up.
“Nobody’s told me they’re excited about it,” says state Sen. Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton), an East San Francisco Bay lawmaker who is co-chairman of the Legislative Delta Caucus. The 15-member bipartisan group of lawmakers who represent the delta region strongly oppose the tunnel — calling it a water grab — and are fighting Newsom’s bill.
The black mark on the governor’s proposal is that he’s trying to shove it through the Legislature as part of a new state budget being negotiated for the fiscal year starting July 1. But it has nothing to do with budget spending.
The tunnel would not be paid for through the budget’s general fund which is fed by taxes. It would be financed by water users through increased monthly rates, mainly for Southern Californians.
Newsom is seeking to make his proposal one of several budget “trailer” bills. That way, it can avoid normal public hearings by legislative policy committees. There’d be little scrutiny by lawmakers, interest groups or citizens. The measure would require only a simple majority vote in each house.
“We’re battling it out,” says Assemblywoman Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City), the Delta Caucus’ co-chair whose district covers the delta as it enters San Francisco Bay.
“This is not about the project itself. This is about how you want to do things in the state of California. This [fast-track] is comprehensive policy that the budget is not intended to include,” says Wilson.
Legislative Analyst Gabriel Petek issued a report concluding: “We recommend deferring action … without prejudice. The policy issues do not have budget implications. Deferring action would allow the Legislature more time and capacity for sufficient consideration of the potential benefits, implications and trade-offs.”
The analyst added: “In effect, approving this proposal would signal the Legislature’s support for the [tunnel], something the Legislature might not be prepared to do — because it would remove many of the obstacles to move forward on the project.
“Moreover, even if the Legislature were inclined to support the project, some of the particular details of this proposal merit closer scrutiny.”
Newsom tried a similar quickie tactic two years ago to fast-track the tunnel. And incensed legislators balked.
“He waited now again until the last moment,” Wilson says. “And he’s doubled down.”
She asserts that the governor is seeking even more shortcuts for tunnel construction than he did last time.
“There are some people who support the project who don’t support doing it this way,” she says. “The Legislature doesn’t like it when the governor injects major policy into a budget conversation. This level of policy change would usually go through several committees.”
Not even the Legislature’s two Democratic leaders are siding with the Democratic governor, it appears. They’re keeping mum publicly.
Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire (D-Healdsburg) has always opposed the tunnel project. So quietly has Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister), I’m told by legislative insiders.
McGuire and Rivas apparently both are trying to avoid a distracting fight over the tunnel within their party caucuses at tense budget time.
Newsom insists that the project is needed to increase the reliability of delta water deliveries as climate change alters Sierra snowpack runoff and the sea level rises, making the vast estuary more salty.
He also claims it will safeguard against an earthquake toppling fragile levees, flooding the delta and halting water deliveries. But that seems bogus. There has never been a quake that seriously damaged a delta levee. And there’s no major fault under the delta.
The tunnel would siphon relatively fresh Sacramento River water at the north end of the delta and deliver it to facilities at the more brackish south end. From there, water is pumped into a State Water Project aqueduct and moved south, mostly to Southern California.
“A tunnel that big, that deep, is going to cause a lot of problems for agriculture and tourism,” says McNerney. “One town will be totally destroyed — Hood. It’s a small town, but people there have rights.”
Newsom’s legislation would make it simpler to obtain permits for the project. The state’s own water rights would be permanent, not subject to renewal. The state would be authorized to issue unlimited revenue bonds for tunnel construction, repaid by water users. It also would be easier to buy out farmers and run the tunnel through their orchards and vineyards. And it would limit and expedite court challenges.
“For too long, attempts to modernize our critical water infrastructure have stalled in endless red tape, burdened with unnecessary delay. We’re done with barriers,” Newson declared in unveiling his proposal in mid-May.
But lawmakers shouldn’t be done with solid, carefully reasoned legislating.
On policy this significant involving a project so monumental, the Legislature should spend enough time to get it right — regardless of a lame-duck governor’s desire to start shoveling dirt before his term expires in 18 months.
Normally, the running of the Belmont Stakes without a chance at a Triple Crown winner makes the third leg of the series about as interesting as a television procedural — the Chicagos, FBIs or Law & Orders — in the last two minutes after the culprit has been identified and prosecuted.
But not this year. The 157th running of the Belmont Stakes has about as many plot lines as a season of “The White Lotus.” It’s easily the best race of the year, and, yes, that includes the Kentucky Derby.
You’ve got your villain in Sovereignty, who kicked racing tradition in the teeth after winning the Kentucky Derby when his connections refused to enter him in the Preakness Stakes because of the short time frame — two weeks — between the first two legs of the Triple Crown. It killed any opportunity racing had to build a new fan base revolving around the Derby and a possible Triple Crown winner.
You’ve got your fresh-faced wannabe in Rodriguez, whose last race was a win in the Wood Memorial. He was scheduled to run in both the Kentucky Derby and Preakness, but a sore hoof forced him to withdraw from both races. His early speed and front-running ability likely means he’ll be on the lead as the horses head down the backstretch. Add to that the fact that he is trained by Bob Baffert and ridden by Mike Smith, both Hall of Famers who know how to get a horse from gate to wire in winning form.
And finally, you’ve got a wiseguy (professional gamblers) horse in Baeza, whose talent far exceeds his early results. He finished a strong third in the Kentucky Derby and second in the Santa Anita Derby behind Journalism. He is also trying to find a place in history for his mom, Puca, who has produced Kentucky Derby winner Mage and last year’s Belmont winner in Dornoch. If Baeza were to win, he would be the first horse who has a dam who has won three Classic races. That’s a record.
And that’s just half of the eight-horse field.
Whoever finishes first, the victory is likely to be remembered as having an asterisk next to it. The Belmont Stakes, considered the test of champions because of its normal 1 1/2-mile distance, is being run at the less interesting distance of 1 1/4 miles. The reason is the race has been moved from Long Island’s Belmont Park to Saratoga Race Track in Saratoga Springs, a suburb of the New York state capital of Albany, because of a massive rebuild at Belmont Park.
The reason the race was shortened is because to have a 1 1/2-mile race at Saratoga, the horses would have to start on a turn, something the organizers didn’t want to happen.
The starting positions add little clarity as to who might win. Sovereignty (post 2, 2-1 on morning line) should have no problem getting early running room, especially with Rodriguez on his immediate outside. Rodriguez (post 3, 6-1) and Crudo (post 5, 15-1) are expected to battle for the lead early. Crudo’s last win was his last outing with a 7 1/4-length win in the Sir Barton Stakes at Pimlico.
Journalism will be breaking from post 7 at 8-5 morning line odds.
“He’s been kind of the same horse since July of last summer,” Michael McCarthy, trainer of Journalism, told NYRA publicity. “He does everything you ask a good horse to do — eats well, trains well, packs well. I thought the last six or seven weeks here, his energy has been the same throughout. Obviously, Saratoga is very good for horses. He seems reenergized up here. I’m looking forward to a wonderful renewal of the Belmont Stakes on Saturday.”
If either Journalism or Sovereignty wins, they will be the first repeat winner of a Classic race since Justify in 2018, who won all three Triple Crown races. Since then, no horse has won more than one Classic race, making it a 21-race streak. Of course, Triple Crown races are only for 3-year-olds meaning trainers start every year fresh trying to find prospective winners.
Racing is in desperate need of stars and the chase for the Triple Crown is one way of getting them. It’s why there was such consternation when trainer Bill Mott and owner Godolphin, decided to skip the Preakness Stakes.
“You never know until they actually do it in a race,” said Michael Banahan, who heads Godolphin in the U.S. “He always gave us that indication that he’d like to go long. And we thought the Derby as well and then finished up, from the top of the stretch to the wire in very good fashion and galloped all the way through the wire.
Crudo is a 15-1 longshot to win the Belmont Stakes, which features an eight-horse field.
