r/CaliforniaUncensored • • Jul 22 '26

Sub News and Updates We are Uncensored but NOT Unmoderated!

0 Upvotes

Per the Guidelines Policies of Reddit is how This Sub Community will be operated.

Reddit allows all Sub Communities to set Their Own Policies and Guidelines under Reddit Guidelines and Policies including the Moderator Code of Conduct!

Freedom of Speech ONLY PERTAINS between YOU and the Government. It Does NOT apply to Social Media.

If You do not like the News Articles posted then post Some of Your Own!!

This Sub Community has Rules and Guidelines plainly posted You should read and follow or face the Consequences there of.

Admins and Mods run this Sub Community NOT the Members. Period. Full Stop!

If YOU have Issues with any of the above then maybe This Sub Community is just not for You. There are Millions of Other Sub Communities for You to explore and please do so.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • Jul 21 '26

Sub News and Updates About This Sub please read and understand.

3 Upvotes

California Uncensored is about all News and Politics throughout the State no matter the News Source. Please keep Your News Submissions to California Only. All are welcome to contribute whether It is News or Comments as long as You abide by Reddit Rules/Policies and the Rules/Policies of This Sub. The Title states Uncensored BUT It is not Unmoderated!


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 8h ago

Economy Labor Taxes Tariffs Unions News and Politics Yes, California, you’re the world’s fourth-largest economy – The Mercury News

Thumbnail
mercurynews.com
67 Upvotes

We’re No. 4! We’re No. 4! We’re No. 4!

California’s lofty economic stature, as measured on the global stage, has been confirmed.

My trusty spreadsheet corroborated that the state’s ranking as the “world’s fourth-largest economy” narrowly holds after reviewing two sets of recently released stats tracking gross domestic product, a broad measure of business output and consumer spending.

Mid-year results from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis for the 50 states and the District of Columbia were compared with nation-by-nation estimates for 2026 from the International Monetary Fund. To level the playing field for this global scorecard, GDP is measured in US dollars and isn’t adjusted for inflation.

By this bragging-rights math, California’s latest GDP tally put it at $4.53 trillion, up 5% from 2025’s output. That was topped by only three other national economies.

The U.S., at $33 trillion and estimated to grow 6% this year, and China, at $22 trillion and up 10% this year, have long been the world’s top two economies. Germany, with $5.5 trillion in GDP, up 7% for 2026, became the world’s No. 3 in 2023.

Look, no matter what you think about the numerous quirks and challenges in the Golden State’s business climate, this vanity scorecard does help illustrate the scale of California’s economy.

Plus, who doesn’t like to follow an economic horserace? Tenuous spot

The Golden State’s perch at the fourth spot on the worldwide totem pole is tenuous.

California’s GDP is barely ahead of Japan’s $4.34 trillion economy, which shrank 2% over the past year. It was the world’s No. 3 as recently as 2022.

Next comes the United Kingdom at $4.27 trillion, up 6% in a year, and India at $4.06 trillion, up 4% in a year.

So, roughly half a trillion dollars, or 11%, separates California from these other top-ranked economies. It’s a good bet that the Indian economy, powered by 1.5 billion residents, compared with California’s 39 million, will surge up the global rankings some year soon.

By the way, after India on this GDP scorecard comes France at $3.55 trillion, Russia at $2.86 trillion, Italy at $2.7 trillion, Brazil at $2.65 trillion and Canada at $2.49 trillion. Caveats noted

Please note that 2026 isn’t over, so the full year’s economic results are yet to be tallied. And let’s simply say that in a year filled with wars – military and trade – uncertainty may be the global economy’s biggest certainty.

So, be patient. It will be April 2027 before we get the final picture on this year. That’s the next time the IMF updates its worldwide GDP figures.

Additionally, these GDP calculations are in U.S. dollars, so currency fluctuations can skew results. The American currency has appreciated roughly 3% against the rest of the world so far in 2026 – boosting the results of the nation and California.

Also, as is common with many economic measures, some noteworthy revisions have been made to historical GDP figures. As a result, California’s status was slightly diminished, ranking as the world’s No. 5 economy from 2019 through last year.

Previous data had placed California as the fourth-largest economy on the planet starting in 2024 – a distinction heralded by many, including Gov. Gavin Newsom.

So if the latest GDP math holds, 2026 will mark the Golden State’s first time in the No. 4 spot.

This change is not some revelation of an evil plot by California cheerleaders. Rather, it just shows how data science’s constant quality control works.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 11h ago

State vs Federal Tenth Amendment Issues 🏛 Federal Appeals Court Blocks California Rule Forcing Agents to Show ID

Thumbnail
breitbart.com
107 Upvotes

A federal appeals court ruled that California cannot force federal immigration agents and other federal officers to display identification during enforcement operations.

In a decision handed down Wednesday, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Section 10 of California’s “No Vigilantes Act” violates the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The ruling reverses a lower court and orders a preliminary injunction barring the state from enforcing the identification requirement against federal agencies and officers.

The law required non-uniformed law enforcement officers operating in California, including federal agents, to visibly display their agency and either a name or badge number while carrying out enforcement duties. Officers who refused could face misdemeanor prosecution by the state.

