Representative

Ban of forever chemicals for California farms nixed by state lawmakers

California lawmakers rejected legislation that would have banned pesticides with so-called “forever” chemicals from use on California’s farms, a restriction strongly opposed by the state’s billion-dollar agriculture community.

Assembly Bill 1603 by Assemblymember Nick Schultz (D-Burbank) would have phased out the use of pesticides that contain perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS chemicals, a family of compounds that can be lasting and harmful to humans.

Representatives for agricultural groups argued at committee hearings last month that banning the chemicals was an overreach that would result in higher numbers of imports of food from other states and stifle innovation in developing new pesticides.

The latest version of the bill, which will be considered when the state legislature resumes its session next month, requires the state to list pesticides with PFAS in its public database.

“I’m disappointed,” Schultz said in an interview with the Times, adding that he intends to still push to phase out PFAS chemicals.

The bill marks the latest back-and-forth over PFAS, chemicals that are found in many different consumer, commercial and industrial products and are known as forever chemicals because some of their components don’t easily break down.

State regulators and environmental groups disagree on the definition of the chemicals, making it difficult to find a consensus on regulations or health risks.

Gov. Gavin Newsom last year vetoed a bill that would have prohibited the sale and distribution of popular consumer products, including cookware, dental floss and cleaning products, that contain PFAS chemicals.

The governor, in his veto message, cited affordability concerns. At the same time, the state has passed various laws intended to protect people from PFAS, including banning them in food packaging and firefighting foam.

Studies show that exposure to certain levels of PFAS may lead to decreased fertility and developmental delays in children and increase the risk of cancers, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, and the vast majority of PFAS chemicals have not been tested for human health effects.

The Environmental Working Group, or EWG, an advocacy group based in Washington, D.C., released a study in March that found that nearly 40% of California’s conventionally grown fruits and vegetables tested contained PFAS residues, including 90% of peaches and nectarines.

The EWG, one of the bill’s supporters, uses a broader criteria to define PFAS than the state and federal authorities.

A spokesperson for California’s Dept. of Pesticide Regulation, which oversees pesticide use, said the EWG report looked at detections of the PFAS, but the state “looks at how the detections compare to federal tolerance levels.”

At a June Senate committee hearing on Schultz’s bill, EWG’s chief science officer, David Andrews, said that PFAS pesticides “fall into a regulatory blind spot.” He also said regulators, including the state, have “been inadequate with respect to evaluating immune system harm or the cumulative impacts of these very small PFAS.”

A spokesperson for the Dept. of Pesticide Regulation declined to comment on Schultz’s bill.

Taylor Triffo, a representative for a coalition of California agricultural associations, said at a different Senate hearing in June that the bill’s original language to ban new PFAS chemicals “would deny California farmers access to [the] next generation of crop protection tools that are safer, more targeted, require lower use rates and help address emerging pests and diseases.”

Representatives for agriculture groups said at hearings last month that they don’t object to the state flagging PFAS chemicals in the state database.

Nearly half of the country’s vegetables and more than three-quarters of its fruits and nuts come from California, according to the state.

Sen. Anna Caballero (D-Merced), chair of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, called pesticide use a “balance” at the June hearing before voting for the amended version.

“Part of the challenge agriculture is facing right now is pest invasion from other countries where the critters have moved on plants and in soil and have come into the state,” she said. “We’ve got to do everything, I think, we can to maintain our agricultural production, because we produce products that are produced almost nowhere else in the country.”

Isabella Quinonez, assistant director of Public Affairs at the California Farm Bureau, said her group objected to the original bill because it would have restricted products based on their chemical class rather than on a pesticide’s scientific evaluation of risk.

“We’re confident in the Department of Pesticide Regulation’s rigorous, science-based regulatory process, which includes residue studies, groundwater monitoring, and ongoing reevaluations,” Quinonez said.

Schultz told The Times he hopes to work with the Dept. of Pesticide Regulation on oversight in the coming years. He rejected any premise that there is “absolutely nothing to worry about, nothing off [with PFAS], because that’s just inconsistent with the science.”

Times staff writer Susanne Rust contributed to this report.

Source link

New York resident sues ICE after it warns him over critical email sent to its former head

An upstate New York resident sued U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for sending federal officers to his house with a warning over an email he sent to the agency’s one-time head.

David Streever, who is a U.S. citizen, was on a trip to Finland when two officers showed up to his Rochester home in June and presented his wife with a warning notice informing him that the email he sent months earlier was considered a threat, his attorneys said. Streever sent the email in January to Todd Lyons, then the acting director of ICE, after an immigration officer fatally shot Minneapolis resident Renee Good during an anti-ICE demonstration.

Streever’s email called Lyons “a monstrous human being” who “will never know peace.” In a lawsuit filed Monday in Washington, he said the agency violated his 1st Amendment rights.