(Seth Wenig / Associated Press)
“So, I’m with the Belmont this year at Saratoga. He just has to do the same distance again. So, I would anticipate that’ll be fine for him. I suppose if it were a regular Belmont at Belmont Park, that’ll be another question to answer going that far. It certainly looks like a mile-and-a-quarter was well [within] his wheelhouse in the Derby and anticipate that it shouldn’t be any issue at Saratoga as well.”
The horse that is poised to pull the upset is Baeza, who has only won one race, a maiden at Santa Anita. His second-place finish in the Santa Anita Derby would have normally been enough to get him in the Kentucky Derby. But Churchill Downs, in an obvious attack at West Coast races, lowered the point total because of a small field.
Trainer John Shirreffs did not want to bring the horse to Churchill Downs, hoping there were enough scratches to get him in the race. Shirreffs was overruled by the owners so he stood on the backside at Barn 41 while hoping for an entry to the world’s most famous race. The reprieve, and entry, came when Rodriguez was scratched because of a sore hoof.
Baeza more than proved his entry into the Derby with a strong third-place finish.
“I think Baeza, week by week, he’s developed a little bit more,” said Shirreffs. “He’s developed a little bit more. I see him, maybe, a little bit taller, a little ‘stretchier’ He seems to be holding his weight really well. And you can really get an image of him now is what he’ll look like as a 4-year-old. So, you’re starting to see him emerge.”
The most likely scenario is the winner of the Belmont Stakes will come from the four most prominent horses. It’s more than possible that the 21-race streak without a repeat winner will be over.
June 5 (UPI) — Former Republican-turned Democrat Rep. David Jolly, D-Florida, has announced his intentions to enter the 2026 race for governor in a state largely dominated by GOP politics.
Jolly acknowledged his political disadvantage running for office in a state where Republicans maintain a fundraising advantage and statistically outnumber registered Democrats, but said he would try to win the support of nonpartisan voters who have been turned off by the highly fractious political climate.
“I’m for lower corporate taxes because I think it leads to greater economic growth,” Jolly said on his campaign website. “But I’m more for gun safety legislation because I think that reduces violence in our state.”
Jolly, who has been an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump and a centrist Republican, said his disagreements with the president were at least partly responsible for his decision to change parties.
Jolly posted on social media that Florida is in a crisis not just of policy, not “right versus left, but right versus wrong.”
Jolly has said he will focus on affordable housing, support a property tax cut, use the state’s tourist and development tax to create housing for the workforce and offer communities more block grants for housing.
He has also proposed restructuring Florida’s catastrophe insurance, replacing private insurance with state dollars in an effort to more effectively help residents who lose property during natural disasters. He said his plan could reduce homeowners insurance costs by as much as 60%.
Jolly flirted with a run for the U.S. Senate in 2016 but abandoned his efforts after Marco Rubio, now the U.S. Secretary of State who was eventually elected to the Senate from Florida, entered the race.
Jolly is the first Democrat to enter the 2026 gubernatorial race. He represented Pinellas County as a Republican in Congress from 2014-2017.
California’s two most prominent Democrats remain mum on their future plans, but former Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Gavin Newsom both took time to tend to their political personas in Compton Thursday, attending separate events at local schools.
As hundreds of graduating seniors crossed the stage in their blue and white regalia early that morning at Compton High School, many paused to shake hands and take selfies with an honored guest on the dais: the former vice president herself, who’d made a surprise appearance after being invited by a graduating student.
Several hours later, Newsom read to young students at Compton’s Clinton Elementary School before standing with local leaders in front of a cheery, cartoon mural to launch a new state literacy plan. The issue is one of deep importance to the governor, whose own educational career was often defined by his dyslexia.
The adjacent appearances, which occurred a few miles apart, were “coincidental,” Newsom said. But they come at a moment when both the high-octane Democrats are in a political limbo of sorts.
The pair are viewed as potential 2028 presidential candidates, but the California political world is also waiting on tenterhooks to see if Harris enters California’s 2026 race for governor – a move that would almost certainly preclude a 2028 presidential bid. Harris is expected to make a decision by summer, and her entrance would upend the already crowded race.
With just 19 months left in his second and final term, the lame duck governor is scrambling to cement his gubernatorial legacy while also positioning himself as a pragmatic leader capable of steering his national party out of the wilderness. Harris, meanwhile, must decide if she actually wants to govern a famously unwieldy state and, if she does, whether California voters feel the same.
Both Harris and Newsom were notably absent at the state party convention last weekend, as thousands of party delegates, activists, donors and labor leaders convened in Anaheim.
California Governor Gavin Newsom presents his Golden State Literacy Plan at Clinton Elementary School in Compton on Thursday.
(Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times)
Newsom was a famously loyal surrogate to then-President Biden. But in recent months with his “This Is Gavin Newsom” podcast and its long list of Democratic bête noire guests, the governor has worked to publicly differentiate his own brand from that of his bedraggled party, one controversial interview at a time.
Meanwhile, Newsom — who previously scoffed at the speculation and said he wasn’t considering a bid for the White House, despite his manifest ambitions — is more openly acknowledging that he could run for the country’s top job in the future.
“I might,” Newsom said in an interview last month. “I don’t know, but I have to have a burning why, and I have to have a compelling vision that distinguishes myself from anybody else. Without that, without both, and, I don’t deserve to even be in the conversation.”
Newsom demurred Thursday when asked whether he thought Harris would run for governor.
“Look, I got someone right behind me running for governor, so I’m going to be very careful here,” Newsom said to laughter, as California Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond — who announced his 2026 gubernatorial bid back in September 2023 — smiled behind him.
Harris attended the Compton High graduation at the invitation of Compton Unified School District Student Board Member MyShay Causey, a student athlete and graduating senior. She did not speak at the ceremony, though she received an honorary diploma.
Staff writer Taryn Luna contributed to this report.
WASHINGTON — When a fire erupts in California, it is a lab across the country, at the University of Maryland, that works together with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to determine where the smoke is going. Those unsung scientists help warn the people downwind of dangerous air quality levels.
And it is the National Weather Service, working with buoys at sea and satellites in orbit, figuring out the risks of increased winds and dryness that could prompt devastating fires in highly populated areas such as Los Angeles.
It is not just meteorologists and technicians being forced out of their jobs en masse, jeopardizing the standards of those programs, said Craig McLean, a 40-year veteran of NOAA who served as the agency’s assistant administrator for research and acting chief scientist until his retirement in 2022.
The Trump administration proposes to go further, seeking to eliminate the entire research team that provides forecasters with tools to make their assessments. The Satellite Operations Facility has been hit with deep layoffs. Contracts for the buoys, and other equipment, are on hold while under review by the Commerce Department.
It is a cascade of delays and setbacks that could become evident to the public sooner rather than later, McLean said.
“The forecast risk is apparent upon us,” he told The Times. “I think it’s ridiculous to assume that it’s not — whether it’s for the fire season and the hydrology, whether it’s for the atmospheric rivers and the inundation and deluge, or whether it’s just for the high wind.”
Newsletter
You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
George Skelton and Michael Wilner cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know in 2024. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
Trump seeks cuts both to forecast and response
Workers put up a sign as wildfire victims seek disaster relief services at a FEMA center in Pasadena in January.
(Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)
The Trump administration’s cuts to NOAA, which have resulted in roughly 600 employee departures, or an about 15% of its workforce, appear to involve across the entire agency, based on self-reporting from employees and the National Weather Service Employees Organization. But the agency itself has provided few details to the public on the extent of its reductions.
“When the voluntary early retirement separation initiative was put up, in one day, NOAA lost 27,000 person years of experience, which is extraordinary in an agency of what was 12,000 personnel,” said Rick Spinrad, who served as administrator of the agency under President Biden.
“So much of what is done at NOAA is interpretive,” he added. “At the end of the day, when your weather forecast office or your local sea grant extension agent is informing you of what might happen, there’s a lot of interpretation of the environment, of local geography, local roads. That experience is gone.”
But if NOAA and the National Weather Service are ill-prepared for hazardous weather events — entering fire season in the West and hurricane season in the East — the Federal Emergency Management Agency may be worse off, having lost nearly a third of its employees since January. This week, Reuters reported that President Trump’s acting FEMA chief, David Richardson, told staff that he wasn’t aware the country had a hurricane season.