Judge Mark Bennett, writing for the panel, said the measure attempts to directly regulate the federal government as it performs its own functions, something a state cannot do without authorization from Congress. Because law enforcement is a core government activity, the court held the identification mandate is invalid in every application to federal officers acting under federal authority.

The panel did not stop at finding the federal government likely to win. It declared the government “certain” to succeed on its constitutional challenge.

California argued the law was permissible because it did not substantially interfere with federal operations. The judges rejected that reasoning, holding that even minimal interference is beside the point when a state directly regulates federal governmental conduct. The panel, which included Obama appointee Jacqueline Nguyen and Trump appointees Bennett and Daniel Collins, had already paused the requirement in April before Tuesday’s ruling on the merits.

California enacted the No Vigilantes Act in 2025 after federal immigration sweeps across the state, many carried out by masked agents in unmarked cars, drew objections from Democrat officials. Gov. Gavin Newsom signed it alongside the No Secret Police Act, which restricts officers from wearing face coverings and was separately blocked by a district judge earlier this year. With the appeals court siding with the Trump administration, the state’s remaining options narrow to seeking a rehearing or petitioning the Supreme Court.

The ruling is already drawing strong reactions, reviving the fight between California and the federal government over immigration enforcement.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 7h ago

Law Enforcement News and Politics Ninth Circuit Rebuke: Federal Appeals Court Strikes Down California ‘No Vigilantes Act’ as Unconstitutional – California Globe

Thumbnail californiaglobe.com
38 Upvotes

Ruling is huge setback to Gov. Newsom’s efforts to restrict federal immigration enforcement operations

By Katy Grimes, October 15, 2026 7:05 am The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously ruled Wednesday in that California’s “No Vigilantes Act” identification requirement for federal ICE officers violates the Supremacy Clause and cannot be enforced by the state against them.

California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a package of 21 bills in September claiming they will increase state oversight of federal immigration enforcement, illegal immigrant detention facilities, and related law-enforcement practices inside California. You can almost hear Governor Newsom saying, “but California is the 4th largest economy in the world…”

Sacramento Democrats cannot regulate, harass, or endanger federal officers carrying out lawful duties. Illegal immigrants are subject to deportation, and it is the federal government’s legal responsibility.

Ostensibly, the new legislation was written to address the February 2026 Ninth Circuit ruling. The DOJ has said that California’s illicit laws discriminate against U.S. citizens and undermine federal law. They are correct.

In February of this year, U.S. District Judge Christina A. Snyder, a Bill Clinton appointee, issued a preliminary injunction against the discriminatory mask ban, but split the difference allowing the name and badge number requirement to take effect. Wednesday’s ruling overruled her.

Gov. Newsom and the state’s Democrats have been trying to impose state oversight and regulations over federal immigration enforcement. They passed a similar law in 2025, but federal judge in February 2026 struck down California’s 2025 “No Secret Police Act” mask ban because it targeted federal agents while exempting state and local officers, finding it unlawfully discriminated against federal officers.

It would be laughable except Newsom and Democrats know what they are doing is unlawful.

Newsom called Trump administration immigration policies “Orwellian” and “totalitarian,” for focusing on strict enforcement and removal of illegal immigrants, resulting in historically low border crossings and a significant increase in deportations. (Pot, meet kettle). The Department of Homeland Security has emphasized the importance of border security and has implemented measures to prevent illegal immigration effectively, and for that, everyone in America is safer.

U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli warned Gov. Newsom in September that he was over his skis, after the governor signed the unconstitutional bills:

Governor, we’ve been through this already. If you want to regulate federal agents, you have to win a federal election. Until then, you have no jurisdiction. Accordingly, I have advised DHS to disregard your bill attempting to ban safe and effective less-lethal tools that agents need to escalate dangerous situations.

In United States v. California, a three-judge panel for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court. It held that § 10 of the No Vigilantes Act “attempts to directly regulate the United States in its performance of governmental functions” without congressional authorization, violating the intergovernmental-immunity aspect of the Supremacy Clause, Law&Crime explains. Here’s why:

The law “explicitly overrides the federal government’s power to determine whether, how, and when to publicly identify its officers” and thus regulates the manner and conditions of federal law-enforcement operations.
It is not a generally applicable rule that incidentally affects federal officers; it targets law-enforcement functions specifically.
Because Congress has not authorized such state regulation, the provision is void as applied to federal agencies and officers. The panel concluded the United States is “certain to succeed” on its facial challenge—no set of circumstances exists under which the Act would be valid against federal officers

In an unmistakable reprimand, Ninth Circuit Judges Mark J. Bennett, Judges Jacqueline H. Nguyen and Daniel P. Collins said, “As before, we conclude that the United States is likely to succeed on the merits of its Supremacy Clause claim because §10 of the No Vigilantes Act attempts to directly regulate the United States in its performance of governmental functions, and Congress has not authorized such regulation,” the unanimous 21-page opinion reads. “Indeed, we conclude that the United States is certain to succeed.”