Streever is one of at least two residents of upstate New York who was served with a federal warning in June in the wake of criticizing ICE online. The Philadelphia-based Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is representing Streever, and said it filed the lawsuit because Streever’s right to free expression was violated.

“This is very clearly within the protection of the 1st Amendment,” said Adam Steinbaugh, an attorney with the foundation. “It was in the context of political speech.”

Representatives for ICE previously declined to comment on the warning to Streever, citing an ongoing investigation, and the agency did not immediately comment Monday. The suit also names Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, whose office also did not immediately comment.

“ICE investigates all credible threats towards its employees and officers, including threats to the ICE Director,” the agency said in a statement last week.

The entirety of the three-paragraph email, which carried the subject line “What’s next,” and referenced a leader in Nazi Germany:

“You are a monstrous human being and will go down in history as America’s Reinhard Heydrich, the butcher.

“The way you are protecting the obvious execution in Minnesota, even as we see the videos, will lead to your downfall. Even Trump will turn on you before the end, and you will be a sad, despised man who eats himself alive with shame at your own pathetic weakness.

“You will never know peace. You will seek to lose yourself, to escape the burden of knowing the truth about yourself. But wherever you go, you will find yourself. You will torment yourself until your last day on Earth.”

Federal agents also attempted to confront Streever at a hotel in New York City when he returned from Finland, but they were turned away by hotel staff, Steinbaugh said.

Federal officials went to Streever’s house the same week that officials visited Paigelynne Gonyea, a poll worker, at a voting location during New York’s primaries to confront her about a social media post.

Gonyea believes the warning stemmed from writing “I think today is a great day for Jonathan to be indicted,” in a post with a picture of Jonathan Ross, the ICE officer who shot and killed Good. She posted it in January, after Ross had already been identified by the news media.

Lauren Bis, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, shared an image of a different social media post from Gonyea in which she said Gonyea shared Ross’ address. Part of that post was redacted.

Bis said in a statement in June that Gonyea “committed a federal crime by posting the address of an ICE law enforcement officer online” and “if you doxx our officers, we will investigate you, and you will be brought to justice.”

A representative for the New York Attorney General’s Office has said the office is aware of the two residents’ contact with federal agents. The representative has said the office has been reviewing the interaction between Gonyea and federal agents that took place at the polls.

Whittle writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Two of music’s most powerful executives maxed out donations to Spencer Pratt

Los Angeles’ music industry, in recent years, has generally supported progressive causes. But as the primaries for the city’s mayoral race and California‘s governorship wrapped up Tuesday, some music executives and performers have supported and donated large amounts to Spencer Pratt, the right-leaning activist and reality TV star running for mayor.

According to data from the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission, Pratt’s supporters include two members of the record industry’s most powerful family who donated the maximum amount allowed by law.

Pratt is a registered Republican whose heated rhetoric about homeless “zombies” and AI-created advertisements have rankled progressives and delighted conservatives. He has received support from President Trump, who told reporters that “I’d like to see him do well. He’s a character. I don’t know him, I assume he probably supports me… I heard he’s a big MAGA person.”

In response, Pratt told TMZ that “Everybody wants me to succeed because L.A. is the most important city in the country. The only support I need is from moms that wanna feel safe in Los Angeles. I’m laser-focused on that.”

Universal Music Group is home to some of music’s most outspoken progressives, including Olivia Rodrigo and Billie Eilish, whose brother and collaborator Finneas O’Connell donated $250 to the progressive mayoral candidate Nithya Raman on May 6.

Earlier this year, UMG’s chairman and chief executive Lucian Grainge presented Rodrigo with the company’s Universal Music Group x REVERB Amplifier Award, which advocates for “social and environmental nonprofit campaigns through the cultural power of music,” according to a release.

On May 9, Grainge (listed as a resident of Pacific Palisades, where Pratt lost his home in the 2025 fires) maxed out with an $1,800 donation to Pratt’s campaign, as previously reported in The Times. A representative for UMG did not immediately return a request for comment on Grainge’s donation.

He’s not the only Pratt donor in the family.

Grainge’s son Elliot ascended through the record industry with his 10k Projects label, and now heads UMG’s competitor Atlantic Records. Vocal progressives like Cardi B, the Marías and Charli XCX are some of the label’s most high-profile acts.

On May 8, Elliot Grainge also gave $1,800 to Pratt‘s campaign. A representative for Atlantic did not immediately return a request for comment.

Last month, the record producer and composing titan David Foster and his wife, singer Katharine McPhee, performed at a fundraiser for Pratt where they crooned a version of Tina Turner’s hit “The Best” to the mayoral hopeful. “Spencer, you’re simply the best. Better than all the rest. Better than Karen Bass and Nithya Raman,” McPhee sang.