Trump has already raised concerns that he is rejecting disaster relief to states for political reasons. In the first three months of his presidency, Trump issued conditions on disaster aid to California after fires ravaged Los Angeles and rejected requests for disaster relief from Washington Gov. Jay Inslee and North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein, both Democrats.
Californians may find themselves more vulnerable to other natural disasters, as well. FEMA announced this month it would cancel $33 million in grants for Californians to retrofit their homes to gird against earthquakes, sparking “grave concern” among state officials. “This move must be reversed before tragedy strikes next,” Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California wrote to the agency.
More disruption for ports and fisheries
Each year, before fishing season begins, NOAA issues a series of scientific reports surveying fish populations and environmental conditions, a basic precaution to prevent permanent damage and overfishing along America’s coasts.
But this spring, staff cuts to NOAA forced the agency to take emergency action on the East Coast so that fishing could begin by May 1. And in Alaska, it took the state’s two Republican senators to plead with the White House to take action to allow fishing to resume.
“The federal government has to do two things: They need to do robust surveys for accurate stock assessments and timely regulations to open fisheries. That is it. When the federal government does not do that, you screw hardworking fishermen,” GOP Sen. Dan Sullivan of Alaska said at a hearing in May. “To be honest, right now, it is not looking good, and I am getting really upset.”
Their challenges don’t stop there. Fishing ships will not able to sail on time without reliable forecasts from the National Weather Service, likely resulting in a reduction of the number of days out at sea and, in turn, leading to fewer profits and staff members.
Americans are already being told to expect higher seafood prices, due to Trump’s tariff policies driving up duties on seafood imports by 10% to 30%, according to a new United Nations report.
“A fisherman who goes out to collect their lobster pots or go fish for tuna needs a reliable weather report,” said Mark Spalding, president of the Ocean Foundation. “Everybody who works with NOAA, from fishermen to shipping, to other businesses that rely on weather and the predictability of currents and storms, are going to feel less secure if not operating blind.”
Similar problems are facing the country’s largest ports, which rely on government experts in ocean monitoring that have left their jobs.
“At the ports of Long Beach and L.A., the systems used to optimize the ships coming in and out of the ports — the coastal ocean observing systems — are being compromised,” Spinrad said. “The president’s budget threatens to eliminate a lot of that capability.”
Vulnerabilities across the Pacific
In Singapore over the weekend, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth warned that a Chinese assault on Taiwan “could be imminent” and would threaten the entire Pacific region, including the United States. He touted U.S. partnerships across the region on maritime security — an acknowledgment that any conflict that might arise in the Pacific would be a fight at sea.
Cuts to NOAA could threaten U.S. readiness, McLean said.
“Because we have territories throughout the Pacific, NOAA is responsible for providing weather forecasts in those areas,” he said. “The defense community doesn’t operate completely dependent on NOAA in military conflicts — they have meteorologists in the Air Force and the Navy. But they are using NOAA models and are heavily guided by what the NOAA forecasts are offering, certainly for bases, whether it’s in Guam or Hawaii.”
The military, for example, uses data produced by thousands of buoys deployed and tracked by NOAA — called the Argo Float Network — that are considered the gold standard in ocean monitoring. The program faces cuts from the Trump administration because of its affiliation with climate change.
“There is a national defense component here,” McLean said. “The defense community is dependent upon what NOAA provides, both in models and in research.”
Race Across the World paid tribute to a former contestant at the end of tonight’s episode, after it was revealed that Sam Gardiner has died aged 24 in a car crash
23:23, 04 Jun 2025Updated 23:23, 04 Jun 2025
Sam Gardiner died at the age of 24(Image: BBC)
Race Across the World has honoured a past contestant following their untimely passing. The emotional tribute came at the close of Wednesday’s episode for 24-year-old Sam Gardiner, who passed away this week.
When the end credits began to roll, the viewers were met with a touching tribute to the series two adventurer. Displayed alongside Sam’s photo, the message read: “In loving memory of Sam Gardiner, 2000 to 2025.”
Fans of the hit BBC travel show expressed their sorrow on X (formerly Twitter), with one posting: “They gave Sam Gardiner an end card. Sad.” Another shared: “The tribute to Sam Gardiner [sad face],” and one more added: “Rest in peace to Sam Gardiner, who took part in series 2 with his Mum, Jo, back in 2020.” A fourth viewer noted: “Lovely tribute to Sam at the end,” while another wrote: “Rest in peace Sam.”
A tribute was left to Sam
Sam tragically died in a car crash on Sunday (June 1), as confirmed by his family, reports Plymouth Live. His mother Jo, who was his teammate on the 2019 series, and father Andrew offered a heartfelt statement: “We are devastated by the loss of our beloved son Sam in a terrible accident.
“We hold on to the beautiful memories of him, even though words can’t fully do justice to how much light and joy he brought into our world. Sam was adored by his family. As a son, brother and nephew, he was loyal, funny and fiercely protective.”
Sources revealed that after participating in Race Across the World, the experience “opened his eyes to the wonder of adventure and travel”. A heartwarming post was later made on Instagram by the official BBC travel series account, honouring Sam and Jo’s memorable journey from Mexico to Argentina.
“We are all deeply saddened to hear the tragic news about Sam, who died this week following a car accident,” the post read. The tribute expressed how evident it was to those who met him and viewers alike, just how life-changing and significant the journey had been for Sam and his mum, Jo.
The homage was wrapped up with: “Since filming, both Sam and Jo have been an integral part of the Race Across the World cast family and on behalf of us all from the BBC, production and the rest of the cast, we would like to extend our deepest condolences.”
Sam and mum Jo were unable to compete in the final leg of the race after they ran out of money. However, Sam had described his time on Race Across the World as a “life-changing” experience.
In the New York City mayoral race, a young immigrant who identifies as a democratic socialist is taking on a centrist former governor from a political dynasty.
With state legislator Zohran Mamdani and ex-Governor Andrew Cuomo leading the race, the New York Democratic primary is seen as a reflection of the battle between progressive activists and the conservative old guard of the United States Democratic Party.
The Democratic candidates will meet for a debate on Wednesday night, ahead of the primary vote on June 24.
Missing from the stage will be incumbent Eric Adams who was elected as a Democrat four years ago. The current mayor is running for re-election as an independent amid dwindling popularity.
Here is a look at the elections in the Big Apple and what it could mean for the city and the country.
Why are the primaries important?
New York City is solidly Democratic, so the party’s nominee is likely to cruise to victory in November.
In 2021, then-Democratic candidate Eric Adams beat Curtis Sliwa, the Republican nominee, by nearly 40 percentage points. Adams has since garnered a national profile.
What’s at stake?
The next mayor will be the executive of the largest city in the United States – tackling numerous issues and pressing challenges, including housing, cost of living, congestion and public transport.
The implications for New Yorkers are obvious, but the outcome of the race will also affect the nearly 65 million people who visit the city every year.
New York is a major financial and cultural hub, not just for the US but for the entire world.
Politically, the primary race could serve as a bellwether for the Democratic Party and the electoral viability of left-wing candidates ahead of the congressional midterm elections next year and the presidential vote two years later.
The job comes with a national profile. The last three New York mayors ran for president.
Mayoral candidate Andrew Cuomo speaks during a Democratic mayoral forum at Medgar Evers College in New York City, April 23 [David ‘Dee’ Delgado/Reuters]
Who are the frontrunners?
In the Democratic primaries, the two frontrunners are Cuomo, 67, and Mamdani, 33.
The son of a former governor, Cuomo has an extensive resume. He served as the US Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and New York attorney general before becoming the state’s governor in 2011.
He resigned in 2021 after a sexual harassment scandal and is now staging what was once thought to be an unlikely political comeback, rebuilding alliances with politicians who called on him to step down a few years ago.
He is running a campaign focused on improving the management of the city, addressing mental health issues and “combating anti-Semitism”.
If Cuomo is the ultimate insider, Mamdani is his foil as a political insurgent.