Law&Crime explains:

The 9th Circuit ultimately found the law runs afoul of the intergovernmental immunity doctrine, which bars state or local rules that regulate the federal government or discriminate against it.

“In sum, if a state law directly regulates the governmental conduct of the United States without congressional authorization, it is void irrespective of whether the regulated activities are essential to federal functions or operations, and irrespective of the degree to which the state law interferes with such functions or operations,” the opinion goes on. “[The No Vigilantes Act] thus directly regulates inherently sovereign functions. Because Congress has not authorized such legislation, it is barred by intergovernmental immunity.”


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 22h ago

Governor News and Politics Marvel Star Mark Ruffalo Erupts on Newsom for Putting Billionaires Over Working Class ‘Once Again’

Thumbnail
breitbart.com
591 Upvotes

Mark Ruffalo, left-wing star of Marvel’s The Avengers series, is has called out California’s Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom, this time over Newsom’s effort to torpedo a state-wide billionaire tax.

Ruffalo blasted Newsom in an X post where he railed that the Gov. constantly “sells out the working class people for the billionaires.’

At issue is Newsom’s vocal support of Prop 42, a proposal meant to torpedo any new state wealth tax on the state’s billionaires. In his statement in support of the move to ban wealth taxation, Newsom said that he fears that wealth taxes would be a threat to people’s retirement savings.

“I am proud to stand with firefighters, blue-collar unions, veterans, seniors, and small businesses in support of Prop 42. We all agree that Californians deserve to have their retirement and life savings protected from new state taxes so those savings are there when they need them,” the governor said in a statement.

But Ruffalo is striking back at Newsom for his opposition to new wealth taxes.

“Once again. Just like the Paramount Merger Gavin Newsom does what he always does. Sells out the working class people for the billionaires again and again. Not only that but endorses a bill that will make it impossible to tax the wealthy at all.,” the actor wrote on X on Wednesday.

Ruffalo has taken aim at Newsom before, most especially for the gov’s support of the merger between Paramount and Warner Brothers Discovery.

In Sept., Ruffalo accused Newsom of working to help Donald Trump, of all people, over the merger deal.

The rabid antisemitic actor called the settlement a betrayal and a “huge win to Trump.”

Ruffalo also blasted Newsom for vetoing a state AI bill early this month.

Ruffalo slammed California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) over his veto of an AI safety bill, calling it “a mistake,” and asking the public to “follow the money” when analyzing Newsom’s decisions.

“AI is now a real-life technology, and love it or hate it, most everyone agrees it will make a massive impact on all of our real lives,” Ruffalo wrote in an op-ed for TIME magazine, titled, “Governor Newsom’s Veto on the AI Bill Was a Mistake.”


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 2h ago

Homeless Crisis News Riverside ejects 31 homeless people, 9 dogs from Hole Lake encampment – Press Enterprise

Thumbnail
pressenterprise.com
11 Upvotes

With both the number of homeless people congregating on private property near Hole Lake and the frequency of complaints increasing, Riverside police and other officials moved 31 people out and cleaned up the land on Wednesday, Oct. 14.

The site of the operation was northwest of Van Buren Boulevard and Arlington Avenue. There is a residential area to the west, Van Buren Golf Center to the east, businesses to the south and Jurupa Avenue to the north.

Police officers and homeless outreach officials have in the past offered services to the homeless on the property, and some took advantage, Detective Steven Espinosa, a Police Department spokesman, said Thursday. But lately, neighbors have called with concerns about the dogs on the property, saying that they were fighting, he said. And more people were living on the land.

“There were enough calls that came in from the neighborhood that it was time to hone in on that area,” Espinosa said.

So Wednesday, police, including the Public Safety and Engagement and Problem-Oriented Policing teams, Parks and Neighborhood Specialists, Riverside County Probation, Riverside County Department of Animal Services and private contractors, showed up without prior warning, Espinosa said.

The 25 men and six women were cited for various violations, including trespassing, probation and parole violations, and drug-related offenses. They were all offered services, Espinosa said.

Police took personal property and stored it at the Police Department, and Animal Services took in nine dogs, Espinosa said. The owners can reclaim the items, he said.

Contractors then hauled away encampment materials, abandoned property, trash and other items.

Espinosa said he hopes the homeless people show up to their court dates. He said he didn’t know where they were going to go next. Police plan to monitor the area.

“We’re limited to what we can do,” Espinosa said.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 2h ago

State vs Federal Tenth Amendment Issues 🏛 California sues to block ICE courthouse immigration arrests | Sacramento Bee

Thumbnail
sacbee.com
9 Upvotes

California on Thursday asked a federal court to bar immigration agents from detaining people at state courthouses, filing its 100th lawsuit against the second Trump administration in less than two years.

In the complaint filed in federal court in Los Angeles, Attorney General Rob Bonta said that immigration detentions at courthouses in California have spiked in recent months despite a court order in a different case barring the practice. Immigration violations are civil infractions, not crimes, and both common law and state statutes bar such arrests at courthouses.