At Warner Music, Gabz Landman, the senior vice president for A&R at Warner Chappell, its powerful music publishing wing, who has worked with Dua Lipa, Laufey and Amy Allen, gave $105.24 to Pratt on Feb. 4. Through a Warner Music representative, Landman said the donation was for merchandise given to a friend, and was not intended as support for Pratt’s campaign.

The superstar EDM producer and DJ Kaskade has left supportive messages on Pratt’s social media, commenting on one of the candidate’s posts that “At this point, who is buying in to Bass’s fairytale narrative?! I am still shocked she hasn’t resigned!” The DJ and producer Diplo also left a supportive comment — a prayer-hands emoji and “please” — on one of Pratt’s social media posts. Records do not show any personal donations to Pratt’s campaign from either artist.

Public records do not show any donations to Pratt’s campaign from live-industry executives atop firms like Live Nation, AEG or Goldenvoice.

Source link

Stephen Colbert’s public access spot sparks CBS copyright fray

Stephen Colbert’s viral public access spot had former bosses CBS and its parent company Paramount in a brief tizzy over the weekend, mere hours after his buzzy late-night sign-off.

The longtime TV personality, 62, returned to the air on Friday evening on “Only in Monroe,” a public access program in Monroe, Mich., with an hour-long late-night parody episode that featured several guests and took shots at Paramount’s monopolistic aspirations in media. Colbert, previously a one-time host of “Only in Monroe,” began his episode: “It’s been an excruciating 23 hours without being on TV, so I am grateful to be able to be here on Monroe Community before they also get acquired by Paramount.”

The “Only in Monroe” episode was broadcast in southeast Michigan, the Associated Press reported, and also published to Colbert’s official YouTube page. News of Colbert’s surprise late-night spot spread online, with social media users reposting the episode in its entirety or sharing clips. Journalist and the Desk founder Matthew Keys shared the episode to his X (formerly Twitter) page, tweeting on Sunday that he received a “frivolous” copyright notice from Paramount Global.

CBS said in a statement shared over the holiday weekend to multiple outlets that the “Only in Monroe” episode was “financed and produced by CBS Studios” and was posted on Colbert’s YouTube page through a collaboration with Monroe Community Media and Colbert’s “The Late Show” YouTube channels. The network, which was home to “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” for more than a decade, said in its statement that it is “regular practice” to copyright-strike “unauthorized websites” that repost its “copyrighted content,” but later added that it’s walking back its actions.

“For this episode, we have decided to waive further enforcement of this standard industry practice until additional review,” the statement said.

A representative for CBS did not immediately respond to The Times’ request for comment on Tuesday. A representative for Colbert also did not immediately respond.

Colbert’s guests on Friday included regular “Only in Monroe” hosts Michelle Baumann and Kaye Lani Rae Rafko Wilson, Emmy winners Jeff Daniels and Steve Buscemi, rapper Eminem (via video call) and White Stripes rocker Jack White. Friday’s broadcast ended with a literal bang, with Colbert, Daniels and White taking hammers to the talk show set and setting it ablaze.

“Since they are no longer using this set, it would actually be helpful for me to destroy it,” Colbert said, “which is pretty great news because right now — for no particular reason — I would very much like to break something.”

“The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” ended its run at CBS after 11 seasons and more than 1,800 episodes. Colbert began his late-night talk series in 2015, succeeding David Letterman. CBS announced it was canceling “The Late Show” in July 2025, with chief executive George Cheeks claiming “this is purely a financial decision against a challenging backdrop in late night.”

“It is not related in any way to the show’s performance, content or other matters happening at Paramount,” Cheeks added at the time.

CBS announced it was parting ways with Colbert, a relentless critic of President Trump, after Paramount settled a lawsuit filed by Trump for $16 million. At the time, media mogul David Ellison’s Skydance Media was also awaiting federal approval to acquire Paramount for $8 billion. Ellison is the son of Oracle co-founder, tech billionaire and Trump ally Larry Ellison.

Colbert ended his CBS tenure at the Ed Sullivan Theater on Thursday evening, joined by an impressive roster of celebrity guests including Paul Rudd, Bryan Cranston, Tim Meadows, Ryan Reynolds and Paul McCartney. The “Late Show” time slot now hosts media mogul Byron Allen’s “Comics Unleashed” syndicated show.

After late night, Colbert revealed in March that his next project is co-writing a new “Lord of the Rings” movie with his screenwriter son Peter McGee. Even as Colbert begins a new chapter away from late night, work may bring him right back under the Paramount umbrella.

The new “Lord of the Rings” films, including Colbert’s project, will be produced by New Line and its parent company, Warner Bros. Discovery. David Ellison‘s Paramount Skydance is seeking a $111-billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery and its properties.

Times staff writers Greg Braxton and Meg James contributed to this report.

Source link