Born in Uganda to parents of Indian descent, Mamdani, who is endorsed by the Democratic Socialists for America (DSA), has been serving in the state assembly since 2021.
He is running on a progressive platform that includes freezing rent, eliminating fees for public buses and establishing affordable, city-owned grocery stores.
Mamdani’s rise in the polls has been fuelled by small donors and an “army” of left-wing volunteers.
Candidate for New York City mayor Zohran Mamdani waits for the subway following a campaign stop in New York City, US, April 1, 2025 [Brendan McDermid/Reuters]
Who else is running?
Also running on the Democratic side are city comptroller Brad Lander; New York City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams; former comptroller Scott Stringer; State Senator Jessica Ramos; State Senator Zellnor Myrie; Michael Blake, a political consultant and former state legislator; and Whitney Tilson, an investor.
Incumbent Mayor Eric Adams is running as an independent after the scandals and investigations that have plagued his tenure.
Conservative activist Curtis Sliwa is the sole Republican in the race.
What are the key dates?
The first Democratic debate will take place on June 4, and the second and final one is set to take place on June 12. Early voting starts on June 14, and the primary election is on June 24.
The general election will be on November 4.
Incumbent New York Mayor Eric Adams is running as an independent [File: Julia Nikhinson/AP Photo]
What is ranked choice voting?
In local elections in New York City, one can vote for as many as five candidates at once with the ranked-choice system.
Here’s how it works: Voters choose their candidates in order of favourability. In the first round of counting, the top choice votes are tallied. If no candidate gets more than 50 percent, more counting ensues with the bottom candidate removed.
With each new round, the votes of the eliminated candidate are counted by the next choice on the ballot.
What do the polls say?
Cuomo is leading the race, according to most surveys. An Emerson College poll last week showed the former governor with 35.1 percent support as a first choice – ahead of Mamdani with 22.7 and Lander with 10.5.
Mamdani may appear like a distant second, but his rise in the race has been stunning. He was polling at 1 percent in February, according to an Emerson survey.
The democratic socialist lawmaker does have a path to victory – consolidating the anti-Cuomo vote in the later rounds of counting.
A protest in solidarity with Palestinians in New York City, September 24, 2024 [File: John Taggart/EPA]
Why has Israel-Palestine been a key issue in the race?
The next New York City mayor will not be deciding how much military aid Israel gets or how the US will vote on United Nations Security Council proposals calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.
Yet, the conflict in the Middle East has been a factor in the local elections.
Mamdani has been an outspoken supporter of Palestinian rights. He participated in a hunger strike outside the White House in November 2023 to demand an end to the war on Gaza.
His positions have sparked outrage from Israel’s backers. Although Mamdani is a citizen, Republican New York City Council member Vickie Paladino called for his deportation on Monday.
Paladino later doubled down in response to the outrage over her statement, claiming that Mamdani would not have been eligible for citizenship under the current regulations due to his involvement in pro-Palestine groups.
For his part, Cuomo has positioned himself as Israel’s top defender, accusing several of his opponents – not just Mamdani – of being too critical of the US ally.
“It’s very simple: anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism,” he said in April.
Fix the City, a pro-Cuomo political group, has received large donations from pro-Israel donors, including $250,000 from billionaire Bill Ackman, according to New York’s Campaign Finance Board.
New York City – home to Columbia University – has seen waves of protests against US support for Israel’s war in Gaza, which has killed more than 54,600 Palestinians.
The issue may sway some voters, in part because it is viewed by many Democrats as a litmus test for broader ideological leaning.
It’s set to be a huge series of Celebrity Race Across the World as a Hollyoaks and Derry Girls star is the latest celeb to join the line-up, according to reports
22:39, 03 Jun 2025Updated 22:39, 03 Jun 2025
It’s been reported Dylan Llewellyn is the latest signing to the hit show(Image: WireImage)
A former Hollyoaks star is the latest famous face to sign up for BBC’s Celebrity Race Across the World, according to reports. Fans of the Liverpool based soap will remember Dylan Llewellyn as cheeky character Martin “Jono” Johnson, as he’s set to appear on screens once again.
Since leaving the soap in 2016, the star has appeared in a number of high profile TV shows including Derry Girls, Big Boys and Beyond Paradise.
Dylan’s latest venture will now see him racing across the globe with a team mate in hopes to beat his competitors, without the help of a phone or credit card.
The Mirror has contacted a representative of the show for comment.
Dylan Llewellyn has reportedly signed up for the show(Image: Hoda Davaine/Dave Benett/WireImage)
Despite his TV success, Dylan previously admitted to going through a rough patch in his career. While chatting on Channel 4’s Sunday Brunch, he shared his near brush with giving up acting: “I was struggling a bit and I was almost like going to give up on acting, you know?”
“And I just wasn’t getting any auditions, and yeah, it was just a really quiet period and I was working in a coffee shop and just grafting because that’s like the realities of acting. You’ve got to graft, you know, it’s a really tough industry.”
He revealed to the Guardian that his breakthrough role as James in Derry Girls came just in time. “It was emotional, really. I was about to give up. It really meant the world to me. It saved me,” he said.
Molly Rainford and Tyler West have reportedly also signed up(Image: Getty Images for Lionsgate UK)
Earlier this week it was reported that Molly Rainford and Tyler West have signed up for Celebrity Race Across the World, according to reports.
The EastEnders star, 24, and Kiss FM presenter, 29, who met on BBC dance show Strictly Come Dancing in 2022, are said to have already filmed the smash-hit series in which a bunch of celebrities partake in an epic race across the world without their phones or credit cards to help.
The last series, which aired last summer saw stars, including Kelly Brook, Scott Mills, Jeff Brazier and Kola Bokinni race across South America.
Speaking on the reported signing of the Strictly couple, a source told The Sun: “Molly and Tyler are a huge coup for the show. They’re popular with millions of viewers from their stints on Strictly, and Molly will bring in loads of EastEnders fans too.”
Molly and Tyler’s relationship blossomed during the Strictly Live Tour in 2023, and things have been going from strength to strength ever since.
TULSA, Okla. — Tulsa’s new mayor on Sunday proposed a $100 million private trust as part of a reparations plan to give descendants of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre scholarships and housing help in a city-backed bid to make amends for one of the worst racial attacks in U.S. history.
The plan by Mayor Monroe Nichols, the first Black mayor of Oklahoma’s second-largest city, would not provide direct cash payments to descendants or the last two centenarian survivors of the attack that killed as many as 300 Black people. He made the announcement at the Greenwood Cultural Center, located in the once-thriving district of North Tulsa that was destroyed by a white mob.
Nichols said he does not use the term reparations, which he calls politically charged, characterizing his sweeping plan instead as a “road to repair.”
“For 104 years, the Tulsa Race Massacre has been a stain on our city’s history,” Nichols said Sunday after receiving a standing ovation from several hundred people. “The massacre was hidden from history books, only to be followed by the intentional acts of redlining, a highway built to choke off economic vitality and the perpetual underinvestment of local, state and federal governments.
“Now it’s time to take the next big steps to restore.”
Nichols said the proposal wouldn’t require city council approval, although the council would need to authorize the transfer of any city property to the trust, something he said was highly likely.
The private charitable trust would be created with a goal to secure $105 million in assets, with most of the funding either secured or committed by June 1, 2026. Although details would be developed over the next year by an executive director and a board of managers, the plan calls for the bulk of the funding, $60 million, to go toward improving buildings and revitalizing the city’s north side.
“The Greenwood District at its height was a center of commerce,” Nichols said in a telephone interview. “So what was lost was not just something from North Tulsa or the Black community. It actually robbed Tulsa of an economic future that would have rivaled anywhere else in the world.”
Nichols’ proposal follows an executive order he signed earlier this year recognizing June 1 as Tulsa Race Massacre Observance Day, an official city holiday. Events Sunday in the Greenwood District included a picnic for families, worship services and an evening candlelight vigil.
Nichols also realizes the current national political climate, particularly President Trump’s sweeping assault on diversity, equity and inclusion programs, poses challenging political crosswinds.