“Federal officers are carrying out disruptive, often violent, civil immigration enforcement arrests without regard for the impacts on the administration of justice,” Bonta said in a news conference announcing the lawsuit. Scaring people from court

In one case, Bonta said, agents refused to show a warrant or let a man speak with his attorney, who was already present. In another, armed agents physically carried a man out of a Rancho Cucamonga courthouse and placed him in an unmarked Sport Utility Vehicle, the attorney general said.

“Federal agents have targeted and apprehended individuals in courthouse hallways, in lobbies, in parking lots,” Bonta said. “These are the kinds of tactics and practices they are engaged in.”

Such actions are scaring people away from coming to court, whether as witnesses, defendants or observers, Bonta said, and amount to a blatant abuse of power. More than one suit per week

Bonta has filed more than a lawsuit per week in the 90 weeks of Trump’s second term. Such actions have been expensive, costing the state more than $30 million last year and requiring a workload equivalent to roughly 99 full-time employees, according to a previous investigation by The Bee.

But the attorney general said the expenditures have been worth it, salvaging billions in state funding that the administration had sought to claw back, and protecting the rights of the state and its residents.

“These 100 lawsuits are a reflection of just how far our federal government has strayed from the principles on which this country was founded,” Bonta said Thursday.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 11h ago

City News and Politics Police vs. firefighters: Bitter $350M tax war erupts in LA

Thumbnail
nypost.com
23 Upvotes

Police officers vs. firefighters. It’s not the annual softball game. It’s a serious political fight over a proposed half-cent per dollar sales tax in the city of LA.

The LA firefighters union, United Firefighters of Los Angeles City Local 112 (UFLAC), has put a 0.5% sales tax increase on the November ballot. The initiative is called Measure FD.

This is not about a union looking for more cash to benefit its members. The fact is that the LA Fire Department (LAFD) has been woefully understaffed and underfunded for several years.

Measure FD could raise almost $350 million each year — over a third of today’s firefighting budget — for equipment and services.

It should not be necessary. But the mayor and the City Council have mismanaged LA’s money and emergency services so badly that firefighters are reduced to begging taxpayers for help.

Now Angelenos could end up paying more taxes because their money wasn’t spent properly in the first place.

In the year before the Palisades Fire on Jan. 7, 2025, LA spent more on homeless services than it did on firefighting.

It’s one of the reasons that firefighters were not adequately deployed ahead of the fire: The LAFD brass allegedly didn’t want to pay overtime.

The lack of funds also likely affected the LAFD’s decision to roll up their hoses and leave the scene of the Lachman Fire on Jan. 2.

That fire erupted on New Year’s Day, just after midnight, allegedly after being set by an arsonist. The LAFD put it out within hours, but when firefighters came back the next day for “mop up” operations, they apparently left before the job was completely done, because of budget concerns.

You know the rest: The high winds of Jan. 7 reignited the Lachman Fire as the Palisades Fire.

And once the Palisades Fire was burning, the department was short of engines to send into the blaze. The LAFD chief, who was later fired, said that dozens of fire engines were down for repair, and that the department lacked maintenance staff.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 1d ago

Elections News and Politics Trump DOJ gives California 48-hour ultimatum over suspected noncitizen voters

Thumbnail
nypost.com
291 Upvotes

The Trump administration has placed California on a 48-hour clock — demanding a review of suspected noncitizen voters or a showdown in court before the midterm elections.

The Justice Department’s ultimatum came in letters Tuesday to Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Dean Logan, the registrar-recorder/county clerk for Los Angeles County. Reuters was first to report on the letters.

Acting Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter wrote that federal officials supplied Los Angeles County with a password-protected thumb drive identifying people they believe are likely noncitizens who were sent mail-in ballots.

A Department of Justice spokesperson confirmed to the California Post that letters were sent to Weber and Logan demanding immediate action to ensure that noncitizens who received ballots do not vote in the upcoming federal election.

“This should not be controversial, as the criminal statute is clear: only American citizens may vote in federal elections. It is a federal crime for noncitizens to vote in U.S. elections, and the DOJ is asking California to ensure that is not occurring,” officials said.

The letter to Weber threatens to seek emergency court intervention if state officials don’t comply — turning a thumb drive into the latest clash between Washington and the Golden State.

“If you cannot implement this process by then, given the ongoing federal election, the United States will have no choice but to seek emergency relief,” McCotter wrote.

A separate letter delivered to Logan came with the password-protected thumb drive listing suspected noncitizens who federal officials say were sent mail-in ballots.

McCotter demanded a review within 48 hours and instructed officials to hold the questioned ballots while citizenship checks play out.

“For individuals whom you cannot independently confirm citizenship status, we request that you immediately instruct the appropriate elections official to segregate — not cancel — those individuals’ vote-by-mail ballots until their citizenship status can be determined,” he wrote.

Officials for the Secretary of State and Governor’s Office did not immediately respond to The Post’s requests for comment.

The Trump administration has repeatedly portrayed voter fraud and noncitizen voting as widespread, despite studies showing it is rare.

A Reuters investigation found that software glitches and clerical mistakes may have put more than 30,000 noncitizens on voter rolls nationwide since 2000, though it was unclear how many actually voted.

