Washington also rescinded designation of HTS, formerly led by Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, as a ‘terrorist’ organisation.
Published On 24 Aug 202624 Aug 2026
The United States has removed Syria from its list of “State Sponsors of Terrorism,” the US Treasury has announced.
A statement issued on Monday confirmed the revocation of a decades-old designation placed on the country during the rule of the ousted Assad regime.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
The announcement confirms a decision initially revealed last month. It also revoked the designation of al-Nusrah Front – the group formerly led by the now-President Ahmed al-Sharaa, also known as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) – as a global “terrorist” organisation.
The move, first announced earlier this year pending a review by Congress, removes a critical impediment to investment in Syria, as the country seeks to reestablish itself in the international community and markets.
It represents a further vote of confidence in al-Sharaa, who has launched what many experts have described as a charm offensive aimed at Western powers, including meetings with President Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron.
“Today’s action will help foster additional investment in Syria to promote political and economic stability,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement, adding that it is “in line with President Trump’s promise to deliver sanctions relief to Syria”.
Having lifted sanctions on Syria in June 2025, alongside the European Union, the US announced in July its decision to delist Syria from its “terror” list, citing efforts by al-Sharaa to unify the country.
HTS was once al-Qaeda’s official branch in Syria and was led by al-Sharaa. Under his leadership, the group removed former President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024 following a lightning offensive.
The designation of the state carried restrictions on US foreign assistance, defence exports, and financial transactions, so Syria’s removal from the list is already being celebrated in the country, particularly by financial officials.
The governor of Syria’s central bank, Safwat Raslan, said on X that this is “a historic step that restores the country to its natural place in the global economic system”. He added that the bank is “working to build a modern and reliable financial system”.
Syrian Finance Minister Mohammed Barnieh described Washington’s move as “a major and historic success for Syrian diplomacy”, according to the country’s official news agency SANA.
It “opens a major and long-awaited door to strengthening Syria’s integration into the global economic and financial system, attracting investment and modern technologies, and supporting development opportunities”, he said.
US envoy to Syria Tom Barrack, meanwhile, called the end of the designation a “decisive step in Syria’s remarkable journey from isolation to partnership, and from a source of terrorism to a committed partner in the global fight against it”.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court cleared the way Monday for President Trump to seek new limits on the use of mail ballots, but they are not likely to take effect this year.
Acting by a 6-3 vote, the court’s conservatives granted an emergency appeal from Trump’s lawyers and set aside a judge’s order that blocked new federal regulations on states and their use of mail ballots.
It’s not clear, however, what happens now, since the midterm elections are less than three months away.
About 30% of the nation’s voters — and 80% of Californians — cast their ballots by mail in 2024. Trump, however, has long maintained the voting by mail leads to fraud, including voting by noncitizens.
The court’s order stressed the new regulations do not put new requirements on the states this year.
Trump’s executive order “is internal directive from the President to his subordinates mandating that certain agencies pursue certain policies. It neither requires nor forbids anything of anyone outside the Executive Branch,” the court said.
The Department of Homeland Security will compile state-by-state lists of citizens who are over 18 and eligible to vote.
“States are not required to use the Lists,” the court said, although they could lead to future prosecutions.
The most disputed provision could have authorized the Postal Service to restrict mail ballots to those who are on the Homeland Security lists, but that is a future proposal, not a rule that will take effect this year.
The unsigned order spoke for the six Republican appointees. The three liberals, all Democratic appointees, dissented into two separate opinions.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said Trump’s order was unlawful and should have been struck down. “It needlessly injects chaos and uncertainty into the upcoming midterm elections,” she said.
“Today’s decision does not address whether the President’s attempts to interfere with States’ administration of the November 2026 elections are lawful,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a dissent joined by Justice Elena Kagan. “Nor does it suggest that the Executive Branch has any constitutional or statutory authority to implement the President’s directives. Instead, today’s decision merely postpones adjudication of those challenges.”
Trump issued his executive order on March 31 with the aim of “ensuring citizenship verification” in federal elections. California and 22 other Democratic-led states sued a few days later and said Trump sought to use the Postal Service to impose new restrictions on voting by mail. They also argued the Constitution gives states and Congress the power to regulate elections, not the president.
A federal judge in Boston and 1st Circuit Court agreed with the challengers and blocked Trump’s executive order from taking effect for the November elections.
The case on appeal was Trump vs. California because California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta was a leader of the Democratic state attorneys who sued.
OMAHA, Neb. — “Do they still like Trump in Nebraska? I think so,” the president said during a recent event in Washington.
Given that the state easily backed Republican Donald Trump three times and hasn’t supported a Democrat for the White House since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964, the answer may seem obvious.
But in Nebraska’s largest city, it’s an open question and could decide one of the country’s most-watched congressional races. Retiring Rep. Don Bacon ’s open seat pits fellow Republican and Omaha City Councilmember Brinker Harding against Democratic activist Denise Powell.
The district encompasses an increasingly Democratic-leaning Omaha metro area of 1 million-plus and its more conservative suburbs — famous for steaks and the Reuben sandwich’s birthplace, though New York disputes that.
It’s one of just eight districts nationwide that elected Republicans in House races while supporting Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris over Trump two years ago.
Harding and Powell have been making the rounds at parades and festivals where meat raffles offer oversized sausages as prizes. However, those on-the-ground appeals could be drowned out by Trump who, like most things in politics, has moved to shape November’s midterm elections in his own image.
The president is organizing a Republican midterm convention in Dallas next month that will serve as much a two-day rally for him as a boon to party candidates nationwide. Trump is also frequently visiting tightly contested districts, despite his low approval ratings and the unpopular war in Iran.
While Trump centers himself, Democrats are happy to oblige.
When Powell knocks on doors to talk to voters, she asks, “What’s keeping you up at night?” On a sweaty Saturday afternoon, John Rosseter responded without hesitation. “Well, Trump.”
“I want to see the history books written years from now,” said Rosseter, 67, who owns a carpentry business. “They won’t be pretty.”
The ‘Blue Dot’ hasn’t helped Democratic House candidates
Nebraska splits its presidential electoral votes, and the 2nd Congressional District’s delegate has gone to Democrats three out of five times since 2008, making it a “ blue dot ” in an otherwise Republican red state. But a Democrat has won the House seat just once since 1994.
Harding plays up Trump’s primary endorsement, and House Speaker Mike Johnson and Majority Leader Steve Scalise campaigned for him. Harding said he has “the full confidence of, not only the White House, but leadership in the Congress.”
He has also tried to appeal to swing voters and says he knows the district better than does Powell, co-founder of Women Who Run Nebraska, which supports female candidates.
Two possible Democratic 2028 presidential candidates — ex-Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Rahm Emanuel, an ex-Chicago mayor who was President Barack Obama’s first White House chief of staff — have campaigned with Powell.
She talks about how Medicare cuts have increased anxiety about affordability. Powell also points to Trump and his family’s business dealings as an example of “the choices that they have made while people on the ground are struggling” and she says that resonates with Republicans.
“Even the ones who aren’t necessarily anti-Trump,” Powell said, “understand the need for checks and balances.”
Some Democrats want a ‘Blue Dot Wave’
Jason Brown and his wife, Ruth Huebner-Brown, caused a sensation in 2024 by spray painting about 50 reused lawn signs with blue dots and distributing them around Omaha’s Dundee neighborhood. The couple has since expanded to professionally produce signs promoting a “Blue Dot Wave.”
Brown said the Republican-controlled Congress has capitulated on “every Trump nominee, every Trump policy, all the way down to putting gilding gold on statues.”
Supporters of Harding have countered with red “Brinker Dot” signs.
“We need to make sure that we keep this country on the track to being even better,” Harding said.
Jack Hosking, the 90-year-old retired former head of a title insurance company, organizes a weekly coffee to discuss political and community issues. He estimated that about 70% of attendees are Trump voters and “maybe even more so lately, because of the crap that the New York mayor started,” referring to Zohran Mamdani’s efforts at pushing the Democratic Party to the left.
Both Powell and Harding have addressed Hosking’s group, though, and he predicted that as much as half will support the Democrat.
“She spoke well enough that, my sense is, a lot of them will cross over,” Hosking said, noting that when it came to campaigning, “Brinker’s not doing much.”
The president seen as a base motivator
The Republican National Committee views Trump as a national asset, betting he can prevent complacency in a year without a presidential race, when enthusiasm for the party in power typically wanes.
The committee rebranded its “Young Guns” program for key candidates to “MAGA Majority” in deference to Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement, and many congressional candidates will be at the Dallas convention with Trump.
Others aren’t waiting that long.
Republican Reps. Mike Lawler of New York and Tom Barrett of Michigan, whom Democrats are aiming to unseat, both appeared with Trump during his rallies in their districts. When the president visited Macungie, Pennsylvania, in June, he joined Republican Rep. Ryan Mackenzie, saying, “I’m here for him.”
Trump also traveled to the Wisconsin district of Republican Rep. Derreck Van Orden, as have Cabinet members.
Rep. Juan Ciscomani, facing a reelection fight, appeared with Trump during an April event in Arizona. Two Iowa Republicans in what could be toss-up reelection contests, Reps Zach Nunn and Mariannette Miller-Meeks, both were by Trump’s side when he kicked off his midterm campaign outside Des Moines.
Bacon sometimes defied the White House in his final term. He criticized Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and tried to curb Trump’s ability to impose tariffs and was the only House Republican who opposed renaming the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America.
Mary Jane Truemper, who heads the Nebraska Republican Party, said Powell and the state’s Democrats have moved too far to the left. She called Harding “a steady force” and said the nominee is not as fond of picking high-profile fights the way Bacon sometimes was.
“I think he speaks to the moderate Democrats as well as the Republicans,” said Truemper, who managed Bacon’s reelection campaign in 2018 and also worked for an unsuccessful primary challenger to him.
Even Powell said, “Don Bacon was a good representative of this district, and I think that there are a lot of people drawn to a pragmatic style of leadership in a state like ours.” But that may not be enough this year.
“People are worse off than they were before,” Powell said.
A local race may expose a wider party divide among neighbors
In the Elmwood Park neighborhood, Andy Maxwell, a 58-year-old pediatrician, said he likes to find the middle ground in politics and his community. But he recalled that, after putting up a Biden sign in his yard in 2020, his neighbors erected a Trump one.
“We don’t like all the turmoil part of it,” Maxwell said of politics nationally.
Nearby, 80-year-old Jerard Pearson called Democrats “feckless,” but said of Trump’s base supporters, “I’ve always been curious about this one-third level of crazy out there, a third of the population.” He is also no fan of a neighbor’s large “Harding for Congress” sign.
Truemper said Harding appreciates Trump’s endorsement but Nebraskans like to be wooed “person-to-person, rather than a national entity coming in.”
“Is that going to be the deciding factor?” she asked of Trump. “I don’t know.”
It was a television show tailor-made for Los Angeles: a highly anticipated Netflix crime drama about a team of ex-special forces operators who outsource their skills to criminals in the city.
The production was backed by a prominent indie studio and had a critically acclaimed lead actor attached. And with a budget of more than $100 million and a crew of 350, the series seemed like a shoo-in for California’s film tax and TV credit.
But last month, shortly before filming was set to begin, producers were stunned to learn the film didn’t make the cut based on a formula the state uses to rank projects by the number of jobs they produce and their spending levels. After two applications for a tax credit had been rejected, they opted to shoot the series in New Jersey, where it was much easier to qualify for film incentives.
“We were shocked,” said a producer on the project who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter. “This is the birthplace of entertainment. It shouldn’t be so hard to shoot here.”
Despite improvements to the state’s tax incentive program, Los Angeles and California continue to struggle to keep movies, television series and even game shows from fleeing elsewhere. Production levels have failed to bounce back since the pandemic and the labor strikes by writers and actors, and they remain at historic lows.
Film activity in the L.A. region plummeted in the second quarter of this year, with shoot days for feature films and TV productions falling 20% and 30%, respectively, compared with already anemic levels from a year ago, according to FilmLA.
The story of how L.A. steadily lost much of its homegrown industry to other locales is a tale of hubris, escalating costs, political inaction and fierce competition from states and countries hungry for a piece of the Hollywood pie. California eventually adopted a very limited film tax credit plan in 2009, but even then production had already gone elsewhere.
Filmmaker Jonathan Nolan, on the set of “Fallout,” has been at the forefront of efforts to keep Hollywood at the center of the entertainment industry.
(Lorenzo Sisti / Prime Video)
This account is based on interviews with more than a dozen producers, studio executives, lawmakers and film industry veterans.
Despite warning signs that runaway production was causing an exodus of talent and jobs, many took for granted that L.A. would remain the epicenter of film and television.
Film activity in Los Angeles has plummeted to historic lows, with devastating consequences for crews and vendors. This series examines how L.A. lost its dominant perch as a film and TV destination and what can be done to bring Hollywood back home.
“I’ve been around long enough … to realize that things kind of die slowly and then they die quickly,” said Jonathan Nolan, a writer, director and producer, whose credits include the HBO series “Westworld” and “Fallout” on Amazon.
Nolan, who championed efforts to get the state to expand its tax incentives, lamented that L.A. once “stood in for everywhere. Now L.A. doesn’t even stand in for itself.”
‘The X-Files’ and the birth of Hollywood North
Like the fall of Rome and the decline of Detroit, Hollywood’s spiral did not happen in a single day, but rather unfolded over decades.