“The fact that this lines up with a broader national conversation is a tough environment,” Nichols admitted, “but it doesn’t change the work we have to do.”
Jacqueline Weary, is a granddaughter of massacre survivor John R. Emerson, Sr., who owned a hotel and cab company in Greenwood that were destroyed. She acknowledged the political difficulty of giving cash payments to descendants. But at the same time, she wondered how much of her family’s wealth was lost in the violence.
“If Greenwood was still there, my grandfather would still have his hotel,” said Weary, 65. “It rightfully was our inheritance, and it was literally taken away.”
Tulsa is not the first U.S. city to explore reparations. The Chicago suburb of Evanston, Illinois, was the first U.S. city to make reparations available to its Black residents for past discrimination, offering qualifying households $25,000 for home repairs, down payments on property, and interest or late penalties on property in the city. The funding for the program came from taxes on the sale of recreational marijuana.
Other communities and organizations that have considered providing reparations range from the state of California to cities including Amherst, Massachusetts; Providence, Rhode Island; Asheville, North Carolina; and Iowa City, Iowa; religious denominations like the Episcopal Church; and prominent colleges like Georgetown University in Washington.
In Tulsa, there are only two living survivors of the Race Massacre, both of whom are 110 years old: Leslie Benningfield Randle and Viola Fletcher. The women, both of whom were in attendance on Sunday, received direct financial compensation from both a Tulsa-based nonprofit and a New York-based philanthropic organization, but have not received any recompense from the city or state.
Damario Solomon-Simmons, an attorney for the survivors and the founder of the Justice for Greenwood Foundation, said earlier this year that any reparations plan should include direct payments to Randle and Fletcher and a victims’ compensation fund for outstanding claims.
A lawsuit filed by Solomon-Simmons on behalf of the survivors was rejected by the Oklahoma Supreme Court last year, dampening racial justice advocates’ hopes that the city would ever make financial amends.
I’m Glenn Whipp, columnist for the Los Angeles Times and host of The Envelope newsletter. While we’re pondering the timeline to upload a human consciousness, let’s consider “Mountainhead” and its Emmy chances.
Newsletter
From the Oscars to the Emmys.
Get the Envelope newsletter for exclusive awards season coverage, behind-the-scenes stories from the Envelope podcast and columnist Glenn Whipp’s must-read analysis.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
Another year, another late-breaking HBO movie
Early on in “Mountainhead,” tech bro and Elon Musk stand-in Venis Parish (Cory Michael Smith) uses film history to put the glitches of his company’s latest AI rollout into perspective.
“The first time people saw a movie, everybody ran screaming because they thought they were gonna get hit by a train,” Venis relates, shouting out the Lumiere brothers’ 1895 film, “Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat Station.” “The answer to that was not stop the movies. The answer was: Show more movies. We’re gonna show users as much s— as possible, until everyone realizes nothing’s that f— serious. Nothing means anything, and everything’s funny and cool.”
In the meantime, though, Venis’ social media platform has given users the tools to create deepfakes so realistic they can’t be identified as bogus. Immediately, people all over the world are uploading videos of their enemies committing atrocities, inflaming centuries-old animosities. Reality has collapsed and, with it, global stability.
But for “Mountainhead’s” quartet of tech magnates, played by Smith, Steve Carell, Ramy Youssef and Jason Schwartzman, everything is just fine. As venture capitalist Randall Garrett (Carell) notes, “We have plenty of calories stockpiled. Western countries have strategic commodity reserves, canola oil, lard, frozen orange juice.”
Later, Randall asks: “Are we the Bolsheviks of a new techno world order that starts tonight?”
“Mountainhead” is in many ways scarier than the zombie apocalypse of “The Last of Us” because it feels like its premise is lurking right around the corner. Armstrong came up with the idea for the two-hour movie in November, after immersing himself in podcasts and books about Silicon Valley. He shot it in March, edited it in April and delivered it in May. It captures the DOGE era, specifically in the casual cruelty expressed by its entitled characters.
“Do you believe in other people?” Venis asks Randall. “Eight billion people as real as us?”
Randall’s reply: “Well, obviously not.”
Cory Michael Smith, left, and Steve Carell in “Mountainhead.”
(Macall Polay / HBO)
“Mountainhead” aspires more directly to comedy, but because we don’t have a history with these four deplorable men, it’s often difficult to find the humor. “Like ‘Fountainhead’ Mountainhead?” Youssef jokes to Schwartzman about the estate’s title. “Was your interior decorator Ayn Bland?” There’s a procession of put-downs like that. When they’re not roasting each other, they’re trying to boost their own agendas — in the case of the cancer-stricken Randall, it’s the quest to live forever as a disembodied consciousness.
For all its Shakespearean drama, “Succession” was wildly entertaining, more of a comedy than, yes, “The Bear.” Kendall Roy performing the rap “L to the OG” at a party honoring his father’s half-century running Waystar Royco will be the funniest two minutes of television probably forever. But half the fun came from the characters’ reactions to this transcendent moment of cringe. We were deeply invested in this world.
For all their money and power, the “Mountainhead” moguls are, like the Roy children in “Succession,” not serious people. But beyond that, “Mountainhead” doesn’t have much of anything novel to say about its subjects. As good as Smith is at channeling Musk’s alien, empathy-deficient otherness, you can come away with the same level of insight — and entertainment — by spending a few minutes watching Mike Myers on “Saturday Night Live.” I don’t need to watch a movie to know that a guy sitting on a gold toilet isn’t prioritizing anyone’s interests but his own.
“Mountainhead,” as mentioned, arrives on the last day of 2024-25 Emmy eligibility, less by design than from necessity. The paint’s still wet on this film. But this does mark the third straight season that HBO has dropped a TV movie right before the deadline. Last year, it was “The Great Lillian Hall,” starring Jessica Lange as fading Broadway legend. Two years ago, it was the excellent whistleblower thriller “Reality,” featuring a star turn from Sydney Sweeney. Both movies were blanked at the Emmys, though Kathy Bates did manage a Screen Actors Guild Awards nod for “Lillian Hall.”
Did the movies land too late for enough people see them? Perhaps. The late arrival time should mean they’d be fresh in voters’ minds when they fill out their ballots. But you have to be aware of them for that to happen.
Awareness shouldn’t be an issue with “Mountainhead.” Enough people will want to watch the new offering from the creator of “Succession,” and there’s not much else on television vying for attention right now. “Mountainhead” should score a nomination for television movie, even with the category being stronger than usual this year with audience favorites “Rebel Ridge,” the latest “Bridget Jones” movie and Scott Derrickson’s enjoyable, genre-bending “The Gorge” competing.
But actors in these TV movies are at competitive disadvantage as the Emmys lump them together with their counterparts in limited series, performers who are onscreen for a much longer time. This decade, only two TV movie actors have been nominated — Hugh Jackman (“Bad Education”) and Daniel Radcliffe (“Weird: The Al Yankovic Story”). The lead actress category, meanwhile, has been completely dominated by limited series.
Not that there are any women starring in “Mountainhead” because … tech bros. As for the men, Carell, Schwartzman, Smith and Youssef are very good at conveying delusional arrogance. I despised each and every one of their characters. If hate-voting were a thing, they’d all be nominated.
SACRAMENTO — This just seems wrong: Californians overwhelmingly approved an anti-crime ballot measure in November. But our governor strongly opposed the proposition. So he’s not funding it.
Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democratic legislative leaders, however, are now under pressure to fund the measure in a new state budget that’s being negotiated and must pass the Legislature by June 15.
A core principle of democracy is the rule of law. A governor may dislike a law, but normally is duty- bound to help implement and enforce it. Heaven save us if governors start traipsing the twisted path of President Trump.
Newsletter
You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
George Skelton and Michael Wilner cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know in 2024. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
But this isn’t the first time for Newsom. Voters twice — in 2012 and 2016 — rejected ballot measures to eliminate the death penalty. Moreover, in 2016 they voted to expedite executions. But shortly after becoming governor in 2019, Newsom ignored the voters and declared a moratorium on capital punishment.