Federal prosecutors, meanwhile, announced 16 new criminal cases Monday involving alleged noncitizen voting or fraudulent registrations.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 4h ago

Entertainment News and Politics After nearly buying Warner Bros., Netflix is laying off 1,000 workers. What happened? - Los Angeles Times

Thumbnail
latimes.com
6 Upvotes

It was a crowning moment. Netflix appeared to have prevailed in an audacious $82.7-billion deal to scoop one of the industry’s most prestigious studios: Warner Bros. The move seemed to cement Netflix’s status as the ultimate Hollywood gate-crasher and its dominance as the leading new player in media.

Now, nearly a year later, the plotline for Netflix has dramatically changed. The streaming giant lost out to Paramount Skydance in its bid for Warner Bros. Discovery and is facing headwinds on multiple fronts.

That was underscored this week when the streaming giant Netflix began shedding 6% of its workforce, or about 1,000 jobs — believed to be the largest layoff in the company’s history and exceeding the last round of job cuts in 2022, when it reported subscriber declines.

On Wednesday morning, Ted Sarandos and Co-Chief Executive Greg Peters sent a note to employees confirming the job losses, adding that the bulk of the cuts would affect the tech, product, legal and human resources teams.

“Our mission — to entertain the world — is ambitious, and delivering on it requires us to be disciplined about where we prioritize our people and resources,” wrote Sarandos and Peters in the memo obtained by The Times.

The cuts mark the latest reductions across the film and TV industry. Other entertainment and media companies have slashed their payrolls, including Walt Disney Co., Paramount and Sony Pictures Entertainment during a period of economic uncertainty in Hollywood.

But the scale of such downsizing is unusual for Netflix. Industry analysts and insiders chalk up the reversal of fortune to several factors. Although it still dominates the television business, the Los Gatos company hasn’t been able to produce enough new hit franchises to replace culture-defining shows from years past such as “Stranger Things” and “Squid Game.”

At the same time, Netflix faces rising competition from rivals such as HBO Max, Apple TV, Hulu and others that have upped their game. Free, ad-supported streaming platforms such as YouTube are increasingly taking a larger slice of consumer streaming hours. And Netflix’s efforts to diversify its business into new areas such as games have yielded mixed results.

The upshot: Netflix continues to be the dominant video subscription streaming player with more than 325 million subscribers, but the time that consumers spend on the platform is growing at a slower pace than what investors want. In the first half of this year, consumer watch time on Netflix increased only 2% compared with a year earlier, even as content spending increased 11% to $20 billion this year. Netflix also narrowed its annual revenue forecast last summer, disappointing some investors.

“Netflix’s layoffs show that even the top streaming companies are not immune to stagnation and financial difficulties,” said Ross Benes, senior analyst at research firm Emarketer.

Amid the sobering signs, investors have grown restless. Netflix shares, which closed at $70.57 on Wednesday, have plummeted 42% in the last year. Part of that decline was fueled by anxiety among investors over Netflix’s deal to buy Warner Bros. Discovery, but the share price hasn’t rebounded even after that deal fell apart.

“They need to better prepare their balance sheet and economics since engagement has plateaued,” said Brandon Katz, director of insights and content strategy at Greenlight Analytics.

Katz said that Netflix’s five most-watched English-language scripted summer movie releases in their first eight weeks posted the lowest average hours watched compared with the streamer’s top five summer releases in 2025, 2024 and 2023, citing Nielsen data.

Sarandos acknowledged concerns about engagement at a Bloomberg Screentime event Sept. 30.

“Overall we’re not growing as fast as I want us to, and we’re working on making that move faster,” Sarandos said.

Netflix declined to comment on the layoffs.

“We’ll continue to invest aggressively in high-impact areas to improve our service and further drive growth and innovation,” Sarandos and Peters said in their memo to employees.

In some ways, Netflix has been victim of its own success. It has produced a string of shows and movies that have hit the cultural zeitgeist such as “KPop Demon Hunters” and “Squid Game.” But finding enough new popular shows that continue to drive subscriptions has been a challenge.

“A lot of these major hits are coming to an end at similar times, and they don’t yet really have heir apparents to replace them,” Katz said.

Sci-fi hit “Stranger Things” released its finale last year, followed by the young-adult drama “Outer Banks” and “Emily in Paris,” which ends this year. Netflix also announced that “The Witcher” and “The Lincoln Lawyer” will wrap after their next seasons.

What’s more, the second seasons of some shows with big followings have seen large view drop-offs compared with their first seasons. For example, the fantasy series “Avatar: The Last Airbender” season 1 debuted with 21.2 million views, but views for its second season dropped 59% to 8.7 million, according to Netflix data.

New series from Netflix also haven’t captured as much consumer demand as other competing shows from rival streamers, according to Parrot Analytics.

Last year, Netflix had just one show — the Japanese anime and manga series “Sakamoto Days” — that made it in Parrot’s top 10 list of first season original series on streaming platforms. Parrot’s ranking measures consumer demand in the U.S. and is based on digital interactions such as social media chatter and Google searches. By comparison, Netflix had three titles in 2022 alone: the true crime show “Monster,” the documentary series “Harry & Meghan” and the sci-fi mystery show “1899,” Parrot said.