Before World War II, Los Angeles’ production hegemony was uncontested. An abundance of sunny weather and a range of landscapes, along with highly skilled artisans, from set designers to scenic painters, re-created the entire world on Hollywood soundstages and backlots.
That began to change during the late 1940s and early 1950s when studios broke with tradition and filmed abroad, attracted by Europe’s cheap labor and the desire among directors for more realism in movies.
William Wyler’s 1953 classic “Roman Holiday,” starring Audrey Hepburn and Gregory Peck, was one of the first, shot entirely overseas on the streets of the Italian capital and at Cinecittà studios.
Still, as productions went on location, often for creative reasons, Hollywood remained the center of entertainment gravity.
“Roman Holiday,” starring Audrey Hepburn and Gregory Peck, was one of the first big American studio films to be shot entirely overseas.
(Paramount Pictures)
In 1993, when there were four broadcast networks, cable TV relied on set-top boxes and streamers were, well, party decorations, a relatively unknown television writer named Chris Carter began pre-production on a new supernatural drama series that he had created.
For the pilot’s opening scenes, he needed a forest, one that was dark and moody. There, a terrified teenage girl would be filmed fleeing before she was consumed by a blinding flash of light and then found dead, bearing unexplained marks on her body.
“It became clear that not only were there not great forests in the ‘zone,’” said Carter, referring to the 30-mile-zone (TMZ) around L.A. that producers try to shoot within to avoid mandatory union surcharges. “But there were better forests in Vancouver.”
As it happened, during the 14-day shoot, Carter, who was working with a tight budget, discovered that Vancouver supplied numerous benefits.
The grim weather naturally provided a spooky atmospheric backdrop while the city “beautifully doubled for almost any place in the U.S. without having to pretend too much,” he said.
Carter’s pilot became “The X-Files,” the wildly popular and groundbreaking 1990s TV series that ran for nine seasons (plus two revival seasons), redefined the science fiction genre and spawned two feature films.
The success of “The X-Files” propelled Vancouver’s reputation as “Hollywood North.”
(Associated Press)
“As David Duchovny said, ‘two weeks became five years,’” quipped Carter.
While other productions such as “Wiseguy” had filmed in British Columbia years earlier, “The X-Files” unintentionally cemented Vancouver’s reputation as “Hollywood North,” fueled by Canada’s favorable exchange rates, skilled crews, lower labor costs and, eventually, tax credits.
The show’s colossal success helped create the model still in play 33 years later for outsourcing movie and television production to regions where tax incentives are higher and production costs are lower.
“It was simply a choice I made for the location, not for the financial benefit,” said Carter. “It wasn’t part of my calculus, but it ended up being a fact of life.”
Throughout the 1990s a steady stream of TV shows and movies shot in Canada. The 1994 adaptation of “Little Women” starring Winona Ryder was largely filmed in Vancouver, with a stand-in for Orchard House, Louisa May Alcott’s home in Concord, Mass., built in a local forest.
But, at the time, few saw what was happening as an existential crisis in the making.
For one thing, L.A. was in the midst of a production boom, prompting the development of the$77-million Manhattan Beach Studios, a 22-acre production facility in 1996. (The studio is now fielding offers by its bank lenders after its owner, the real estate investment firm Hackman Capital Partners, defaulted on over $2 billion in mortgages on several studio facilities it had acquired in recent years.)
Losing the ‘golden goose’
Canada’s booming film business inspired other U.S. states to get in on the action. Louisiana became the first to pass a film tax incentive, enhancing it in 2002; New Mexico and Georgia followed with their own programs.
Helping to fuel the film tax credit frenzy was none other than the Motion Picture Assn. The Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group for the major film studios and streamers for years aggressively lobbied lawmakers and even governors in other states to adopt their own film programs.
Eventually, nearly 40 states and some 80 countries and territories were offering film incentives in the form of transferable tax credits, grants or rebates.
“Everybody thought, ‘We are Hollywood. Why do we have to do anything?,’” said Lori Balton, a top location manager, whose list of credits spans nearly 40 years and includes such films as “Heat” and “Once Upon a Time in … Hollywood.”
“They always thought that they had the golden goose. And it was going to keep laying eggs and instead, it packed up its bags and moved.”
Earlier this year, while speaking at Burbank City Hall chambers, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) dropped some sobering data: 45% of all U.S. films and scripted television shows were shot abroad in 2025, up from 33% in 2022.
Like most filmmakers, Miles Millar would prefer to work in Los Angeles, where he lives, but he hasn’t done so for 25 years, since he was a co-producer and writer on the CBS action series “Martial Law.”
“It is not financially viable to shoot the kinds of shows we do here,” said Millar, whose work includes “Smallville” and “Beetlejuice Beetlejuice.”
It was too expensive to film in Los Angeles, so the Netflix hit “Wednesday” shot its first season in Romania before relocating the show to Ireland.
(Netflix)
When Millar and his “Wednesday” co-creator and co-showrunner Alfred Gough began pre-production on the first season of the Netflix hit series about five years ago, L.A. as a location wasn’t even discussed.
They settled on Romania. Tim Burton, “Wednesday’s” executive producer and primary director, “loved the idea,” said Millar, noting that the director was predisposed to its gloomy and gothic wonders, having once visited Dracula’s castle in a Transylvanian mountain village with rocker Alice Cooper.
“We built the whole town of Jericho and six standing sets at a huge scale. There was no way you could even begin to construct the level and scale of sets that we did, in L.A.,” he said. “We’re talking about the difference of tens of millions of dollars.”
Still, the former Eastern Bloc country had its challenges. The crew didn’t speak English and its promised tax rebates never materialized.
When “Wednesday” was picked up for a second season (it is now filming its third), the show moved to Ireland, where it received more than $23 million in tax credits last year, according to the country’s Tax and Customs office.
“The last thing I want to do is shoot thousands of miles away from my family for nine months, year after year,” Millar said. But it has come down to “where do we get the most bang for the buck?”
Outsourcing scores and VFX
Other critical components of filmmaking, including visual effects and musical scoring, have also been outsourced over several years.
L.A. was once home to 18 film scoring stages that could accommodate full symphony orchestras. Today only three remain, driven away partly by high labor costs and cheaper overseas competition.
Similarly, many visual effects studios have moved elsewhere. Vancouver alone has dozens of visual effects studios, including Sony Pictures Imageworks and a major branch of Industrial Light & Magic.
“We’ve allowed that piece of the market to leave,” said Marielle Abaunza, president of the California Post Alliance, an advocacy group backing a state bill offering post-production firms their own tax breaks, similar to what New York offers.
“For 16 years, places like New York have slowly been building up their talent, their facilities, their relationships with filmmakers and their relationships with studios,” Abaunza said.
Even as other states and foreign governments invested in their own film industries and began luring away productions from California, lawmakers in Sacramento were initially skeptical of giving tax breaks to producers. Some critics saw them as little more than a handout that diverted resources from more pressing needs such as healthcare and education.
“If you’re on the outside looking in, there is this false sense that everyone who works in Hollywood has to be rich whether you’re crew or not,” said Amy Baer, a producer and former Sony executive who now runs Artists Equity, Ben Affleck and Matt Damon’s production company.
As production losses mounted in L.A., a coalition of labor and industry groups lobbied then governor and actor Arnold Schwarzenegger to take action.
Schwarzenegger, a longtime champion of tax credits, was able to get a program passed as part of an economic stimulus provision of the state’s 2009 budget. It was dubbed “The Ugly Betty” bill, named after the ABC show that had relocated from L.A. to New York.
Though hailed as a significant step, the new film sweeteners had some key limitations. The pool of money was small — capped at $100 million annually over five years. And it couldn’t be applied to offset the cost of actors’ salaries, a key driver of budgets.
In reality, the program was too small and restrictive to compete with a growing crop of rivals that had larger tax breaks and fewer restrictions.
Chief among them was the United Kingdom, which soon began to attract a number of big-budget movies thanks to a hugely popular 25% cash rebate on production expenses, including money spent on actors’ salaries and other above-the-line costs.
In a paradigm-shifting move, Warner Bros. purchased Leavesden Studios outside of London in 2010, investing more than $160 million into the facility. Much of the blockbusters “Wonder Woman” and “Barbie” were filmed there.
Although the California program was tripled to $330 million annually starting in 2014, it did little to halt the continued exodus of film work. Marvel Studios began moving its production operations to Georgia, enticed by the state’s uncapped tax credits that could be used for actors’ salaries. Both “Black Panther” and “Avengers: Infinity War” were filmed largely at Trilith Studios in Fayetteville, Ga. Another historic town east of Atlanta attracted so many movies and TV shows it became known as “Hollywood of the South.” (Last year, Marvel shifted most of its operations to the U.K. in search of even bigger cost savings.)
Marvel Studios, which filmed blockbusters such as “Black Panther” in Georgia, has since shifted operations to the U.K.
(Film Frame / Marvel Studios)
While numerous studio facilities lay empty here, streamers and studios have built major production hubs outside of L.A. Though it still shoots dozens of productions in L.A., Netflix has spent billions to operate production hubs abroad while constructing massive facilities in places like New Jersey and New Mexico.
“Everyone kept saying, if we have more tax credits, then at least we’ll be able to bring production back,” said Monica Levinson, a veteran producer who has worked on FX’s “Love Story” and the movie “Zoolander.” “Well, that didn’t happen. And the crews got better and better out of the country.”
Rising costs
As the rest of the world courted Hollywood, L.A. did little to help itself.
Despite recent improvements to streamline and reduce costs, the city’s film approval system remains a maze of multi-layered permitting, fees and complex logistics, location managers say. The Greater L.A. area has more than 100 jurisdictions, many of which have their own rules, regulations and permitting fees for filming.
Filming in L.A. also has become more expensive compared with other film hubs due in part to higher labor costs and mandatory staffing requirements, such as paid on-set fire safety monitors, and traffic and parking controls.
What’s more, unlike New York, the city doesn’t have its own film commissioner who could advocate for the industry.
An L.A. commissioner would be “somebody that is beating the drum 365 days a year that is not aligned with a special interest other than creating more production in California, which makes our state and our people prosperous,” said Scott Budnick, a producer on the wildly successful “The Hangover” franchise who lobbied for the state’s enhanced film tax credits.
For a time, the loss of market share was masked by a surge in local TV shoots as studios spent heavily to supply content to their new streaming platforms.
But the pandemic and back-to-back strikes by actors and writers roiled the industry. Studios laid off thousands, cut back on films slates and slashed TV spending and it never rebounded. Film incentives became even more critical for those deciding where to shoot.
By the time Gov. Gavin Newsom announced a plan in October 2024 to more than double funding for the film and TV tax credit program, to $750 million annually (closer to New York’s annual allocation of $800 million, although it retained annual caps and doesn’t count actors’ salaries), the industry outlook was bleak.
“I think there was a tipping point between COVID and the strikes that shone a very bright light on the fact that the majority of production had fled the state,” said Baer, the producer.
There are a few bright spots, however.
The critically acclaimed HBO hit medical drama “The Pitt” is filmed almost entirely on the Warner Bros. lot in Burbank, and has injected tens of millions into the local economy while sustaining nearly 1,000 jobs. Two other Emmy-award winning series, Apple TV’s “The Studio” and HBO’s “Hacks,” which just ended, also shot locally.
At Jonathan Nolan‘s urging, Amazon agreed to relocate his post-apocalyptic series “Fallout” to Los Angeles in 2024 after filming its first season in New York, Utah and Namibia. The show received $67 million in California tax credits for its second and third seasons.
Walton Goggins plays the dual role of Cooper Howard and The Ghoul in Amazon’s post-apocalyptic series “Fallout.”
(Courtesy of Prime Video)
“We want to keep shooting here,” Nolan said. “I don’t want to pack my kids off to the back end of beyond just for the privilege of being able to continue doing what I’m doing.”
To build support for the expanded credits, Nolan last year allowed state lawmakers to visit the sets of “Fallout,” including at the Melody Ranch in Santa Clarita.
“I think they were struck by just how big an endeavor this is,” said Nolan, whose brother Christopher is director of “The Odyssey,” (The epic film was shot across Greece, Sicily and several other countries.) “These are hundreds or thousands of jobs on one production alone, hundreds of millions of dollars being put in the local economy.”
Nolan and others in the industry admit the California program is imperfect.
Mayor Karen Bass, who backed the tax credit program in 2009 when she was speaker of the California Assembly, has touted the success of the expanded incentives, saying they’ve created “thousands of good-paying union jobs … right here in Los Angeles, bringing direct investment to our community.”
Since the expanded program went into effect last July, 179 projects have generated $7.2 billion in direct production spending, bringing nearly 38,000 cast and crew jobs to the state, according to the California Film Commission.
“We remain committed to supporting the entertainment industry here and feel optimistic and energized by the response from the community to the program’s modernization and enhancements,” Colleen Bell, the commission’s executive director, said in a statement.
Bass, who is up for reelection, said she would redouble efforts to remove tax credit caps and further reduce film permitting fees “because this industry is core to the history, culture and economic power of Los Angeles.”
The question, however, is whether L.A. is still core to the film industry.
Earlier this year, writer and director Ryan Coogler, who won an Oscar for his “Sinners” screenplay, began filming the pilot for a reboot of “The X-Files.”
During the “Happy Sad Confused” podcast, Coogler called the drama “one of the most beautiful American television shows ever made” and assured fans that while he planned to put his own stamp on the seminal series, his version would pay homage to the original.