Nothing on California’s ballot last year got more votes than Proposition 36, which increases punishment for repeated theft and hard drug offenses and requires treatment for repetitive criminal addicts.
It passed with 68.4% of the vote, carrying all 58 counties — 55 of them by landslide margins, including all counties in the liberal San Francisco Bay Area.
“To call it a mandate is an understatement,” says Greg Totten, chief executive officer of the California District Attorneys Assn., which sponsored the initiative. Big retailers bankrolled it.
“It isn’t a red or blue issue,” adds Totten, referring to providing enough money to fund the promised drug and mental health treatment. “It’s what’s compassionate and what’s right and what the public expects us to do.”
Rolled back Proposition 47
Proposition 36 partly rolled back the sentence-softening Proposition 47 that voters passed 10 years earlier and was loudly promoted by then-Lt. Gov. Newsom.
Proposition 47 reduced certain property and hard drug crimes from felonies to misdemeanors and arrests plummeted, the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California found.
Proposition 36 was inspired by escalating retail theft, including smash-and-grab burglaries, that were virtually unpunished. Increased peddling of deadly fentanyl also stirred the public.
The ballot measure imposed tougher penalties for dealing and possessing fentanyl, treating it like other hard drugs, such as heroin and cocaine. But the proposition offered a carrot to addicted serial criminals: Many could be offered treatment rather than jail time.
Newsom adamantly opposed Proposition 36.
“We don’t need to go back to the broken policies of the last century,” the governor declared. “Mass incarceration has been proven ineffective and is not the answer.”
Newsom tried to sabotage Proposition 36 by crafting an alternative ballot measure. Top legislative leaders went along. But rank-and-file Democratic lawmakers rebelled and Newsom abandoned the effort.
The Legislature ultimately passed 13 anti-theft bills that Newsom and Democrats hoped would satisfy voters, but didn’t come close. Totten called the legislative product “half measures.”
Proposition 36 was flawed in one regard: It lacked a funding mechanism. That was part of the backers’ political strategy. To specify a revenue source — a tax increase, the raid of an existing program — would have created a fat target for opponents.
Let the governor and the Legislature decide how to fund it, sponsors decided.
“We didn’t want to tie the hands of the Legislature,” Totten says. “The Legislature doesn’t like that.”
Anti-crime measure won’t work without funding
Without funding from Sacramento, Proposition 36 won’t work, says Graham Knaus, chief executive officer of the California State Assn. of Counties.
“We believe strongly that if it’s not properly funded, it’s going to fail,” Knaus says. “Proposition 36 requires increased capacity for mental health and substance abuse treatment. And until that’s in place, there’s not really a way to make the sentencing work.”
There’s a fear among Proposition 36 supporters that if treatment isn’t offered to qualifying addicts, courts won’t allow jail sentencing.
“That will probably get litigated,” Totten says.
“Counties can’t implement 36 for free,” Knaus says. “Voters declared this to be a top-level priority. It’s on the state to determine how to fund it. Counties have a very limited ability to raise revenue.”
The district attorney and county organizations peg the annual cost of implementing the measure at $250 million. State Senate Republicans are shooting for the moon: $400 million. The nonpartisan legislative analyst originally figured that the cost ranged “from several tens of millions of dollars to the low hundreds of millions of dollars each year.”
Newson recently sent the Legislature a revised $322-billion state budget proposal for the fiscal year starting July 1. There wasn’t a dime specifically for Proposition 36.
The governor, in fact, got a bit surly when asked about it by a reporter.
“There were a lot of supervisors in the counties that promoted it,” the governor asserted. “So this is their opportunity to step up. Fund it.”
One supervisor I spoke with — a Democrat — opposed Proposition 36, but is irked that Newsom isn’t helping to implement it.
“It’s disappointing and immensely frustrating,” says Bruce Gibson, a longtime San Luis Obispo County supervisor. “Voters have spoken and we need to work together with the state in partnership.”
In fairness, the governor and the Legislature are faced with the daunting task of patching a projected $12-billion hole in the budget, plus preparing for the unpredictable fiscal whims of a president who keeps threatening to withhold federal funds from California because he doesn’t like our policies.
“I am quite concerned about adequately providing the necessary funding to implement Proposition 36,” says state Sen. Tom Umberg of Santa Ana, a strong Democratic supporter of the measure.
He’s fearful that the Legislature will approve only a token amount of funding — and the governor will veto even that.
Under California’s progressive system of direct democracy, voters are allowed to bypass Sacramento and enact a state law themselves. Assuming the statue is constitutional, the state then has a duty to implement it. To ignore the voters is a slap in the face of democracy.
Commercial content notice: Taking one of the offers featured in this article may result in a payment to The Sun. You should be aware brands pay fees to appear in the highest placements on the page. 18+. T&Cs apply. gambleaware.org.
Remember to gamble responsibly
A responsible gambler is someone who:
Establishes time and monetary limits before playing
Only gambles with money they can afford to lose
Never chases their losses
Doesn’t gamble if they’re upset, angry or depressed
CLOVIS, Calif. — The stars close the show and Long Beach Poly’s 4×400-meter relay brought the crowd to its feet with a stunning performance in the final race of the CIF State Track & Field Finals, winning in 3 minutes 8.68 seconds for the second-fastest time ever in the state meet. The top four teams ran sub-3:10, making it the fastest four-lapper ever in the finals on depth.
The Jackrabbits just missed the state meet record of 3:08.42 set in 2010 by a Gardena Serra foursome anchored by Robert Woods, running the fourth-fastest time in California history.
Central East of Fresno was second in 3:09.23, Servite took third in 3:09.46 to clinch the team title with 33 points, L.A. Cathedral took fourth in 3:09.59 and Long Beach Wilson was fifth in 3:10.55.
Sprinters headlined Friday’s preliminaries but it was the distance runners who played leading roles Saturday at Buchanan High School.
Rylee Blade has made a habit of performing her best on the brightest stage and she ran her fastest girls’ 3,200-meter race ever (9:50.51) but had to settle for second when she was passed on the last turn by Hanne Thomsen of Santa Rosa Montgomery, who won in 9:48.98.
Corona Santiago senior Rylee Blade, left, hugs girls’ 3,200-meter champion Hanne Thomsen after a thrilling finish Saturday.
(Steve Galluzzo / For The Times)
“I knew this would be a kicking race and give [Thomsen] credit, she had a bit more at the end,” said Blade, the Corona Santiago standout who won the state title as a sophomore and was third last year.
In a shocking development, Stanford-bound senior Evan Noonan of Dana Hills, last year’s boys’ 3,200 champion, caught a stomach flu earlier in the afternoon and had to drop out of the race, distraught that he couldn’t defend his title. Woodcrest Christian’s Eyan Turk took advantage of the race favorite’s absence, winning in 8:51.62.
Thomsen was involved in another stretch duel in the girls’ 1,600 versus another Corona Santiago runner Braelyn Combe, who did not realize she won until times were posted on the scoreboard.
Santa Margarita’s Leo Francis wins the boys’ long jump with a leap of 25-00.75 at the CIF state track and field championships at Buchanan High School in Clovis, Calif., on Saturday.
(Steve Galluzzo / For The Times)
“We were shoulder to shoulder with 100 [meters] to go and pushed each other to the end,” said Combe, who won by five-hundredths of a second in a personal-best of 4:35.64, the second-fastest in the country this year and fifth fastest in state history. “I’ve never been that close to someone at the finish line. I closed my eyes and prayed and when I looked up at the board I burst into tears. I’ve never wanted anything more in my life. I’m so happy. My family drove five hours up here to watch.”
Combe, a junior who took second in the 1,600 last year, credits her victory to training with Blade, whom she called “unbelievable.”
“It’s a blessing to have her on my team, she’s the best pacing partner,” said Combe, who capped off her day by anchoring the Sharks’ 4×800-meter relay, which ran 8:49.01 to establish a new state meet record. “It’s a real advantage for me.”
Long Beach Wilson senior Loren Webster wins her second straight CIF state girls’ long jump title with a personal-best leap of 21-00.25 at Buchanan High School in Clovis, Calif., on Saturday.