Sarandos told investors in July that such declines are typical and that second season falloff is slightly improved this year. But popular shows on rival streaming services such as the medical drama “The Pitt” on HBO Max have not seen such declines. “The Pitt” drew even more viewers in its second season than the first.

To diversify its business, Netflix has expanded its programming offerings beyond TV shows and movies to include live sports, such as football and baseball games.

Although live programs have helped to spur significant subscription sign-ups, they still represent just 1% of watch time on Netflix while costing 5% of the company’s content budget, Sarandos has said.

Netflix also has added video podcasts that have helped to boost daytime viewing on the platform, and has made deals with YouTube creators to bring their content to the streaming service.

But some of the new content hasn’t clicked, particularly in games, analysts said. In August, Netflix shut down Hollywood-based Night School, the maker of supernatural adventure game “Oxenfree,” and said it was closing a Helsinki-based games studio.

“They are spending on a lot of things that haven’t necessarily proven to be effective yet,” said Rob Rosenberg, a partner at law firm Moses & Singer and former Showtime Networks general counsel. “It feels a lot like they’re trying to send a message to Wall Street that ‘we’re re-examining how we do business.’”

Meanwhile, Netflix continues to face more competition from rivals such as YouTube, which offers a free, ad-supported version of its video library.

Unlike Netflix, YouTube does not pay for the creation of many of the videos on its platform. Instead, creators or companies upload and produce the programs themselves and YouTube shares ad and subscription revenue.

YouTube’s share of streaming watch time in the U.S. on TVs has steadily increased. In July, YouTube represented 14.2%, compared with Netflix’s 7.8%, according to Nielsen.

The pressure to boost engagement on Netflix has caused tension within the company, particularly between the teams of people responsible for how programs are promoted on the platform and the employees responsible for bringing shows and movies on Netflix, according to people familiar with the matter who were not authorized to speak publicly.

Some blame the content for not being enticing enough, while others contend that the programs could be promoted better on Netflix.

“It’s a bit of a quagmire,” said one of the sources familiar with the matter. “There is a tension when things aren’t working. People tend to point fingers.”

In their staff memo, Sarandos and Peters said Netflix is on track to deliver its full-year forecast and will continue to invest in areas that improve its service and drive growth and innovation.

“Doing that means making focused choices across the business so we can keep delivering for our members, partners, employees, and investors,” they wrote.

Despite the downsizing, Netflix remains highly profitable. In the second quarter, the company generated $3.4 billion in net income, up 9% from a year earlier. Revenue rose 13% to $12.6 billion last quarter, including double-digit revenue growth in all of its regions. Next week, the company will share its third-quarter results.

The streamer is expected to get a boost from new seasons of popular shows — including season 4 of the political drama “The Diplomat” and spy series “Lupin: Part 4,” as well as Thanksgiving Eve and Christmas Day NFL games.

Having new seasons of popular shows such as “Lupin” and “The Diplomat” will help boost Netflix’s engagement, said Alejandro Rojas, vice president of applied analytics at Parrot Analytics.

“The new season is like a catalyst for people to watch the previous seasons,” Rojas said.

On the theatrical side, Netflix also has high hopes for upcoming movies including La Bola Negra, starring Penelope Cruz; and “The Further Mis-Adventures of Cliff Booth” featuring Brad Pitt. Next year, Netflix will release the Greta Gerwig-directed film, “Narnia: The Magician’s Nephew” on Imax screens.

Netflix has not signaled any changes to its strategy for releasing movies or TV shows. But some analysts said it could benefit from having more theatrical releases and by dropping episodes of shows once a week, instead of all at once, to generate more buzz for programs. They also expect that Netflix will be more disciplined in its content spending.

“While the company will expand its sports roles, it’s cutting back at a time when revenue matters much more than subscriber additions,” said Benes of Emarketer. “With pressure mounting, Netflix will look to turn the tide by getting a boost from low-cost content. The battle for top creators will become more pitched.”


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 12h ago

Fraud RICO Scams Investigations Southern California woman sought for bank fraud added to FBI’s ‘Most Wanted Fraudsters’ list – Daily News

Thumbnail
dailynews.com
13 Upvotes

A Southern California woman wanted for defrauding banks out of nearly $15 million, now believed to be in Dubai, has been added to the FBI’s “Most Wanted Fraudsters” list, the agency announced.

Mary Carole McDonnell, 75, is wanted for bank fraud and aggravated identity theft in Orange and Los Angeles counties. With her name now on the list of most wanted fraud fugitives, there is a reward of up to $150,000 for information that leads to McDonnell’s arrest and conviction.

McDonnell allegedly represented herself as the heiress to the McDonnell aircraft family, falsely claiming she was related to the owners of the McDonnell Douglas aviation company, authorities said. She claimed she had $80 million in a trust in order to get a loan.

She is accused of defrauding a bank out of $14.7 million, which she still has not paid back, authorities said.

A federal warrant for her arrest was issued in December 2018 in Santa Ana.