“We intend on having both monsters of the week and also the overarching conspiracy,” he said.
And like the original series, it was shot in Vancouver.
U.S. President Donald Trump (R) meets with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney (L) on Oct. 7, 2025. Trump on Sunday said Canada wants the “benefits of being a state, without being one.” File Photo by Shawn Thew/UPI | License Photo
Aug. 23 (UPI) — U.S. President Donald Trump on Sunday accused Canada of wanting the “benefits of being a state, without being one” as trade tensions between the U.S. and its northern neighbor escalate.
“Canada wants the benefits of being a State, without being one!!!,” Trump posted on social media overnight. “They have also charged our great farmers, for many years, massive amounts of Tariffs. No more!!!”
Trump’s remarks came after Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Ottawa next month would impose retaliatory tariffs on the U.S. after the Trump administration’s 50% tariffs on Canada took effect.
Carney told a press conference that his government would “match Washington’s new tariffs dollar for dollar in order to protect Canadian workers, farmers, families and businesses.”
He said further details on the retaliatory tariffs would be released in the “coming days,” with the levies targeting steel, dairy, appliances, agricultural equipment, pulp and paper, and electronics.
Carney said Ottawa is “reluctantly” taking this step.
Trump has previously discussed making Canada the 51st state, which Canadian leaders have rejected.
Big-city mayors are giving poll workers panic buttons in case election skeptics question their work. County and state officials are gaming out responses to immigration raids near voting centers.
Lawyers for Democratic states and civic groups are pre-writing legal challenges to ballot seizures. And Democratic aides in Washington are preparing members of Congress to push back in the court of public opinion against any baseless claims of voter fraud in competitive districts.
Across California and the nation, civic organizations, voting rights advocates and Democratic leaders are preparing for a raft of potential actions by the Trump administration to interfere in, subvert or deny November’s midterm vote.
President Trump, an election denier for years, has without evidence described the U.S. election system as badly corrupted by fraud and dangerously vulnerable to both domestic and foreign interference.
He has said he would do “anything necessary” to have “honest elections,” and has tried since returning to office to unilaterally rewrite the rules for voting nationwide and wrest control of elections from the states through executive orders and other administrative measures.
Now, he has declined to rule out additional and unprecedented steps to force his will on the November election, including through emergency declarations and military deployments, and in February suggested Republicans should simply take over voting in blue states.
Election experts say there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud in American elections, despite Trump’s allies searching for years.
A worker looks through ballots at a Los Angeles County Ballot Processing Center on Monday, June 8, 2026 in City of Industry, CA. Counting continues on ballots cast for the state’s primary election held June 2.
(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)
Much of the work to resist any Trump interference or power grab is being done quietly to avoid revealing too much of the strategy to the Trump administration or stoking unnecessary fear among voters.
It is designed to match what Trump’s opponents see as his three-part “interference playbook” — to “deceive” voters before the election, “disrupt” the vote itself and “deny” any unfavorable results after, said Justin Vail of Protect Democracy, a prominent litigant against the administration.
“The threats are real,” Vail said, “but the preparation is larger and more coordinated than ever before.”
The scenarios being planned for include the president deploying troops or immigration agents to polling sites to intimidate voters, fomenting unrest as a pretext to declare a national emergency, claiming fraud in the ballot counts of key congressional races or commanding the U.S. Postal Service to intervene in mail ballot delivery.
All told, the efforts amount to an unprecedented exercise to ensure the nation’s elections are safe from its own federal government.
They also reflect a deterioration in trust between states and counties overseeing elections, voting rights and pro-democracy advocates and a federal administration that has denigrated their work and tried to take control of voting away from states.
As public frustration with the economy mounts and Trump’s approval rating sinks, Democrats have become hopeful their party will retake power in Congress. Trump, meanwhile, has suggested that alleged election integrity problems will be the culprit if Republicans lose.
In California, 61% of voters recently identified federal inference in November as a “major concern,” according to a UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll co-sponsored by The Times.
“We are taking this threat really seriously,” said Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who helped form a Senate task force to prepare. “Politically, I’m very optimistic about the midterms. But I’m also deeply concerned with the president’s willingness to interfere with them — and the fact that, unlike even in 2020, where there were at least some people around him to try to constrain what he was doing, all those people are gone.”
President Donald Trump is seen on a screen as his supporters cheer during a rally on the National Mall on January 6, 2021 in Washington, DC. Trump supporters gathered in the nation’s capital today to protest the ratification of President-elect Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory over President Trump in the 2020 election.
(Samuel Corum / Getty Images)
Much of the work is legal preparation among Democratic state attorneys general and lawyers with leading civic organizations. Nothing is being ruled out after Trump’s supporters, at his goading, violently attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, following his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden.
Other preparation is political, as members of Congress, mayors and other elected officials position themselves to use their bully pulpits and legislative powers to punch back. And grassroots campaigns are also unfolding, as community leaders recruit voters to defend their local elections, including online.
“This is an all-hands-on-deck task,” said Skye Perryman, president of the nonpartisan legal organization Democracy Forward. “We’re anticipating scenarios we haven’t seen before in the United States.”
Trump, who has never accepted his 2020 loss to Biden despite scores of reviews and audits confirming the result, has consistently sought to undermine Americans’ trust in elections, telling the nation in a prime-time speech last month that the voting system was “broken” and claiming that the SAVE America Act, a strict Republican-proposed voter ID and citizenship measure, is necessary to fix it.
The White House said it wouldn’t respond to hypothetical questions about the midterm election, but said anyone who breaks voting laws will be held accountable. Lauren Bis, a White House spokesperson, blamed “extreme liberal Democrats” for undermining U.S. confidence in elections by blocking the SAVE America Act, which Trump has failed to push through Congress.
Bis claimed voters support such changes, and said “President Trump is absolutely right: We fix this now, or we lose our country.”
Causes for concern
The fears of interference are driven by Trump’s long record of election denial; his recent insistence that the midterms are vulnerable to both domestic fraud and foreign interference; his success installing loyalists and fellow election deniers in powerful positions throughout his government; and his current administration’s many attempts to usurp control over state voting processes, including through executive orders, lawsuits and legislation.
Sen. Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) (C) departs after a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump and Republican senators at the U.S. Capitol on June 24, 2026 in Washington, DC. President Trump is visiting Capitol Hill to attend a closed-door luncheon with the Republican Senate Steering Committee to push his SAVE America Act, which would impose strict voter ID and proof-of-citizenship requirements in federal elections.
(Kevin Dietsch / Getty Images)
Some analysts saw Trump’s speech last month as laying the groundwork for greater intervention in November, and he raised further alarm this month by entertaining a suggestion from conservative radio host and election conspiracy theorist Wayne Allyn Root that the president has “the right to declare a national security emergency” to unilaterally enforce new voting restrictions.
“Stranger things have happened,” Trump responded.
The White House has previously downplayed the likelihood of immigration agents being deployed to polling locations, but Trump has refused to rule it out. Legal experts say such a move would probably be swiftly blocked by courts, as would any unlawful deployment of military troops to polls.
Some voting experts said Trump’s efforts shouldn’t be blown out of proportion, particularly given federal courts’ dim view of them to date.
David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, noted Trump’s executive orders on elections were blocked, the Justice Department is 0 for 23 in cases demanding state voter rolls, and the primaries have run smoothly with high turnout — showing the president is “having very little effect.”
Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, said it is “important that people be aware that there are threats, but to not let those threats be debilitating” or prevent them from voting.
Civic experts are urging regular voters to help debunk misinformation about voting within their communities. Democracy Forward has asked people to take one civic-minded action per day leading up to the election, while Indivisible, a progressive grassroots organization, is training volunteers nationwide to mount public push-back to any interference.
Coordination in Congress
A Senate aide who spoke with The Times on condition of anonymity said members of the Senate task force meet regularly to plan for as many potential forms of interference as possible — and that there is “no bottom” to what they’re considering.
Task force members are studying nuanced local election laws to understand how Congress members should respond to any federal interference in their home states, and working on “coordinated messaging” that all members can use in response to immigration raids or other broad interference, the aide said.
National Guard troops stand in the shade at The Park at LeDroit in Northwest on August 12, 2026 in Washington, DC. U.S. President Donald Trump is claiming credit for Washington’s dramatic crime decline a year after Trump sent thousands of National Guard troops to the nation’s Capitol, but the evidence shows crime was already falling before his federal intervention and the extent to which his policies accelerated that decline remains disputed.
(Andrew Harnik / Getty Images)
They are also reading “line by line” through recent legal decisions limiting National Guard deployments and other federal actions to identify any “loopholes” the administration might exploit.
They are paying particular attention to districts with competitive congressional races and where past problems have arisen. In California, they’ve studied the recent seizure of ballots by Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and the criticism of slow ballot counting statewide, the aide said.
Schiff said the scenario he is “most concerned” about is one in which the president or his allies “seed” unrest in big cities to “give the president a pretext, Reichstag fire-like, to call out the military or invoke the Insurrection Act or call out ICE or Border Patrol.”
The Reichstag fire erupted in the German parliament four weeks after Adolf Hitler was sworn in as chancellor in 1933, and was used to justify a sweeping crackdown on political opponents and the suspension of civil liberties — ushering in Nazi rule.
Schiff said lawsuits will be a necessary but “very imperfect remedy” in such a scenario, and Democrats will need to develop a more robust response combining “litigation with mobilization” and legislative oversight.
Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, which has election oversight, is helping to create an election observer program for hotly contested races, and has warned his colleagues that he will call a vote on any election-related emergency Trump declares, so that they must co-sign or resist it.
Separately in the House, staffers have been building their own “road map” for how to deal with a laundry list of “terrible things that bad-faith actors who seek to subvert the election could do,” with a principal focus on any ways they might disrupt the Jan. 3 swearing in of new Congress members, said a House aide involved in the preparations there, who spoke with The Times on the condition of anonymity.
The U.S. Capitol, on July 20, 2026 in Washington, DC.
(Tom Brenner / Getty Images)
House staffers are also looking at how court imposed limits on Trump’s emergency powers might be “exploited, weaponized [or] ignored” by the administration, including the Justice Department.
A Justice Department spokesperson said the department is “working diligently” to fulfill the demands of Trump’s election-related executive order purporting to “strengthen the integrity of our elections,” which courts have blocked, and has “statutory authority to enforce our nation’s election laws, including through requesting state voter rolls,” which courts have also blocked.
Assistant Atty. Gen. Harmeet Dhillon, who heads the department’s civil rights division and has threatened local elections officials with legal consequences if they don’t comply with her voter roll demands, said her division “has a statutory mandate to enforce our federal voting rights laws, and ensuring the voting public’s confidence in the integrity of our elections is a top priority of this administration.”
State and local preparations
California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said attorneys from his office and similar Democratic ones across the country are “hard at work planning, preparing, strategizing, researching, getting ready for all the different ways the Trump administration can break the law.”
California Attorney General Rob Bonta, right, holds a press conference at the Ronald Reagan State Building in downtown Los Angeles on Thursday, May 14, 2026.
(Christina House/Los Angeles Times)
That includes any attempts to seize ballots, deploy federal law enforcement or the military, or command the U.S. Postal Service to interfere with mail ballots, he said. “The right to vote is the right from which all other rights flow. It’s fundamental. We need to protect it.”
Dean Logan, registrar-recorder and county clerk for Los Angeles County, said he has a responsibility to ensure that “election operations remain secure and uninterrupted” no matter the threat, and is taking steps to do so, though he declined to address potential acts by Trump. Long Beach Mayor Rex Richardson said big cities are also preparing, including to prevent harassment of voters or election workers.
“Cities are where we host vote centers. It’s where the volunteers come from, where people go with their questions,” Richardson said. “We have to pay attention to national rhetoric. We have to be aware of anxiety that might — tensions that may — arise.”
As a teenager before he was even allowed to vote, Charlie Comfort organized for then-Sen. Barack Obama in his hometown of Oskaloosa, Iowa.
Now he’s a Republican.
Meet Charlie. He lives in Waterloo.
He’s 23 and this will be his third presidential caucus.
Charlie’s first foray into politics was during the 2008 campaign. He met Obama at the Smokey Row Coffeehouse, one of the most popular stops for candidates in Oskaloosa, on the Fourth of July in 2007.
Obama campaign volunteers. (Handout)
It was Malia Obama’s 9th birthday, and the shop’s staff put the candidate’s daughter’s name up on the marquee inside.
After Obama spoke, Charlie ran home excited and ready to help.
He wasn’t old enough to vote but dedicated hours to organizing his neighbors, teachers and anyone else who would listen. The Obama campaign said Charlie, a high school student, made more phone calls than any other volunteer in town.
His hard work — at age 15 — earned him a prime spot next to the candidate in this group photo.
They clearly illustrated the divided nature of the state: Martha Comfort backed Hillary Clinton, Keith Comfort preferred John Edwards and their son was traveling all over the region to put up Obama lawn signs instead of finishing his homework.
Here they are, eight years ago.
Martha Comfort, a legal assistant in town, was working as a Clinton precinct captain. Keith Comfort, a banker, was a little more passive about his support for Edwards, who would ultimately come in second in the caucuses (and later drop out of the race).
Here’s a semi-awkward clip where I tried to get them to pretend they were in a caucus.