(Steve Galluzzo / For The Times)
Looking like an Olympic gymnast, Loren Webster successfully defended her state title in girls’ long jump, achieving a personal-best of 21 feet, 0¼ inch. Transgender athlete AB Hernandez, who beat Webster at the Southern Section Masters Meet and posted the top qualifying mark Friday, finished 3½ inches behind in second.
“I’m glad I was able to win to honor my jump coach who has worked with me since my first year jumping as a sophomore,” the teary-eyed senior said of Carl Hampton, who died of cancer May 24, the day of the Masters Meet. “I PR’d by a couple of inches. I was injured most of the season but I knew what I was capable of and I knew today was the only day that mattered.”
Hernandez went on to win the triple jump and tied for first with Lelani Laruelle of Monte Vista and Jillene Wetteland of Long Beach Poly in the high jump at 5-07.
JJ Harel of Sherman Oaks Notre Dame cleared 6-09 to win the boys high jump after finishing second at the state meet last year.
“I knew I would win but honestly, I’m not happy,” said the Knights’ junior, whose personal-best was 7-0¼ last year. “I was on fire in the lower heights, getting over easily but once it got to seven feet I forgot my form.”
1
2
1.Sherman Oaks Notre Dame’s Aja Johnson celebrates after finishing first in the girls’ shot put on Saturday.2.Sherman Oaks Notre Dame’s JJ Harel won the boys’ high jump title Saturday.(Steve Galluzzo / For The Times)
Giving Harel a high-five after his win was Notre Dame senior Aja Johnson, who won the girls’ shot put for the second time in three years with a throw of 45-05¾.
“It’s not a PR or anything but at least I won it for my school. … I’m happy about that,” said Johnson, who is going to college at Louisville.
Oaks Christian’s girls repeated as 4×100 champions in 46.08, edging Long Beach Poly (46.18) for the second year in a row. Servite won the boys 4×100 relay in 40.27, one hundredth of a second faster than its preliminary time.
Concord De La Salle junior Jaden Jefferson won the boys’ 100 meters in 10.27, followed by Servite’s Benjamin Harris (10.31), Alemany’s Demare Dezeurn (10.39) and Rancho Cucamonga’s RJ Sermons (10.48). Temecula Valley’s Jack Stadlman won the 400 meters in 46.02 and took second in the 200 meters in 20.82. Sermons, who had to win a run-off Friday to gain the last qualifying spot, finished sixth in the 200 in 21.05.
Long Beach Wilson successfully defended its 4×400 girls relay title.
Servite won the boys state team title, while Clovis North finished second and Santa Margarita placed third.
Long Beach Wilson claimed the girls state team title, Long Beach Poly finished second and Santiago Corona finished third.
Long Beach Wilson junior Wyatt Obando, second right, edges Lucas Alberts of Jesuit to win the boys’ 800 meters Saturday.
MAX VERSTAPPEN is on the verge of a Formula One race ban after race stewards made a decision over his collision with George Russell at the Spanish Grand Prix.
Max Verstappen was handed a 10-second penalty for “undoubtedly” causing his collision with George Russell
3
Verstappen appeared to deliberately drive into the Brit at Turn 5 of the Spanish GPCredit: Sky Sports
3
The FIA later hit the Dutchman with three penalty points, leaving him one off of a race banCredit: Shutterstock Editorial
That punishment dropped him from P5 when he crossed the line to P10, which opened a massive 49-point gap between himself and championship leader Oscar Piastri.
A further investigation from the FIA after the race saw the 27-year-old avoid disqualification, despite calls from Nico Rosberg on Sky Sports commentary.
However, F1‘s governing body decided that Verstappen‘s actions also warranted three points on his Super Licence, declaring the collision was “undoubtedly caused” by him.
And this has placed him on the verge of a ban for an F1 race later this season.
With the three points added from his exploits in Barcelona, Verstappen is now just one penalty point away from a race ban.
F1’s penalty points system works on a 12-month rolling basis, and Verstappen currently sits on 11 penalty points out of the maximum of 12 before a ban.
But the next time the four-time world champion will see any of his penalty points expire will be on June 30.
That means Verstappen will need to be on his best behaviour at both the Canada Grand Prix on June 15 and then Red Bull’s home race at the Austrian Grand Prix on June 29.
Picking up another penalty point in Montreal would mean a ban for Verstappen at the Red Bull Ring, while a point in the second race would mean he is banned from the British Grand Prix on July 6.
Verstappen will become the first-ever reigning world champion to be hit by a ban if he picks up another point in either of those races.
One of F1’s most recognisable voices reveals Leclerc and Hamilton moments that will live with him forever
However, if he stays clean across the next two race weekends then Verstappen will see two points expire from his licence and move down to nine.
After that he will need to avoid further incident going all the way to October 27th.
The chaos in Spain began after a safety car restart caused by Mercedes rookie Kimi Antonelli veering into the gravel.
Verstappen nearly spun and Charles Leclerc overtook him before Russell, 27, nearly went into the back of him, with the Dutchman going off track onto the escape road.
He was then told by his team to give the place back to the Brit, believing he had gained an unfair advantage by leaving the track.
Fuming Verstappen swore down the radio at the decision before slowing up.
What are Verstappen’s penalty points and when do they expire?
Two points: Expire 30th June 2025.
These were awarded for causing a collision with Lando Norris at the 2024 Austrian Grand Prix.
Two points: Expire 27th October 2025.
These were awarded for forcing Lando Norris off track during the 2024 Mexico City Grand Prix.
One point: Expires 1st November 2025.
This point was awarded for being under the minimum VSC delta time during the 2024 Brazilian Grand Prix Sprint.
One point: Expires 1st December 2025.
This point was awarded for driving unnecessarily slowly on a cooldown lap during qualifying for the 2024 Qatar Grand Prix.
Two points: Expire 8th December 2025.
These were awarded for causing a collision with Oscar Piastri during the 2024 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix.
TheMercedesman thought he was letting him through at Turn 5 but his rival then appeared to intentionally ram into the side of him, which landed Verstappen in hot water.
Speaking after the race, Russell said: “I’m too close to give my opinion on behalf of the drivers. It’s like in Austin last year, some of the best moves ever then you go to Mexico and he lets himself down a bit.
“You go to Imola with one of the best moves of all-time, then this happens. It cost him and his team a lot of points. Charles and I actually dropped off like a stone on those last two laps.
“He probably could have come back to fight for the podium, so I won’t lose any sleep [over it]. We have our own problems and that’s making our car go faster.”
Verstappen himself said: “I don’t need to say anything about it because it doesn’t matter anyway.
“I had a big moment there in the last corner. Unfortunately the hard tyres had very low grip so that was quite painful. Basically, we just ran out of tyres.
“In hindsight, was it better to stay out? Maybe, I don’t know. It’s always easy to say afterwards. Because of those hard tyres, you get into those situations.
“I think [the strategy] was good, I think it worked for us. It was the best way forward. It was racy and I liked it. Unfortunately we didn’t get the benefits at the end.”
WASHINGTON — A Starship spun out of control in suborbital flight on Tuesday, failing to meet critical testing goals set by SpaceX in its plans for a mission to Mars. A poll released last week showed the national brand reputation for Tesla, once revered, had cratered. And later that same day, House Republicans passed a bill that would balloon the federal deficit.
It has been a challenging period for Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, who not long ago thought he had conquered the private sector and could, in short order, do the same with the federal government. That all ended Wednesday evening with his announcement he is leaving the Trump administration.
“As my scheduled time as a Special Government Employee comes to an end, I would like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending,” Musk wrote on X, his social media platform.
The mission of the program he called the Department of Government Efficiency “will only strengthen over time as it becomes a way of life throughout the government,” he added.
Musk’s departure comes on the heels of a ruling from a federal judge in Washington on Wednesday questioning Musk’s initial appointment as a temporary government employee and, by extension, whether any of his work for DOGE was constitutional.
“I thought there were problems,” Musk said in a recent interview with the Washington Post, “but it sure is an uphill battle trying to improve things in D.C., to say the least.”