McDonnell was the chief executive officer of Bellum Entertainment, a Burbank-based company that produced true crime shows, including “It Takes a Killer” and “I Married a Murderer.”

McDonnell, who also goes by Mary Carole Carroll, Mary Caroll McDonald, Mary C. Carroll and Mary Carroll McDonnell, is 5’7”, 145 pounds, and has known ties to Los Angeles, Montgomery, Alabama and Dubai, officials said.

The Bureau started the Most Wanted Fraudsters list, a separate list from the Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list, in June 2026 to bring attention to fugitives who committed fraud.

The FBI has captured six most wanted fraudsters from the list in recent months, according to the bureau.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 8h ago

Domestic Terrorism 6 teens arrested after nearly $200,000 in damages reported at shuttered Bay Area elementary school – The Mercury News

Thumbnail
mercurynews.com
7 Upvotes

Vandals who shattered windows, destroyed televisions and ransacked classrooms caused an estimated $200,000 in damages at the shuttered Brook Hill Elementary School in Santa Rosa, police said, and six teenagers have been arrested in connection with the break-in.

Officers were dispatched to the Vallejo Street campus about 6:15 p.m. Friday, Oct. 9, after a community member reported seeing several minors entering the school that’s been closed since June 2025. When authorities arrived, the minors ran away in different directions, leading officers on several foot chases, the Santa Rosa Police Department said in a news release.

Officers detained six minors, all age 16, and arrested them on suspicion of burglary, felony vandalism and conspiracy. All were transported to Los Guilicos Juvenile Hall in Santa Rosa, though it was not known Wednesday if they remained in custody since juvenile records are not public. A seventh minor was later identified, cited and released to his parents, police said.

While examining the campus, officers logged extensive property damage to the school’s administrative offices, classrooms, the library and other facilities. Damages approached $200,000, Santa Rosa City Schools spokesperson Patrick Gannon said Wednesday afternoon

Police responded to a separate incident on campus Friday, authorities said. Officers worked to compare the reported damage earlier in the day with the destruction reported Friday evening.

“Investigators compared observations from the earlier investigation with the newly discovered damage and determined that while some damage pre-dated the evening incident, the vast majority of the destruction documented that night was newly inflicted,” the police department said in its news release.

Detectives investigated both incidents to determine whether any of the minors arrested Friday evening were involved in the earlier vandalism incident or if more people participated in either incident.

Brook Hill is one of four campuses the school district declared surplus in September following their closures over the past two school years. The district has begun the process to offload Brook Hill, Lewis Early Learning Academy, Steele Lane Elementary School and the former Doyle Park campus of Santa Rosa French-American Charter School.

Santa Rosa City Schools shuttered a total of six schools over the past two years as part of district-wide cuts to rectify a budget deficit. In addition to the four schools declared surplus, the district has also closed Biella Elementary and Santa Rosa Middle schools.

Managing the empty schools has been a challenge for the district. There have been several incidents of burglary and vandalism at campuses since they closed, including at Biella and Santa Rosa Middle School. The damage to Brook Hill, however, is the most extensive and the most expensive, Gannon said.

The district’s insurance typically covers incidents like vandalism and theft. However, incidents can impact and increase insurance rates. The district is considering adding more security cameras at the shuttered sites, but those also come at an additional cost, Gannon said.

“There is only so much we can do to prevent something without investing more funding that would take away from somewhere else,” Gannon said. “We do want to try to prevent things like this, so we’re working closely with the Santa Rosa Police Department. … In the interim, we just ask the community to please be respectful. There are very serious consequences that come from committing crimes.”


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 2h ago

Legislature News and Politics Elderly parole law could cost taxpayers millions to keep sex offenders in prison | California | thecentersquare.com

Thumbnail
thecentersquare.com
2 Upvotes

A new law taking effect in 2027 will cost taxpayers millions of dollars annually to keep convicted sex offenders incarcerated longer.

The law is Assembly Bill 2727, which was introduced in the California Legislature this year after two convicted sex offenders over age 50 - but younger than 65 - became eligible for the state’s elderly parole. Under state law earlier this year, California inmates were eligible for elderly parole if they reached age 55 and had served at least 20 years of their sentence, or if they reached age 65 and had served at least 25 years of their sentence.

Under the new law, inmates have to be at least 65 years old and have served at least 25 years of their sentence, making those in their 50s ineligible for elderly parole.

The earlier law was passed after overcrowding in California’s state prisons prompted lawmakers to find ways to let nonviolent offenders out of prison, according to the original 2017 bill that established the elderly parole program.

“Protecting our children and our communities has been at the heart of this bill from day one,” said Assemblymember Stephanie Nguyen, D-Elk Grove, the author of AB 2727.

“When someone has been convicted of some of the most serious sexual offenses, especially crimes against children, we have a responsibility to make sure every safeguard is in place before they are released back into our communities," Nguyen said in a press release sent to The Center Square.

Nguyen did not respond to The Center Square's request for further comment.