His interest in education policy had an unintended consequence — he didn’t like that Obama, for whom he’d worked so hard to get to the White House, had not revamped the No Child Left Behind Act as promised. He found himself intrigued by the Republican candidates coming to town in the hopes of winning the Iowa caucuses and challenging Obama in 2012.
In the 2012 Iowa caucuses, he was a Newt Gingrich precinct captain.
But he changed his mind on the way in, and his first caucus vote ultimately went to ex-Sen. Rick Santorum. “I appreciate he spent so much time in Iowa,” Charlie says now.
Once Mitt Romney won the nomination, Charlie set out to help the GOP in the swing state.
That fall, he appeared in a piece by “PBS NewsHour.” (About four minutes into the piece, interviewed at the Smokey Row coffee shop, of course.)
Fast forward four years, and he’s got a tough choice to make.
Charlie has moved from Oskaloosa to Waterloo and is working in marketing. He spent his weekend “chasing the candidates around” because he was undecided as the long campaign for the caucuses comes to a close.
Like most Iowans interested in this quirky process, he’s met many of the hopefuls as they make their way across the state. He even introduced former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush at an event at Smokey Row in October. But that didn’t really help him make up his mind.
“I am disappointed by all the anger, rhetoric and hatred that has been spewed by the party this year,” he says. “I am disappointed that the candidates who would support more moderate values have balked on that to try and get more of a conservative base turning out and I don’t think the Republican platform has been expressed as well as it could.”
Martha and Keith Comfort are still Democrats.
But they also are still split on their preferred candidate.
Keith Comfort gave his first-ever political donation, to Sen. Bernie Sanders. Martha Comfort isn’t working on Clinton’s behalf this time, but she’s still in her corner — probably.
“Now I’m on the fence and I may lean towards Bernie,” she says. “I like what he stands for and I look at Hillary and she really does have the experience but she does have some baggage. But I guess everybody does.”
Then again … “I’m leaning to Hillary because she’s realistic about what she’s promising. She knows what takes place in the office of the president and the process to get things through Congress.”
She says she’ll be resolute in her choice before walking into her neighborhood caucus meeting Monday night: “Nobody is going to persuade me there, even if my husband is across the room.”
As for Charlie, he’s made up his mind.
Iowa caucusgoer Charlie Comfort and presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina
Charlie Comfort and Carly Fiorina. (Courtesy of Charlie Comfort)
He didn’t even need the whole weekend.
“This is who I plan to caucus for,” Charlie said Saturday via Facebook Messenger.
It wasn’t intended to have dramatic effect, but the photo didn’t come through for several minutes.
But there he is, smiling next to former Hewlett-Packard Chief Executive Carly Fiorina, considered a long shot in Iowa and nationally.
“She seems genuine, authentic. She has a business background and has experience with policymakers, whether it be domestically or foreign. Ultimately, I think she is in it for the right reasons — to help fix America,” he said.
“I am very impressed with her secretary-to-CEO story. Only in America.”
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — A Missouri judge has allowed new U.S. House districts backed by President Trump to be used in the November elections, rejecting a bid by to put the Republican-friendly districts to a statewide vote of the people.
The ruling Wednesday by Cole County Circuit Judge Daniel Green is a victory for Republicans seeking to hold onto their slim majority in the U.S. House. But the case is likely to end up in the state Supreme Court.
Missouri’s new districts already were used in the August primaries. On that same day, Republican Secretary of State Denny Hoskins rejected a petition with thousands of signatures seeking to force a November referendum on the map. Hoskins asserted that Missouri’s Constitution doesn’t allow a referendum on congressional redistricting.
The judge agreed with Hoskins and other Republicans, who joined in defense of the new map.
“The Missouri Constitution does not supply any statement — let alone a clear one — reallocating authority over congressional redistricting away from the General Assembly to a referendum process,” Green wrote in the ruling.
Opponents of the redistricting plan quickly announced an appeal.
“Everyone knows that Cole County is not the final decision here,” said Richard von Glahn, executive director of People Not Politicians, who sued to try to place the new map on the ballot. “After months of delay, we are pleased to be moving forward to the Missouri Supreme Court to enforce our constitutional rights.”
Missouri’s current U.S. House delegation is made up of six Republicans and two Democrats who were elected from districts with boundaries drawn after the 2020 census.
But Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe called the Legislature into a special session on redistricting last year after Trump urged Republican-led states to redraw congressional boundaries to their advantage ahead of the midterms.
Missouri’s revised map is designed to help Republicans defeat Democratic U.S. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Kansas City. It reassigns portions of Kansas City to two neighboring districts represented by Republicans and stretches the remainder of Cleaver’s 5th Congressional District far eastward into Republican-heavy rural areas. About 59% of its voters are new to the 5th District, according to an Associated Press estimate.
State Sen. Rick Brattin won a Republican primary in the reshaped district in early August. Cleaver was unopposed for the Democratic nomination.
Republicans had argued that the new districts should be used in the November elections even if a voter referendum on the map was allowed to occur at the same time.
Lawsuit highlights dispute about referendum rights
The Missouri Constitution does not specifically say that a referendum can be used to decide congressional redistricting, nor does it forbid it, which is why the issue ended up in court.
Republican Attorney General Catherine Hanaway’s office, which represented the secretary of state in court, argued that congressional redistricting is a legislative duty not subject to referendum without specific constitutional permission.
The attorney general and the Republican Party also argued it was too late to switch district boundaries before the November election. Changing districts after the primary would cause “widespread voter confusion” and an “erosion in confidence in the integrity of the state’s elections,” said John Gore, an attorney for national, congressional and state Republican committees.
The judge agreed, ruling that a district swap after the primary would violate federal law.
It’s been more than 100 years since a Missouri redistricting plan faced a referendum. In 1922, voters rejected a new congressional map passed by the Republican-led Legislature. The legitimacy of that referendum petition was not challenged in court.
Redistricting battle spread to numerous states
Missouri’s mid-decade redistricting effort has been among the most litigated nationally, triggering about a dozen lawsuits over the past year.
The Republican-led state was the second, after Texas, to respond to Trump’s call to redraw congressional districts. Several other states followed. All told, Republicans hope to win as many as 16 additional seats from new House maps enacted in eight states: Texas, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, Tennessee, Louisiana and Alabama. Democrats, whose counterattack faced several setbacks, think they could win up to six additional seats from new districts in California and Utah.
It remains to be seen whether the redistricting works as intended for Republicans. The president’s party historically has lost congressional seats in the midterms, and Trump’s poor approval ratings could provide an extra hurdle for Republican candidates.
Lieb writes for the Associated Press. AP journalist Hannah Recht contributed to this report from Washington.
Californians are more concerned about the Trump administration interfering in the state’s midterm elections than they are about voter fraud, noncitizens voting illegally or foreign interference, according to a new poll.
A majority of voters — 61% — identified potential federal interference as a “major concern” heading into November, slightly more than the 59% who cited possible foreign interference as such, according to the poll from the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies, co-sponsored by The Times.
By comparison, 41% of California voters identified voter fraud and 37% identified noncitizens voting as major concerns, the poll found.
The polling reflects the liberal leanings of the state, where registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, as well as the nation’s hyperpartisan divide on voting issues and vulnerabilities.
That divide has been driven for years by President Trump’s relentless criticism of U.S. elections, particularly in large blue states such as California, and recently by his administration’s attempts to wrest control over voting processes from the states based on unverified claims of widespread fraud and the fierce pushback against those claims from California Democrats and other liberal leaders around the country.
The White House has dismissed concerns about interference and accused Democrats of obstructing its efforts to protect American elections from fraud, including through the proposed SAVE America Act — which would enforce strict new ID and proof-of-citizenship requirements for voters nationwide.
While 80% of Democratic respondents to the poll said potential federal interference in the state’s elections was a major concern, just 28% of Republican respondents identified it as such.
Voter fraud was identified as a major concern by 84% of Republican voters but just 21% of Democratic voters, the poll found. Noncitizens voting illegally also was identified as a major concern by 85% of Republicans but just 12% of Democrats.
Republicans also have substantial concerns about the security of mail ballots and how slowly California counts its vote, while Democrats were far less concerned about those issues, the poll found.
Mark DiCamillo, the poll’s director, said it clearly reflects the partisan divide around election issues and “shows that in this state, federal interference is a big deal — more so than in other places around the country.”
He called that a “big finding” in line with previous polls that found “Californians are very concerned about prioritizing efforts to defend democracy and to protect election systems,” including in the face of threats from Trump — who routinely has focused on the state in his regular attacks on election integrity.
“For 61% of Californians to say that’s a major concern to them in terms of the threats to the election system, I think that’s very newsworthy,” DiCamillo said.
He also noted the particularly stark difference between state Democrats and Republicans on the issue of noncitizens voting.
“Nearly 90% of Democrats say that’s not a concern, whereas 85% of Republicans feel it is,” he said. “Californians have a lot of noncitizens in the state, but Democrats don’t think they’re infecting the voter rolls, so they’re not concerned about it.”
That was striking, DiCamillo said, given how much Trump has pointed to California to claim that noncitizens are voting.
“Obviously, the Democrats are very strongly opposed to the president, what he’s trying to do, and the Republicans are supportive,” DiCamillo said.
Other findings in the poll also support that conclusion.
For instance, while Trump has claimed without evidence that mail ballots are a major source of fraud and their use should be reined in, the poll found that 72% of Californians approve of mail ballots as a primary method for voting in the state — with 58% saying they strongly approve.
California law requires every registered voter in the state to be sent a mail ballot, and more than 80% of voters have used such ballots in recent elections.
Trump also repeatedly has accused California officials of failing to secure state elections against fraud and of cheating as they count later-arriving mail ballots. But the poll found that Californians by greater than a 2-to-1 margin — 65% to 31% — are confident local election officials are accurately and fairly counting ballots. However, the poll did find that more than half of respondents, 53%, had concerns about delays in California’s vote-counting process.
Overall, 64% of respondents were confident in the integrity of the state’s election system, compared to 34% who were not.
Kim Alexander, president of the California Voter Foundation, downplayed the threats of voter fraud and noncitizens voting in the state, but acknowledged they are real concerns for some voters — which is a problem in itself.
“I see election security as both a matter of actual security and perceived security. And the truth is that we have a great deal of actual security in California elections, but, unfortunately, that security is not being perceived by some voters,” she said. She attributed that in part to the “constant drumbeat that we’ve had now for a decade, coming from the occupant of the White House, that our elections are rigged.”
Alexander said California law requires registering voters to prove and attest to their identity and has multiple verification measures to ensure people casting ballots are who they say they are. She said there are “common sense” reasons why noncitizens do not try to vote — including that it requires them to turn over personal information and could be grounds for criminal charges and deportation, which is “a huge disincentive.”
Alexander also said Trump administration interference in the midterms is a real concern, but so is overhyping the threat to the point it discourages voters from casting ballots.
“Not to dismiss the threats — the threats are real — but the more we talk about them, the more we scare voters,” Alexander said. “I’ve encountered voters who’ve said this to me: ‘What’s the point in voting when they’re just gonna cheat?’ Or, you know: ‘It’s all rigged.’ And that’s part of the play here — is to scare people into thinking that voting doesn’t matter.”
To counter that, Alexander said it is “really important that people be aware that there are threats, but to not let those threats be debilitating or to allow them to dissuade people from wanting to participate.”
The poll surveyed 4,207 registered voters in California from Aug. 3 to 9, online in English and Spanish, and has an estimated margin of error of about 2.5 percentage points in either direction.
The head of one of Hollywood’s largest talent agencies warned state leaders that a new budget bill threatens job gains from California’s film and TV credit program.
Legislators earlier this year passed a provision in the state budget that extends limitations on corporate tax credits, including a $5-million state tax credit cap each year.
But film industry advocates say the corporate tax credit cap will hurt film producers and undercut the effectiveness of the state’s expanded film and TV tax credits.
Lawmakers more than doubled annual funding for the program last year to $750 million in an effort to boost jobs and stem the exodus of film work from California.
CAA Chief Executive Bryan Lourd called for state leaders to create an exemption for tax credits earned under the expanded film and TV program.
“Without this fix, we risk destabilizing a program that is critical to keeping film and television production in California and the thousands of jobs it supports,” Lourd wrote in an Aug. 11 letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom, California State Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) and President Pro Tempore Monique Limón (D-Santa Barbara).
“California must make itself competitive with the rest of the country and the world if it hopes to have a thriving entertainment ecosystem,” Lourd wrote. “Honoring commitments that have already been made to the entertainment industry is an essential step in achieving that goal.”
Film industry advocates expected producers would be exempted from the tax credit cap.
“It’s a reversal of California economic policy as it relates to the entertainment industry in an unhelpful and uncompetitive direction,” said Hilary Krane, CAA’s chief legal officer, in an interview. . “It undermines people’s ability to plan for the economics of the program because they all counted on a certain amount coming in under the previous rules that they were entitled to and had, but now can’t use.”
“The result of the changes is that production companies will lose the full value of credits already earned in exchange for creating middle-class entertainment industry jobs and other economic benefits to the State,” the Entertainment Union Coalition said last month.
Nick Miller, Rivas’ spokesperson, said the state Assembly is taking a hard look at the issue.
“Our lawmakers strengthened California’s film and TV jobs program last year and will keep fighting for creative industry workers,” Miller said in an email.
Newsom’s office did not immediately return a request for comment.
Time is running out for a fix to happen this session, which ends in less than two weeks.
State Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur (D-Los Angeles) said state leaders are working on introducing legislation soon to address the issue.
Already, tens of thousands of jobs have come back to Southern California due to the modernization of the film and TV tax credit program, he said.
“We just saw the beginning of that resurgence and we don’t want to nip that in the bud,” Zbur said in an interview.
WASHINGTON — As the year’s midterm primaries draw to a close, Tuesday’s results in Florida, Wyoming and Alaska continued to underscore an unpredictable election season marked by unreliable polls, intra-party divides and surprise showings by political outsiders.
In one high-profile surprise, democratic socialist state Rep. Angie Nixon’s easily defeated former Army intelligence officer Alexander Vindman in Florida’s U.S. Senate primary, despite Vindman having raised 16 times as much money as the new Democratic nominee, according to OpenSecrets, a nonprofit that tracks campaign finance.
According to Florida Politics, a digital media outlet, a now-deleted Change Research poll showed Vindman leading Nixon by 10 points. At that time, 41% of Democrats polled were still undecided.
In the race for a Senate seat Democrats hope to flip, former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola outpolled incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan, with another Republican Dan Sullivan — this one a retired teacher — also making the cut for the four-person, ranked-choice general election in November.
The results from Tuesday night also show that President Trump’s influence on his party’s base may be dwindling. Three of his endorsed candidates in Wyoming and Florida, both safe red states, were defeated.
Here are four takeaways from Tuesday’s results:
Democratic socialist overcame a huge cash disadvantage
Nixon, who recently joined the Democratic Socialists of America and the Working Families Party, won in a massive upset against Vindman, a moderate selected to run by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Nixon will face Republican incumbent Sen. Ashley Moody in November in a special election to serve the final two years of former Sen. Marco Rubio’s term. Moody was appointed to the seat by Gov. Ron DeSantis when Rubio became secretary of State.
Through a highly coordinated grassroots campaign, Nixon overcame a $15-million fundraising deficit against Vindman in a state where affordability, high property insurance costs and public infrastructure strain were top concerns for many voters.
Although Vindman had the support of the Democratic establishment his lack of profile in Florida — where he has lived for just three years — was a clear detriment, said Susan MacManus, a political analyst at the University of South Florida.
“Angie Nixon was extremely well known in Democratic circles,” MacManus said. “There’s a battle here in Florida: Do you want a Democratic candidate who’s a fighter, or do you want someone more in line with the establishment? … Nixon had no money, but she had a presence.”
But Nixon still faces a steep battle against Moody, MacManus said. According to state data, Florida has 1.5 million more Republicans than Democrats, meaning that Nixon will have to win over most of the independents — and perhaps convert a few Republicans — to have a shot in the general election.
Florida redistricting had a big effect on House races
In May, DeSantis’ office rearranged districts for the second time this decade to secure more safe-Republican seats in the House of Representatives, shortly after the Supreme Court narrowed the scope of the Voting Rights Act.
In Florida’s 25th District, a newly drawn coastal area north of Miami, incumbent Rep. Jared Moskowitz defeated democratic socialist and activist Oliver Larkin.
The redistricting increased the number of Jewish voters in the district, which likely hurt Larkin’s candidacy because of his openly anti-Israel stance, said Jonathan Cervas, an assistant professor at the Carnegie Mellon Institute for Strategy and Technology.
Moskowitz will face the former mayor of Boca Raton, Scott Singer, in the general election.
In Florida’s Black-majority 20th District, which was redrawn this year, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz finished ahead of four Black rivals in a crowded field, and will face Brent Andersen, an insurance broker, in November. Black leaders criticized Wasserman Schultz, a white 11-term congresswoman, for running in the district.
“She won against a crowded field, but she didn’t win with 50% of the vote,” said Kareem Crayton, vice president of the Brennan Center’s Washington office. “The open question remains: Is she the preferred candidate of African Americans? We’ll see in the general.”
Although these two districts lean slightly blue, data suggest that Republicans will be more competitive in these areas than they were in the 2024 congressional races, Cervas said. He added that this shows Florida’s redistricting efforts were mostly a success, likely adding at least one or two seats in the general election.
Alaska was more competitive than Democrats thought
Some Democratic Party leaders had initially ranked Alaska behind other states with the potential to flip a Senate seat. But they likely will make the Alaska race a higher priority after a strong showing Tuesday by former Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola, who topped the field in the primary against incumbent Sen. Dan Sullivan. It has been 11 years since Alaska last had a Democratic senator.
According to the New York Times, the Alaska Survey Research poll shows Peltola with a two-point lead heading to the general election.
Peltola has run as a centrist Democrat, attacking the Trump administration’s cuts to the federal workforce and lack of resource development in Alaska, which is likely to have wide appeal in a state that Trump won in 2016, 2020 and 2024, but that has suffered in recent months from rising costs and job losses.
Three Trump endorsements fell short
Trump-endorsed incumbent Rep. Cory Mills — the subject of a House Committee Ethics probe stemming from accusations of assault by two women — lost his primary race in Florida’s 7th District to former television reporter Ryan Elijah, making him the 10th Trump-backed candidate to lose in a primary this year.
After the results were known, the president wrote in a Truth Social post: “I told Congressman Cory Mills of Florida, a friend of mine, to get out of the Race, but he wouldn’t listen. He thought he could win, so who can blame him?”
Trump had picked Catalina Lauf to replace Republican Rep. Byron Donalds, only to see her lose to Jim Schwartzel, a businessman-turned-politician. Donalds is the Republican nominee for governor, where he will face Democrat David Jolly, a former Republican House member.
Trump’s pick for Wyoming governor, Superintendent of Public Instruction Megan Degenfelder, was defeated handily by Republican state Sen. Eric Barlow.
Democrat Xavier Becerra pledged on Tuesday to participate in more than one debate against Steve Hilton, his GOP rival in the California governor’s race.
“We will have debates, and between now and Nov. 3, we will continue to go out there and meet with folks to make sure they have an opportunity to see the candidates,” Becerra told reporters after greeting business owners, community leaders and voters in a walking tour of Little Tokyo. “Voters need to have good information. We’ll make sure they have it, and there will be debates.”
Xavier Becerra, center, who is running for governor of California, talks with Roy Kuroyawagi, owner of Japangeles in Little Tokyo on Tuesday.
(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)
Hilton has been needling Becerra for not being as publicly visible on the campaign trail since the two men advanced in the June primary. The British-born conservative strategist and political commentator raises chickens at his Silicon Valley home and has said he named one of them “Xavier.”
“Xavier Becerra wants to be governor while dodging questions from the press and a debate with me,” Hilton posted on the social media platform X earlier this month.”What else do you expect from a lazy, arrogant, entitled ‘empty suit’ 36-year machine politician.”
Becerra held a 55% to 37% lead over Hilton in a UC Berkeley/L.A. Times poll released Thursday. The margin is unsurprising given the edge that Democrats have in voter registration over Republicans in a state that last elected GOP politicians to statewide office in 2006.
“Well, if I were trying to coast, I’d be out on the coast right now instead of here with you all and making a nice visit to Little Tokyo,” he said outside of an Asian-fusion gastropub on an oppressively hot, muggy afternoon. “Listen, this is all about making sure voters have a choice. We’ll get out there and make sure we’re front and center with them … even if it’s a little hot.”
Becerra spoke with reporters after visiting Little Tokyo businesses and chatting with locals and visitors.
When a group of young women pledged to vote for him in the gubernatorial race, Becerra urged them to vote against Proposition 39, a ballot measure that would require Californians to provide government-issued identification when voting and election officials to verify registered voters are U.S. citizens.
“Please vote against that. That would deter people from voting,” Becerra said, making a thumbs-down gesture. “I’m not joking.”
Becerra later told reporters that the proposition, which likely California voters oppose, according to polls, is a direct attack on the state’s elections by President Trump.
“The president has insisted on trying to disrupt elections. When he can’t do it in Washington, D.C., he’s trying to do it in our state directly,” Becerra said. “Prop. 39 is President Trump’s effort to try to interfere in our election. We have to resist it. We have to oppose it. And I hope people know that Prop. 39 is just a prop for Donald Trump. And anyone who believes that we have to see more people vote, we have to see robust elections, should be voting against Prop. 39.”
Becerra also enjoyed a little shopping.
At Japangeles, he purchased a ball cap with “L.A.” superimposed over Japanese characters for “Nihon,” what the Japanese call their own country; at Cafe Dulce, he picked up a fruit tart; and at a 123-year-old Japanese confectionery, he bought sweet mango mochi wrapped in a thin, fluffy pancake.
His visit Tuesday came during the community’s annual Nisei Week festival, which celebrates Japanese American culture and history. Becerra represented the area during his time in Congress. He ran into several people he had known over his long political career, including former Los Angeles City Councilmember Jan Perry, and Brian Kito, the third-generation owner of the Fugetsu-Do Bakery.
Kito showed Becerra a picture of the then-congressman swearing him in as a neighborhood council president more than a decade ago.
“It was a nice reunion,” Kito said. “He’s a true gentleman. … I’m hoping nothing but success for him.”
Kaia Gerber says she had an exorcism after her parents believed she was “possessed” as a child.
While promoting her new FX series “The Shards” on the podcast “The Mitch Churi Chat Show,” the 24-year-old actor and model recalled her experience working with Ryan Murphy on “American Horror Stories” (co-created by Brad Falchuk).
Gerber played a teenage ghost in the 2021 “Horror Stories” spinoff trapped inside the historic Rosenheim Mansion, also known as the Murder House from the first “American Horror Story” season. Concerned about the spooky Los Angeles estate — which served a convent for nuns for half a century — Gerber said her mother, supermodel Cindy Crawford, gave her holy water to take on set.
“She was like, ‘I don’t want you to get possessed,’” Gerber said. “I was told I was possessed as a child.”
Gerber — who during the interview sat next to her co-star Homer Gere — shared that she was “haunted” her whole life.
“I do feel as though I attract beings from the other dimension, in a very casual and chill way,” said Gerber, who was also a cast member in “American Horror Story: Double Feature” (the 10th season of the FX anthology series) in 2021, where her character was involved in an alien abduction.
When questioned by host Mitch Churi if the actor-model had undergone an exorcism, she revealed that she “actually” did.
“They played a didgeridoo all over me. That’s how they did the exorcism,” Gerber said. “That actually did happen. I’ve never talked about it, but it actually did happen.”
The sacred wind instrument — which is created from a eucalyptus tree trunk or branch naturally hollowed out by termites — was developed a thousand years ago by the Aboriginal community in northern Australia and is often used in cultural ceremonies.
Some didgeridoo instrumentalists believe its low-frequency sound waves can foster a state of health and harmony for those in the Aboriginal community. An online search showed no info on it being used in an exorcism.
Regardless, the “Bottoms” actor revealed to the Australian podcast host she was “all healed” now that she was promoting the ’80s slasher TV series, which is based on the autofictional novel by Bret Easton Ellis centering on privileged high school seniors who are stalked by a killer known as the Trawler.
In response to her spiritual update, Churi said, “that’s the devil speaking, I don’t know who to trust.”
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is pitching a plan to help shield local police officers who make immigration arrests from possible financial consequences if they are accused of on-duty misconduct.
The agency is proposing to subsidize liability insurance for state and local officers who are trained and deputized to enforce federal immigration laws, according to a planning document published Friday.
ICE’s partnerships with local departments have soared since President Trump returned to the White House last year and may get an additional boost with liability insurance by removing a hurdle that has made some local police departments reluctant to join. The Associated Press is the first to report on this insurance proposal.
Under the plan, officers would purchase insurance covering up to $500,000 in personal liability, which typically funds legal fees, settlements and judgments. Officers would be reimbursed up to $250 annually — roughly what the insurance is expected to cost.
One prominent critic of ICE’s immigration crackdown said the program would be yet another way for officers to avoid personal accountability for misconduct.
“The concern here is that ICE is going above and beyond to guarantee law enforcement does not have even the slightest risk of liability for violating Americans’ rights while helping ICE arrest people,” said David Bier, director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute, who has called on Congress to make it easier to sue ICE agents for wrongdoing.
ICE outlined the plan in a document informing industry officials that it is considering hiring a contractor to help provide outreach, training and communications support for its so-called 287(g) partnerships with local departments, which are named for a section of a 1996 immigration law. The contractor would hire the insurance vendor and process the reimbursements, among other tasks.
ICE has asked for industry feedback by Thursday. The proposed timeline for launching the program and its estimated cost are unclear.
ICE had no immediate comment on the plan.
Arrests by ICE’s local partners have spiked since last year
During Trump’s second term, ICE has offered generous financial incentives to participating local agencies, increasing the number who have partnered with the federal government, as well as the number of arrests.
Nearly 1,600 agencies in 32 states now have agreements to participate in ICE’s task force model, in which trained local officers can interrogate, arrest and charge people suspected of being in the country illegally, according to ICE data.
Departments qualify for funding to help cover expenses like their officers’ pay, equipment and vehicles. With encouragement from state and local Republican officials, agencies in Florida, Texas, Oklahoma and Georgia have been among the leaders.
Arrests made through such programs jumped to an average of 3,000 per month in the first two months of 2026, according to the most recent ICE data provided to the University of California Berkeley’s Deportation Data Project. That compares to a monthly average of 250 in 2024 under President Biden.