Newsletter
You’re reading the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
George Skelton and Michael Wilner cover the insights, legislation, players and politics you need to know in 2024. In your inbox Monday and Thursday mornings.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
Growing conflicts with Trump
Musk’s role as an omnipresent advisor to President Trump began to wane weeks ago, amid public backlash against DOGE’s cuts to treasured government programs — from cancer research to the National Park Service — and after Trump bucked Musk’s counsel on economic policy, launching a global trade war that jolted supply chains and financial markets.
But the entrepreneur has grown increasingly vocal with criticism of the Trump administration this week, stating that a megabill pushed by the White House proposing an overhaul to the tax code risks undermining his efforts to cut government spending.
Musk responded to a user on X, his social media platform, on Monday lamenting that House Republicans “won’t vote” to codify DOGE’s cuts. “Did my best,” he wrote.
“I was disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not decrease it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing,” Musk explained further in an interview with “CBS Sunday Morning” later in the week. “I think a bill can be big, or it can be beautiful, but I don’t know if it can be both. My personal opinion.”
The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” would increase border security and defense spending, renew tax cuts passed in 2017 and extend a new tax deduction to seniors, while eliminating green energy tax benefits and cutting $1 trillion in funding to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Despite the cuts, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill would add so much money to the debt that Congress may be forced to execute cuts across the board, including hundreds of billions to Medicare, in a process known as sequestration.
Hours after the CBS interview aired, the White House appeared to respond directly to Musk with the release of a press release titled “FACT: One, Big, Beautiful Bill Cuts Spending, Fuels Growth.” And Trump responded directly from the Oval Office, noting Democratic opposition and the challenges of unifying a fractious GOP caucus. Negotiations with the Senate will result in changes to the legislation, Trump said.
“My reaction’s a lot of things,” Trump said. “I’m not happy about certain aspects of it, but I’m thrilled by other aspects of it.”
“That’s the way they go,” he added. “It’s very big. It’s the big, beautiful bill.”
Cuts in question
It is unclear whether Musk succeeded in making the government more efficient, regardless of what Congress does.
While the DOGE program originally set a goal of cutting $2 trillion in federal spending, Musk ultimately revised that target down dramatically, to $150 billion. The program’s “wall of receipts” claims that $175 billion has been saved, but the Treasury Department’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service has documented an increase in spending over last year.
“DOGE is just becoming the whipping boy for everything,” Musk said in the Post interview this week. “So, like, something bad would happen anywhere, and we would get blamed for it even if we had nothing to do with it.”
Musk had been brought into the Trump administration designated as a special government employee, a position limited to 130 days that does not require Senate approval.
But the legal case making its way through the Washington courtroom of U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan is questioning the entire arrangement.
The White House attempted to “minimize Musk’s role, framing him as a mere advisor without any formal authority,” Chutkan wrote, while granting him broad powers that gave him “unauthorized access” to “private and proprietary information,” like Social Security numbers and medical records. Those actions, Chutkan added, provide the basis for parties to claim Musk inflicted substantial injury in a legal challenge.
‘I think I’ve done enough’
Musk was scheduled to speak on Tuesday after SpaceX’s Starship test launch, setting out the road ahead to “making life multiplanetary.” But he never appeared after the spacecraft failed early on in its planned trajectory to orbit Earth.
The SpaceX Starship rocket is launched Tuesday in Texas. It later disintegrated over the Indian Ocean, officials said.
(Sergio Flores / AFP / Getty Images)
Starship is supposed to be the vehicle that returns Americans to the moon in just two years. NASA, in conjunction with U.S. private sector companies, is in a close race with China to return humans to the moon for the first time since the end of the Apollo program.
But none of Musk’s endeavors has suffered more than his electric car company, Tesla, which saw a 71% plunge in profits in the first quarter of 2025 and a 50% drop in stock value from its highs in December. An Axios Harris Poll released last week found that Tesla dropped in its reputation ranking of America’s 100 most visible companies to 95th place, down from eighth in 2021 and 63rd last year.
The reputational damage to Tesla, setbacks at SpaceX and limits to his influence on Trump appear to be cautioning Musk to step back from his political activity.
“I think in terms of political spending, I’m going to do a lot less in the future,” Musk told Bloomberg News on May 20, during the Qatar Economic Forum. “I think I’ve done enough.”
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday turned down a middle-school student’s claim he had a free-speech right to wear a T-shirt stating there are “only two genders.”
Over two dissents, the justices let stand a ruling that said a school may enforce a dress code to protect students from “hate speech” or bullying.
After three months of internal debate, the justices decided they would not take up another conservative culture-war challenge to progressive policies that protect LGBTQ+ youth.
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. filed a 14-page dissent joined only by Justice Clarence Thomas. He said the case “presented an issue of great importance for our nation’s youth: whether public schools may suppress student speech because it expresses a viewpoint the schools disfavor.”
Liam Morrison, a seventh-grader from Massachusetts, said he was responding to his school’s promotion of Pride Month when students were encouraged to wear rainbow colors and posters urged them to “rise up to protect trans and gender-nonconforming students.”
Two years ago, he went to school wearing a black T-shirt that said “There are only two genders.”
A teacher reported him to the principal, who sent him home to change his shirt. A few weeks later, he returned with the word “censored” taped over the words “two genders” and was sent home again.
The T-shirt dispute asked the Supreme Court to decide whether school officials may limit the free expression of some students to protect others from messages they may see as offensive or hurtful.
In March, the court voted to hear a free-speech challenge to laws in California and 21 other states that prohibit licensed counselors from using “conversion therapy” with minors.
That case, like the one on school T-shirts, arose from appeals by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal group. It has already won free-speech rulings that allowed a cake maker and a website designer to refuse to participate in same-sex weddings despite state laws that barred discrimination based on sexual orientation.
On April 22, the court sounded ready to rule for religious parents in Montgomery County, Md., who seek the right to have their young elementary children “opt out” of the classroom use of new “LGBTQ-inclusive” storybooks.
The T-shirt case came before the court shortly after President Trump’s executive order declaring the U.S. government will “recognize two sexes, male and female,” not “an ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity.”
Although the Supreme Court has yet to rule on T-shirts and the 1st Amendment, lower courts have upheld limits imposed by schools.
In 2006, the 9th Circuit Court in a 2-1 decision upheld a move by school officials at Poway High School in San Diego to bar a student from wearing a T-shirt that said “Homosexuality is shameful.” The appeals court said students are free to speak on controversial matters, but they are not free to make “derogatory and injurious remarks directed at students’ minority status such as race, religion and sexual orientation.”
Other courts have ruled schools may prohibit a student from wearing a Confederate flag on a T-shirt.
In the new case from Massachusetts, the boy’s father said his son’s T-shirt message was not “directed at any particular person” but dealt with a “hot political topic.”
In their defense, school officials pointed to their policy against bullying and a dress code that says “clothing must not state, imply, or depict hate speech or imagery that target groups based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religious affiliation, or any other classification.”
Lawyers for the Alliance Defending Freedom sued on the student’s behalf and argued the school violated his rights under the 1st Amendment. They lost before a federal judge in Boston who ruled for school officials and said the T-shirt “invaded the rights of the other students … to a safe and secure educational environment.”
The 1st Circuit Court agreed as well, noting that schools may limit free expression of students if they fear a particular message will cause a disruption or “poison the atmosphere” at school.
The Supreme Court’s most famous ruling on student rights arose during the Vietnam War. In 1969, the Warren court ruled for high school students who wore black armbands as a protest.
In Tinker vs. Des Moines, the court said students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate. … For school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, [they] must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint.”
The justices said then a symbolic protest should be permitted so long as it did not cause a “substantial disruption of or material interference with school activities.”
The attorneys for Liam Morrison contended he should win under that standard.
“This case isn’t about T-shirts. It’s about public school telling a middle-schooler that he isn’t allowed to express a view that differs from their own,” said David Cortman, an Alliance Defending Freedom attorney in the case of L.M. vs. Town of Middleborough.