Local departments, officers worried about liability for ICE work
As local officers increasingly carry out federal immigration work, they and their departments have expressed concerns about the civil liability that could result from claims alleging excessive use of force, wrongful arrest and illegal search and seizure, among other things.
That’s because insurance policies that cover their local work may not apply. Pennsylvania’s risk pool, for instance, recently made clear that it would exclude “proactive immigration enforcement activities” from coverage, forcing several participating counties to search for other insurance options.
Butler County Sheriff Michael Slupe said he found insurance to cover his 13 deputies participating in the program at a cost of $20,000 in annual premiums.
“I want to make sure the guys are additionally covered, so we had to spend the money,” he said, adding that federal funding would cover the cost.
Federal officers usually enjoy legal immunities and a government-funded defense when they face lawsuits. But those protections may not always apply to local officers, which has heightened their concerns over liability and the need for insurance.
Although civil lawsuits are the main concern, professional liability insurance typically helps cover legal fees for officers facing criminal investigations as well.
Sheriffs’ group says ICE’s insurance idea sounds promising
Justin Smith, a former Colorado sheriff who is executive director of the National Sheriffs’ Assn., said ICE’s plan sounds promising and that he was eager to speak with ICE about how the plan would work.
Smith said he has shared concerns with ICE that some sheriffs are reluctant to join the partnerships because of the potential liability at a time when immigration enforcement faces intense public protests and media scrutiny. Smith said others who are partnering with ICE have already started facing legal claims tied to their immigration work, which can be costly whether or not deputies are ultimately found to have done anything wrong.
“Right now, any time you are working on immigration there is going to be a much higher potential for there being problems and having suits and issues,” he said. “They’re recognizing that it is a different environment. And I think trying to be good partners with us as best they can.”
Under their agreements, ICE warns local departments that they are responsible for the costs of incidents that give rise to liability. But it seeks to reduce the risk by saying local officers performing ICE-authorized functions are “acting under color of federal authority,” which would bar lawsuits against individual officers.
The agreements also state that local officers who face civil lawsuits can ask the U.S. Department of Justice to represent them, and that ICE will generally support their requests. But the final decision on whether to do so rests with the department.
SACRAMENTO — A state lawmaker from San Diego has proposed fast-tracking the construction of an arena and housing project, drawing criticism from opponents who argue the site is not suitable for large-scale development because of flooding.
State Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson (D-La Mesa) wrote a letter last week to a powerful Assembly chair that outlines proposed amendments to Senate Bill 344 to help Midway Rising, a project backed by Los Angeles Rams owner Stan Kroenke, avoid potential lawsuits related to its environmental review.
“As amended, SB 344 would deem the Midway Rising Specific Plan Subsequent Environmental Impact Report to be in full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA,” Weber Pierson wrote to the Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco, chair of Assembly Rules Committee.
“In order to promote the swift and deliberate development of affordable housing in the City of San Diego, an urgency clause is needed for this measure.”
Developers are seeking to replace the decades-old Pechanga Arena, and build a new 16,000-seat facility, 4,254 homes, including up to 2,000 affordable units, and commercial and outdoor space. The site is south of Mission Bay.
Parts of the development could rise to a maximum height of 25 stories, according to project’s environmental impact report.
Sports teams, including minor league hockey team the San Diego Gulls, play at the Pechanga Arena. The arena is surrounded by parking lots, which are used for weekend swap meets.
The Assembly Rules Committee on Monday approved an urgency clause to Senate Bill 344, which mean it needs a 2/3 vote of both houses to pass and would go into effect immediately upon the governor’s signature.
Weber Pierson told the Times Monday that the amendments intended to help Midway Rising “haven’t crossed” the desk, meaning that the language hasn’t been inserted into Senate Bill 344. If the amendments go into the bill, “then at that point, I think we can have a conversation,” she said.
Brad Termini, the chief executive of Zephyr, one of Midway Rising’s development partners, said the proposed legislation “will help prevent frivolous lawsuits from causing unnecessary delays and keep the project on track to break ground next year, accelerating the delivery of much-needed housing in San Diego.”
The Kroenke Group didn’t immediately provide comment. Kroenke, the owner of the Rams, was announced as the major investor in Midway Rising in 2023.
Former San Diego Assemblymember Lori Saldaña, a longtime critic of the proposal, called the proposed amendments “reckless and rushed.”
“It removes the opportunity for the public and organizations to weigh in,” said Saldaña.
State lawmakers routinely carve out environmental exemptions for proposed sports stadiums, sometime in the closing days of the legislative session. The legislature has until the end of August to pass or reject scores of bills.
Former Senate Leader Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) led his colleagues in passing a bill in 2013 that helped the Sacramento Kings arena by limiting environmental lawsuits. The new arena for the Golden State Warriors basketball team in San Francisco also benefited from CEQA reforms passed by state lawmakers in 2011.
The landmark 1970 legislation is credited with helping to protect the state’s environment, but it is also criticized for blocking development.
Since it passed, the CEQA has been a consideration in how most major projects get approved in California. The law requires the disclosure of any effects a development might have on the environment, an evaluation of alternatives and, in many cases, proposed changes that would reduce those environmental effects to a level of insignificance.
Weber Pierson also previously authored Senate Bill 958, another bill that will help the arena, that is awaiting a vote in the Assembly.
That bill states that the environmental impacts of a project that are associated with increased building height, including noise, shadows, or the potential to attract wildlife, shall not be considered significant impacts on the environment.
The bill only applies to specific developments, including those that are proposed on an graded infill site and those that pay construction workers a prevailing wage.
Weber Pierson said that SB 958 “is not special-interest legislation” during a Aug. 9 public forum about the project, describing it a broad-based housing tool, according to the Peninsula Beacon.
The publication reported that the forum “got testy at several points, with some audience members openly booing” the speakers.
Eric Law, chairman of the Penisula Community Planning Board, criticized the state senator’s proposed amendments in an interview Monday.
“The continued efforts to push legislation specific to Midway is misguided and unneeded,” said Law, whose group provides input to the city on planning issues.
Law said his group isn’t opposed to development, but wants the city to stick to the current three-story limit for the area.
“We absolutely endorse the idea of redevelopment — that place is kind of an armpit,” Law said of Pechanga Arena. “They need affordable housing and better housing — you just don’t need to do it over 30 feet.”
The San Diego City Council still needs to approve the project.
Saldaña said the developers are ignoring the growing sea-level rise that is causing nearby street flooding.
Saldaña said she was out Tuesday night in the area with volunteers from community planning groups, including Law, and witnessed groundwater “literally coming up and flooding the streets.”
“Not a drop of rain had fallen,” she said. “It’s just the higher sea level pushing the groundwater to the surface.”
Weber Pierson told the Times that Saldaña should bring her concerns about flooding to the developer and city officials.
Most people, when asked what terrorism is, will say that it is the use of violence and terror to create fear among people. This is broadly the dictionary definition. The 2017 Manchester Arena bombing at an Ariana Grande concert, in which 22 people, including many children, were killed, is a clear example.
Yet the legal definition of terrorism in Britain is far broader than this common understanding. Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000 allows even “damage to property” to constitute terrorism when it is carried out for a political, religious, racial or ideological purpose and is intended to influence the government or intimidate the public. Where firearms or explosives are involved, the latter requirement does not apply.
Including politically motivated damage to property within the definition was controversial from the start. When Parliament debated the bill in 1999, animal liberation activists were among the groups MPs had in mind.
Labour MP Alan Simpson warned during the debate that by defining attacks on property as terrorism, “we transform the relationship between civil protest movements and elected Parliaments and the judicial system.”
The criticism did not end with Parliament. The Supreme Court later described Section 1’s definition of terrorism as “very far-reaching”, while David Anderson QC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, called it “remarkably broad – absurdly so in some cases”.
“The current law allows members of any nationalist or separatist group to be turned into terrorists by virtue of their participation in a lawful armed conflict… however odious the regime which they have attacked.”
“To render people subject to the terrorism laws whom no sensible person would think of as terrorists risks destroying the trust upon which these special powers depend for their acceptance by the public.”
Yet defining what can count as terrorism is only part of the story. Not every organisation whose conduct falls within that definition is proscribed. That decision rests with the government.
Proscription therefore adds a political choice: Which organisations should be banned, making membership and inviting support for them criminal offences.
For example, the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), an armed Kurdish group that has fought the Turkish state for decades, is proscribed in Britain. Its Syrian offshoot, the Democratic Union Party (PYD), is not, because PYD-led forces became Western allies in the fight against ISIS (ISIL).
Britain proscribed Hamas’s military wing in 2001. In 2021, Home Secretary Priti Patel extended that proscription to Hamas in its entirety, including its political wing, declaring the previous distinction between the two “artificial”. Many civilian members of Hamas who had never picked up a gun were now deemed terrorists alongside its fighters.
By collapsing the distinction between Hamas’s military and political wings, Britain legitimised Israel’s portrayal of Hamas’s civilian administration as part of a terrorist apparatus and, with it, the targeting of hospitals and schools as terrorist infrastructure.
The asymmetry is stark. Britain’s terrorism laws can criminalise non-state organisations and those who support them, while state terrorism, including Israel’s, remains outside their reach.
The proscription of Palestine Action brought a different consequence of these laws into focus: Their use against protest in Britain. Palestine Action is a British direct-action group that has targeted arms companies supplying Israel. In July 2025, the government proscribed it under the Terrorism Act 2000.
United Nations Human Rights Chief Volker Turk warned that the decision to proscribe Palestine Action “raises serious concerns that counter-terrorism laws are being applied to conduct that is not terrorist”.
The ban has been fiercely contested in the courts. In February 2026, the Divisional Court ruled the proscription unlawful. On June 15, the Court of Appeal reversed that decision and upheld the ban. The court also described Elbit as carrying out a “lawful business”, ignoring its role in supplying the Israeli military during the genocide.
In upholding the ban, Lady Chief Justice Sue Carr drew a contrast with the Suffragettes, saying Palestine Action was not “a direct action civil disobedience protest group like the Suffragettes operating transparently in the open” but “a covert group operating in cells”.
Carr’s characterisation rests on an extraordinarily sanitised version of suffragette history.
In November 1909, a suffragette attacked Winston Churchill with a horse whip. In the same month, suffragettes, armed with a catapult and missiles, attacked Prime Minister H. H. Asquith’s car in Liverpool.
In 1912, Suffragettes attempted to set fire to the Theatre Royal in Dublin during a matinee attended by Asquith. They left a canister of gunpowder close to the stage. Earlier in the day, Mary Leigh had hurled a hatchet towards Asquith.
In 1913, four postmen in Dundee were severely injured by phosphorus chemicals left in post boxes. The following year, Mary Richardson slashed the Rokeby Venus in the National Gallery, while bombs were discovered in St Paul’s and churches were burned down.
This history sits uneasily with Carr’s distinction. The Suffragettes themselves engaged in politically motivated attacks on property and people of precisely the kind that Britain’s modern definition of terrorism is broad enough to capture.
The Filton case shows what this can mean in practice. When the Filton 25 attacked an Elbit factory in Bristol, they were remanded in custody for up to 18 months. When six of them went on trial in November 2025, the jury acquitted them of aggravated burglary, the most serious charge, and failed to reach verdicts on criminal damage. No defendant was convicted at that first trial. At a retrial, four were convicted of criminal damage; only one was eventually convicted of grievous bodily harm, without intent.
The jury was not told that guilty verdicts could later lead to the offences being treated as having a “terrorist connection” for sentencing. Justice Jeremy Johnson subsequently made precisely that finding. Johnson had also ruled out defences based on necessity and the need to prevent the greater crime of genocide. In doing so, he usurped the role of the jury.
The consequences of the ban were not confined to those accused of taking direct action against Elbit. Once Palestine Action was proscribed, inviting or expressing support for the group became a terrorism offence.
When the government proscribed Palestine Action, people defied the ban. Nearly 4,000 people have been arrested for holding placards supporting Palestine Action.
The Home Office reported that in the year ending March 2026, there were 3,061 terrorism-related arrests, 2,819 of them linked to suspected support for Palestine Action. The average age of those arrested in connection with Palestine Action was 59, compared with 31 for all other terrorism-related arrests. A majority of the Palestine Action arrests were women.
The profile of Britain’s average “terrorist” changed from a man aged 31 to a woman aged 59.
This is where Britain’s extraordinarily broad definition of terrorism, combined with the government’s power to proscribe organisations, has led. Conduct once understood as protest and political expression can now be prosecuted under terrorism legislation.
As Orwell wrote, “If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” When the meaning of “terrorism” is stretched far enough, the extraordinary powers attached to that word stretch with it.
Today, my own trial begins. I am accused of inviting support for Hamas. My prosecution is not separate from the story told here. It is where that story leads.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.
SACRAMENTO — A billionaire-funded political group gave a $5-million donation to the campaign opposing California’s proposed wealth tax, the first of many expected in the expensive fight over a ballot question dividing the state.
If approved by voters, Proposition 40 would impose a one-time 5% tax on the assets of billionaires who were residing in the state at the start of this year to pay primarily for healthcare.
The ballot measure has splintered California Democrats and their allies, who are at odds over which public services would receive a portion of the revenue and Proposition 40’s long-term impact on the state budget.
Gov. Gavin Newsom, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra and groups including Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California and the California Teachers Assn. oppose the tax, arguing it could push many of the state’s biggest taxpayers to relocate and in effect destabilize the state’s finances.
On Monday, nine Democratic state lawmakers announced their opposition to Proposition 40, writing in an open letter to voters that “while well-intentioned, this measure will blow a massive hole in our state budget in the years ahead and undermine our ability to sustain investments in the very priorities Prop 40 claims to support.” Its signers included Assemblymembers Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks), Lisa Calderon (D-Whittier) and John Harabedian (D-Pasadena).
The California Democratic Party, the California Federation of Labor Unions and progressive officials including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) support the tax, which is intended to raise roughly $100 billion over five years to backfill federal cuts to healthcare and other social safety net programs by President Trump and the Republican-led Congress.
To this point, Building a Better California — a group funded by Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other members of the Silicon Valley elite — has focused on qualifying two ballot measures meant to defang the billionaire tax while maintaining a neutral position on Proposition 40 itself.
That changed over the weekend when the group of billionaires officially came out against the measure and reported the $5-million donation to the anti-Proposition 40 campaign backed by teachers and firefighters unions.
A handful of billionaires have pumped more than $156 million into Building a Better California, mostly from Brin, who has given more than $100 million to the group. It has also received more than $17 million from venture capitalist L. John Doerr, $12 million from Ripple Labs founder Chris Larsen and $3 million from philanthropist and former Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt.
In addition to opposing the wealth tax, Building a Better California announced support for Proposition 3, which would permanently extend an existing tax on certain high earners, along with two housing bonds.
The group has already spent more than $127 million on two competing ballot measures written to weaken or nullify the billionaire tax: Proposition 41 would require audits for new state special taxes and prohibit new taxes from being excluded from the state spending limit. Proposition 42 would ban new taxes on assets such as as personal property, intellectual property and retirement accounts.
If Proposition 40 passes but either Proposition 41 or Proposition 42 receive more votes, the billionaire tax would be voided.
“A few controversial billionaires like Sergey Brin would rather spend millions to fund shady opposition campaigns than simply pay their fair share in taxes so millions of their fellow Californians don’t lose their healthcare. That’s shameful,” said Debru Carthan, executive vice president of Service Employees International United-Healthcare Workers West, the union that collected the signatures to put the measure on the ballot.
Abby Lunardini, a spokesperson for Building a Better California, said the state “is at an inflection point” due to its high cost of living and taxes.
“California’s future rests on both maintaining our economic competitiveness and making smart, accountable public investments that improve affordability and quality of life for all,” Lunardini wrote in a statement. “It’s rare for such a broad coalition to unite around any single cause in California, but it reflects the potentially devastating impact of this measure on healthcare, education, and our state’s economy.”
The $5-million donation is the largest reported by the Proposition 40 opposition campaign, which wrote in a statement that it “welcomes support from everyone — teachers, doctors, hospitals, community clinics, firefighters, housing advocates, blue-collar unions, entrepreneurs, small businesses, Democrats, and Republicans.”
The donation indicates that members of the opposition coalition — and not billionaires — will play a more visible role in campaign ads.
“Two groups in California that have the most credibility with voters are the teachers and the firefighters,” said Garry South, a Democratic strategist who has worked on past ballot measure campaigns. Making them visible messengers against Proposition 40 “is a very important credibility aspect for the No campaign.”
“Nobody likes political consultants or lawyers. They like firefighters and nurses and teachers,” Republican strategist Matt Rexroad agreed.
LINCOLN, Calif. — One thing Anne Smull, a retired feedstore owner, was looking forward to on election day was voting for the man who currently represents her in Congress, conservative Rep. Kevin Kiley. Now she can’t.
That’s because California Democrats sliced Kiley’s district six ways as payback for Republican redistricting in Texas and elsewhere. The chunk of the district that Smull, who identifies as a conservative, lives in is now grafted onto an overwhelmingly Democratic seat based in the state’s wine country.
During a recent lunch at a cafe in Lincoln, a onetime agricultural town that has morphed into a bedroom community on the edge of Sacramento’s exurban sprawl, Smull was heartbroken to hear she can no longer vote for Kiley.
“He believes in the same things I do,” Smull said. “It feels sneaky and underhanded.”
Republicans started the redistricting competition. Democrats might finish it
Democratic voters in several other states know how Smull feels.
President Trump last year told GOP-controlled states to redraw their maps before this year’s midterm elections to increase the number of winnable seats for Republicans in order to help the party hold on to the U.S. House. The effort was turbocharged by a U.S. Supreme Court decision in the spring of this year that neutralized a key provision of the Voting Rights Act and cleared the way for Republicans to redraw more seats across the South that had elected Black Democrats.
Democratic-leaning and heavily minority communities from Texas to Tennessee have been split into multiple congressional districts that dilute the Democratic vote by stretching deep into conservative areas.
In the future, it is likely that more Republican voters in other states will go through what Smull and other conservatives in Northern California are facing. Democrats in Maryland, New York, Illinois and other strongholds have pledged to retaliate in time for the 2028 elections and split Republican-leaning districts the way their California counterparts did Kiley’s.
Democrats have been hindered nationally by stricter rules against partisan line-drawing in their states, but California showed a way around that. California Democrats won voter approval last year to redraw the state’s congressional map, originally made by an independent commission, and formed five new Democratic-leaning seats.
‘We have zero voice,’ says voter angry at the Democratic drive for a new political map
Kiley’s is one of them. The reworked political lines led the two-term congressman to leave the Republican Party and run as an independent in the slightly Democratic-leaning district that now includes his home.
He spoke out against partisan gerrymandering, even unsuccessfully trying to force the Republican-led House to allow a vote on a bill to ban mid-decade redistricting.
“We’ve seen partisan divisions really spin out of control in really harmful ways, and I think Exhibit No. 1 is the redistricting wars,” Kiley recently told a group of voters in the suburb of Citrus Heights.
Democrats contend Kiley’s party switch is purely a political trick to survive in a more liberal district. They note that he still caucuses with House Republicans and has voted for many of the GOP’s priorities, including Trump’s sweeping budget and tax cut bill last year, and that political organizations run by House Republicans are spending money to back his reelection.
Even some of Kiley’s supporters think the election was a factor in the congressman’s decision to become an independent.
“My original thinking was he did it because of redistricting — maybe it’d help him get reelected,” said John Coburn, a 68-year-old retired business owner, at the Citrus Heights event.
Coburn is furious at the Democrats’ redistricting and hopes Kiley wins. Coburn does not care that they did it in retaliation for Texas, where Republicans at Trump’s directive revised that state’s map to carve out up to five new winnable conservative seats.
“I don’t care about Texas, I live in California,” Coburn said, adding that “40% of the state is Republican, and we have zero voice. Zero. It’s not how our Founding Fathers intended.”
For Democrats in the district, a rare political opportunity
In an interview, Kiley said his switch to independent was no political gambit. If he wanted to stay in the House, he argued, he could have had an easier time staying in the GOP, moving to a more conservative district that included parts of his old one and running in a Republican primary there.
“I could have gone there and run and played the same game these other politicians are playing,” he said.
Kiley said that he is caucusing with Republicans to avoid losing his seats on committees and that in the next Congress he will try to change rules so independent members do not lose committee seats because they do not caucus with one of the two major parties.
Among his backers, he noted, is onetime Democratic presidential hopeful Andrew Yang, a former technology entrepreneur who co-founded a centrist party for independents.
The Democrat running against Kiley, former state Sen. Richard Pan, scoffs at his rival’s newfound independent status.
“He was a MAGA champion when he first ran for Congress, and now he’s trying to say ‘I’m not,’” Pan told a crowd at a senior community in Roseville, referring to Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement.
Earlier that day, Pan swung by the Placer County Democratic Party office, tucked away on the second story of a brick shopping arcade in Lincoln’s compact downtown.
Placer is a Republican county that stretches from the Sacramento suburbs to the northwestern shores of Lake Tahoe. The entire county is in Kiley’s current district, but it will be divided among three districts in the new map.
Kathleen Crawford, chair of the county Democratic Party, was enthusiastic about the county getting carved up.
“It’s worth it, because we have an opportunity to get Democratic representation, which has been missing from our county,” Crawford said. “I’ve been here 15 years, and this is my first real opportunity to elect a Democrat.”
A never-ending cycle that cuts out ‘the little people’
Lincoln’s downtown is flanked by fruit, vegetable and flower farms, as well as new subdivisions. The community and its neighboring suburbs have become a destination for people fleeing the San Francisco Bay Area’s housing prices. That has helped change the once solidly conservative area into a political battleground where skilled mapmakers can draw winnable seats for Democrats.
Ed Church, a 61-year-old risk manager, was eating lunch at Simple Pleasures cafe in Lincoln when he contemplated Kiley’s shift. A Democrat, Church has not been a Kiley fan and he was bemused by the congressman’s move.
“If that’s how he’d been initially and not so MAGA, I probably could have supported him,” Church said of Kiley’s independent status. Now Church, as a Lincoln resident, is in a purely Democratic district and will not have a say in Kiley’s fate in November. His main criteria in the election will be “who’s going to stand up to Trump?”
Across the street at a gun store, Wesley Johnson, 43, who considers himself a conservative independent, said he was dispirited by the state’s redistricting.
“I feel Northern California is not represented fairly,” Johnson said. “San Francisco, Sacramento and Los Angeles control everything.”
He acknowledged Republicans were doing the same thing in states they controlled and said he did not know how it could stop.
“You’re just cutting out the little people,” Johnson said.
David Ellison’s Paramount Skydance has asked a judge to force California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and his coalition of 11 other states to prepare to set aside as much as $1.9 billion as the Warner Bros. Discovery merger challenge heads into overtime.
In Monday’s court filing, Paramount requested the plaintiff states, including New York, Colorado, Oregon and Nevada, as well as the Writers Guild of America, post a bond that would cover the “ticking fees” Paramount promised to pay Warner shareholders should the deal stretch beyond its anticipated September close.
Ellison was confident his proposed Warner takeover would sail through its regulatory clearances. President Trump’s Justice Department approved the merger in June, as have dozens of other countries.
The states would not be required to pay the full $1.9 billion upfront. Instead, they would have to come up with a portion of that amount by Sept. 30. Should the Democrat state attorneys general and WGA lose their lawsuits, they would ultimately have to pay the full amount.
Monday’s court filing highlights Ellison’s frustrations and the financial pressures that deal delays will bring the media company. The filing also continues Paramount’s full-court political pressure campaign to get Bonta and the other states to abandon their antitrust lawsuit.
Paramount did not expect such a spirited challenge from Bonta and the 11 other Democratic state attorneys general who banded together with the WGA to try to block the $111-billion merger of two historic Hollywood studios.
Paramount’s 23-page filing, signed by former high profiile federal prosecutor Danielle Sassoon, was intended to rattle the states.
Paramount is trying to create divisions among the plaintiff states by prompting them to question their resolve in fighting a protracted and potentially expensive legal battle, according to a person familiar with Paramount’s strategy who was not authorized to speak publicly.
Because WGA has separately sued to unravel the deal, Paramount has asked the judge to have the union post a bond to cover some of the costs, too.
In its motion, Paramount cited the Clayton Antitrust Act, which is the foundation for Bonta’s lawsuit. The law carries a provision to require plaintiffs to post a bond to cover the potential financial harms of halting a transaction.
The bond gives a defendant, in this case Paramount, a way to recover lost funds should they ultimately prevail in court.
“We have satisfied all closing conditions under our merger agreement, having received regulatory clearances from 68 jurisdictions,” Paramount said in a statement. “These two lawsuits are the only barrier to closing this transaction.”
Paramount is incurring considerable legal fees and deal-related costs.
The company cited a potential eight-month merger delay because Martínez-Olguín scheduled the trial for March 2. If the case goes to trial, it might not be decided until next May.
At issue are the “ticking fees” that Paramount in February agreed pay to Warner investors should the merger be delayed . Paramount agreed to pay $.25 a share for every quarter until the acquisition finalizes.
The fees add up to $7 million a day, or $650 million per quarter.
Paramount is facing a June 4 deadline to close the deal. That’s when Warner Bros. Discovery can demand a $7-billion break-up fee.
Paramount wants to get the deal done as soon as possible, and with the approval of Mexican regulators last week, only Bonta and the states’ lawsuit stands in their way.
Paramount also is cognizant of shifting winds in Washington should Democrats regain control of Congress in November, which could bring fresh scrutiny to the merger .
Ticking fees weren’t the only costs of the extended timeline.
“There will be no integration and no ramped-up investment in content, production, and creative talent by the combined company,” Paramount said . “Employees of both Paramount and WBD are also harmed by the uncertainties caused by the delay.”
Last week, the Directors Guild of America and the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees — which represent a combined 200,000 union members — waded into the clash over the merger, which continues to carve deep divisions throughout the industry.
“We remain confident that plaintiffs’ case is without merit and will defend our pro-competitive transaction in court,” Paramount said. “We look forward to closing this transaction and delivering its benefits to consumers and entertainment industry workers in California, the United States and around the world.”
NEW YORK — Ohio State and Oregon were 1-2 in The Associated Press Top 25 released Monday, giving the Big Ten Conference the top two teams in the preseason rankings for the first time in 65 years and just the second time ever.
The Buckeyes received 40 first-place votes and Oregon received 14 in voting by 69 media members who cover college football.
Ohio State will go into a season No. 1 for the ninth time, and first since 2015. The Buckeyes are now tied with Alabama for second-most preseason No. 1 rankings behind Oklahoma’s 10.
Oregon has its highest preseason ranking in program history after having opened No. 3 four times.
Georgia, Notre Dame and Texas round out the top five. Defending national champion Indiana starts at No. 6 and is followed by Miami, Texas A&M, Mississippi and Oklahoma.
Notre Dame received six first-place votes, Indiana got eight and Miami one.
This is the first year a conference has held down the top two spots in the preseason poll since Oklahoma and Nebraska of the Big Eight were 1-2 in 1987.
The last time the Big Ten had the Nos. 1 and 2 teams in the preseason was 1961, when Iowa and Ohio State topped the poll. The Hawkeyes lost four of their last five games after a 4-0 start and finished that season unranked. The Buckeyes went 8-0-1 and ended the season No. 2 behind unbeaten Alabama.
The Big Ten has won three straight College Football Playoff championships (Michigan, Ohio State, Indiana) and will be going for an unprecedented fourth straight national title. This is the fourth consecutive year the Big Ten has had two of the top three teams in the preseason rankings.
The Southeastern Conference leads all conferences with nine teams in the preseason Top 25, marking the third straight year it has had at least that many. Five of the top 10 teams are from the SEC for the first time since 2013.
Four Big 12 teams are ranked, with conference champion Texas Tech the highest at No. 12. The Atlantic Coast Conference has three ranked teams, with the Hurricanes joined by No. 19 SMU and No. 24 Louisville. There are no Group of Six schools in the Top 25.
Top-ranked Buckeyes
The offense is loaded. Heisman Trophy finalist Julian Sayin was the most accurate passer in the nation by a wide margin last season, Jeremiah Smith leads the nation in receiving yards and receiving touchdowns over the last two years and Bo Jackson is coming off a 1,000-yard rushing season as a freshman.
There is little concern about the defense even though eight starters must be replaced for a second straight year. At least six transfers are projected to start or play major roles.
Ohio State will get tested early and often. The Buckeyes visit Texas on Sept. 12 and five of their nine conference games are against preseason ranked teams, including at Indiana and against Oregon at home.
The Buckeyes have ended a season No. 1 in the AP poll six times (1942, 1954, 1968, 2002, 2014, 2024).
Bulldogs best of the SEC
The beat goes on for Kirby Smart’s Georgia Bulldogs. They’re in the preseason top five for the ninth straight year. The two-time defending SEC champion Bulldogs are favored to play in a sixth straight conference title game and appear in the CFP for the sixth time in 10 years.
Texas, the preseason No. 1 last year, opens in the top five for the third straight year. No. 8 Texas A&M is in the preseason top 10 for the first time since it was No. 6 in 2022, the year that marked the beginning of the end for coach Jimbo Fisher.
Pete Golding’s first full season as Mississippi head coach starts with the No. 9 Rebels in the preseason top 10 for the second time in three years and third time since 1970. No. 10 Oklahoma is in the preseason top 10 for the first time since 2022, when it was in the Big 12.
What about the Hoosiers?
Indiana is the seventh returning national champion in 40 years, and second in three years, to be ranked outside the top five in the preseason (Michigan went into the 2024 season ranked No. 9 after winning the national title).
The Hoosiers became the first team in the modern era to go 16-0, and they return lots of talent and signed a top-10 transfer class. The move from Heisman Trophy winner and No. 1 NFL draft pick Fernando Mendoza to TCU transfer Josh Hoover at quarterback apparently put doubts in the minds of voters.
Poll nuggets
—USC, which landed the nation’s top recruiting class during the offseason, is ranked No. 15 in the preason poll.
— Ohio State will try to become the 12th team to start and finish No. 1 since the AP preseason poll debuted in 1950. The last team to do it was Alabama in 2017.
— Notre Dame has its highest preseason ranking since it was No. 2 in 2006. The Fighting Irish, who have a Heisman candidate in quarterback CJ Carr, bring a 10-game winning streak into the season and are still smarting from being left out of the playoff.
— Lane Kiffin’s first LSU team is No. 11 after finishing 7-6 and unranked under Brian Kelly and Frank Wilson.
— Ten of the 12 CFP teams last season are ranked. The two that aren’t are James Madison and Tulane from the Group of Six.
— No. 23 Houston has its first preseason ranking in four years and third since 1991.
Tired of budget stalemates, deficits and continuous acrimony in the state Capitol, California voters in 2010 started taking action to temper political gridlock and loosen the grip of entrenched special interests.
They approved statewide ballot measures to create an independent congressional redistricting commission, taking that power away from self-interested Sacramento lawmakers, as well as a new “top-two” primary system intended to stifle the power of the major political parties and provide more representative, less hyperpartisan candidates with a greater chance of victory.
Now, in an era of even more bitter divisions in the state and nation, those reforms face severe threats.
Last month, supporters of a proposal to repeal the state’s current primary system, in which the two candidates in state and congressional elections who receive the most votes move on to the general election regardless of party affiliation, received permission to gather voter signatures to place the measure on the 2028 ballot.
In November, Californians voted to temporarily scrap the congressional districts that were crafted by a voter-approved independent commission and instead replace them by ones approved by Democratic lawmakers in Sacramento. The move, aimed at giving Democrats an edge in the November midterm election, was in response to President Trump urging GOP state leaders, notably in Texas, to alter their districts to boost Republican numbers in the closely divided U.S. House of Representatives after the 2026 election.
“In the olden times, California liked to see itself as the epicenter of good-government reform,” said Jessica Levinson, an election law professor at Loyola Marymount University.
But the sense of optimism when voters approved these reforms has faded, she said, because of the divisiveness cultivated by Trump but also because of polarization that predates him.
“There’s no world in which you can look at California or any other state in 2026 and say it looks like 2010,” Levinson said. “We, the public, speak to each other in different ways. Politicians talk to each other in different ways. … It feels to me like we talk a lot more about triage than we do about building a shining city on a hill. It’s a different universe.”
But others question the effectiveness of the California’s good-government reforms and merits of the self-glorification that followed.
“It’s not clear that any of these reforms helped elect more moderates or limit polarization,” said Rick Hasen, a professor of law and political science at UCLA. “Reformers may have over-promised in the early 2010s what election reform could actually do to improve the lives of Californians. And Californians did not fully appreciate the unintended consequences of reforms enacted with even the best of intentions.”
The efforts to claw back the 2010 reforms occurs at a time of declining trust in institutions and during a fragile moment in the nation’s democracy. Trump continues to push debunked claims that the 2020 election was rigged, as well as other voting misconduct conspiracies that often focus on California.
In a prime-time speech last month, the president again raised concerns about the length of time it took California elections officials to count ballots in the June 2 primary.
“It took a month to count the votes,” he said. “I wonder what they were doing.”
Lauded by civic groups, the good-government reforms were championed by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and funded by major GOP donor Charles Munger Jr.
Both of the state’s major political parties as well as prominent politicians and several labor unions opposed the efforts when they were placed on the 2010 ballot.
Jessica Millan Patterson, a former state GOP chairwoman, is among those who believe the temporary pause in independent redistricting that voters approved in November will not be temporary. And she said the top-two primary is a failed experiment.
“Speaking as a Republican, I just don’t feel that it has served us well at all,” she said. “Not only has it locked us out of many general election ballots, but it has also not moderated Sacramento at all.”
California Democratic Party Chairman Rusty Hicks, who supported the suspension of independent redistricting, agreed with Millan Patterson about the top-two primary.
“The current top-two system has failed to deliver on what its supporters promised,” he said. “It’s well past time to review, revise and maybe even repeal it.”
Hicks expressed fears earlier this year that the top-two primary would result in two Republican gubernatorial candidates advancing to the November ballot in a strongly Democratic state because of a sprawling and splintered Democratic field.
Hicks’ rare public move urging low-polling Democratic candidates, which included every minority candidate of color in the race, to consider their viability sparked widespread controversy during the primary.
Ultimately, the June primary resulted in the same outcome Californians have seen since the top-two primary was approved — a gubernatorial general election contest between a Democrat and a Republican. Xavier Becerra, a former Biden Cabinet member, and Steve Hilton, a GOP strategist and television commentator, will face off in November.
Still, a bipartisan coalition is striving to rescind the top-two primary system, which has created many noteworthy intraparty races, such as U.S. Senate contests between Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris and Rep. Loretta Sanchez of Orange in 2016, and incumbent Sen. Dianne Feinstein and state Sen. Kevin de León of Los Angeles in 2018, all Democrats.
In Congress, independent redistricting and the top-two primary created a brutal 2012 contest between veteran Democratic Reps. Brad Sherman and Howard Berman in the San Fernando Valley. Four years later, veteran Bay Area Rep. Mike Honda was toppled by fellow Democrat Ro Khanna, now viewed as a potential 2028 presidential candidate.
This year, a combination of the redrawing of the state’s congressional districts and the top-two primary means Republican Rep. Ken Calvert of Corona is battling with Republican Rep. Young Kim of Anaheim Hills.
On July 14, Secretary of State Shirley Weber announced that the proposal by veteran Democratic strategist Steve Maviglio — also backed by Republicans such as former state GOP Chair Ron Nehring — has 180 days to gather the signatures of nearly 875,000 registered voters to qualify the effort for the November 2028 ballot. If approved by voters, the top-two primary would be repealed and the system would revert to its prior version, insuring every qualified political party could have a candidate advance in the primary to the general election.
Maviglio argued that the top-two primary has failed to deliver on its promises to reduce partisanship and budget deficits in Sacramento.
“It’s gotten worse, not better,” he said. “I find it’s hard to make that argument if you look at what’s coming out of the Legislature the last 10 years.”
Supporters of the top-two primary repudiated these arguments and vowed to challenge the title of the proposed 2028 ballot measure about the state’s primary, arguing it would disenfranchise 5.4 million Californians who are not registered with either major political party.
“Voters passed Proposition 14 [which created the top-two primary] to take control away from party insiders and put it in the hands of the people,” said Cara McCormick, campaign manager of More Choice California, a group opposing the top-two primary being rescinded. “This initiative does the opposite. It takes away the rights of millions of California voters and gives them back to political parties. The least voters deserve is a ballot title that says so.”
Abel Maldonado, who served as lieutenant governor under Schwarzenegger and backed both 2010 reforms, staunchly supported the top-two primary as a response to a historic state government shutdown because of the failure of lawmakers to approve a balanced budget.
“Some of us thought that a complete open primary top two would create a system [that elects] people who were open-minded, pragmatic and had common sense,” he said. “It has happened in some races, but in other areas it has not.”
Maldonado said that he disagrees with returning to the prior system, in which political parties could opt to allow only voters affiliated with them to cast ballots in their primaries. But he said the current system ought to be tweaked, allowing voters to cast ballots for a candidate of any political party in a primary, with a candidate from each party moving onto the general election.
Schwarzenegger did not respond to a request for comment. But his prior comments, as well his efforts to end gerrymandering across the nation since leaving office, have made clear that his views have not changed.
“Of course the politicians want to undo reform that is good for the people and not for the politicians,” Schwarzenegger said in a statement earlier this year after the “Undo the Top Two” ballot measure was proposed. “They will always choose to move the goal posts instead of performing better.”
After California Democrats sought to redraw the state’s congressional districts last year, Schwarzenegger posted a picture of himself on X working out wearing a T-shirt that said “Terminate Gerrymandering,” a reference to one of his hit films.
Munger said he hoped groups he worked with to pass these reforms such as Common Cause and the California League of Women Voters would stay “true to their principles” and defend them when they “are under assault.”
“It was disappointing they stayed on the sidelines during last year’s fight over independent redistricting, and they should not do so going forward,” said Munger, who spent more than $30 million opposing the November ballot measure to suspend independent redistricting. “In order for the citizens to trust their government, they must have confidence that our elections are fair and free.”
Maldonado, who lauded the work of California’s independent redistricting commission, said he believes California Democrats will make the temporary pause of independent drawing of district boundaries permanent.
“We as Republicans have zero say in redistricting, and as much as I like to say this is what I like to have, the Democrats control supermajorities in both houses, and they get to choose whatever the hell they want,” he said. “The only way they’ll return it is by an initiative process with the will of the voters.”
He said he supports a national effort to create independent redistricting in every state, but believes it has no chance of passage.
“That would be great. It would be a step in the right direction. I think voters would have more confidence in politicians,” Maldonado said. “But, I mean, in this polarized era, this notion — think about it. The fox is building the henhouse for the chickens.”
Aug. 16 (UPI) — Police arrested a 19-year-old found hiding in a closet on the Virginia State University campus hours after he allegedly shot five people, local officials said.
Camron Harris was in custody at Chesterfield County Jail on suspicion of four counts of malicious wounding and four counts of use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, WTVR-TV in Richmond, Va., reported. He was being held without bond.
Police said more charges may be filed.
The shooting took place on the VSU campus around 1:30 a.m. Saturday.
The victims ranged in age from 17 to 23 years old. A 21-year-old man sustained critical injuries, while the other four, including a 19-year-old woman, had non-life-threatening injuries, WRIC-TV in Richmond reported. The only student of the school was a 20-year-old man who was released from the hospital.
Officers discovered Harris around 4 p.m. Saturday hiding in a closet in Seward Hall on campus. He didn’t attend the school.
The campus had not started fall classes at the time of the shooting, but officials put the school on lockdown until about 8:30 a.m. Saturday. Classes were expected to begin Monday.
VSU is a historically Black university with about 5,100 undergraduate students.