According to the bill analysis for AB 2727, California’s taxpayers pay $138,000 annually to incarcerate convicted prisoners in California’s prison system. Every year an older individual is incarcerated costs an additional $138,000, ultimately costing millions of dollars more to keep sexual offenders in prison for longer.

Taxpayers would pay roughly $4.13 million each year to the Department of State Hospitals to expand screenings for inmates who are being evaluated as sexually violent predators, and an additional $10.23 million to $20.46 million for treatment for those individuals, according to fiscal comments included in the legislative analysis of the bill.

Additional costs to taxpayers is one of the main concerns Prison Policy Initiative, which opposed the bill, has about implementation of this law.

“This law expands the resource expenditure that California is burdened with in order to release certain people from its state prisons,” Wanda Bertram, communications strategist for Policy Prison Initiative, told The Center Square on Wednesday.

Earlier this year, two convicted child molesters - David Allen Funston, 64, and Gregory Vogelsang, 57 - were eligible for elderly parole. Funston was granted elderly parole and was immediately re-arrested by Placer County authorities upon his release on new charges from another child sex abuse case from the 1990s. He pleaded not guilty in that new case. Funston is in county jail in Placer County, according to county records.

Vogelsang was considered for elderly parole by the California Board of Parole Hearings and was ultimately not granted elderly parole, according to previous reporting by The Center Square. He is incarcerated at Valley State Prison in Sacramento County, according to the California Incarcerated Records and Prison Search database.

During a March press conference in which lawmakers called attention to Vogelsang’s potential release, Assemblymember Jeff Gonzalez, R-Indio, told reporters that public safety considerations were more important than the cost of keeping sex offenders in prison for longer.

“I don’t give a damn about the rising costs,” Gonzalez said. “I give a damn about these victims. When we say ‘What about the rising costs?’ that is so disconnected from the pain that we are feeling. That is so disconnected from the problem that we have. The rising costs are not a factor here.”

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office did not respond to The Center Square's request for comment before publication time. The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, as well as Democratic and Republican lawmakers on public safety committees in the Legislature, also did not respond to The Center Square.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 8h ago

Elections News and Politics Medi-Cal eligibility, fees and the 2026 CA governor fight | Sacramento Bee

Thumbnail
sacbee.com
3 Upvotes

ISSUE | MEDI-CAL CHANGES: Advocates and legislators successfully held off changes to California’s Medicaid program — known as Medi-Cal — that were pushed by Gov. Gavin Newsom during this year’s budget negotiations. Newsom wanted to lower the amount of assets that seniors and disabled adults can have and still be eligible for coverage from $130,000 to $2,000. Instead, the limit will now be $21,000 and won’t take effect until July 1 — as long as the next governor and legislators don’t decide to change it.

Newsom also wanted to increase the monthly fee undocumented people pay to keep receiving full benefits to $50 from $30. But the final budget said the next governor will need to put forward a plan in May that includes a fee no less than $30 but also no greater than $50.

In 2025, the Newsom administration had to borrow and ask the Legislature for billions of dollars to help cover costs for the program after eligibility was expanded to include more people, no matter of their immigration status.

Both changes proposed by Newsom would have saved the state hundred of millions of dollars. But they were seen as adding undue hardships to people who rely heavily on the care. The next governor will have a chance to continue down the path suggested by Newsom or come up with a new approach.

Here’s where the candidates stand. Xavier Becerra, Democrat: No details yet

Becerra, the former U.S. secretary of health and human services, has not yet decided how he wants to treat either the asset limit or the monthly fee, according to his campaign.

“Trump’s H.R. 1 has done real damage to California’s healthcare system, putting millions at risk of losing their coverage. Secretary Becerra’s priority as governor will be to protect access to care,” said campaign spokesperson Jonathan Underland, referring to the federal bill that Trump and Republicans in Congress approved that imposes requirements and cuts funding for medical care. Steve Hilton, Republican: Opposes asset limit cut, undocumented healthcare coverage

Hilton, in a statement, opposed the cut to the Medi-Cal asset limit saying: “Seniors and people with disabilities shouldn’t lose their coverage because they’ve managed to save some money. They’ve done the responsible thing. Why punish them for it?”

As for the monthly fee for undocumented Californians, the Republican said he would end the coverage altogether.

“California spends billions on healthcare for people here illegally,” he said. “Charging $30 or $50 a month doesn’t make that a sensible use of taxpayers’ money.” Why it is significant

California has faced significant budget deficits in recent years and the next governor is likely to need to dig out of future ones.

Medi-Cal covers more than one-third of California’s population so the eligibility and fee decisions made by the new state leader could lead to savings, but will also be closely watched by legislators and advocacy groups that will be ready to push back on changes they see as too severe.

The next governor will also need to decide on what to do with a proposal to tax corporations that don’t offer healthcare for their employees and who have workers that rely on Medi-Cal. If implemented, money from that tax could be used to offset Medi-Cal costs.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 11h ago

California Swamp IE The Political Cesspool Plot to stack California courts with judges who don't believe in prisons

Thumbnail
nypost.com
6 Upvotes

In 1970, a 17-year-old black militant pulled a gun from beneath his coat at the Marin County Hall of Justice. He took control of Courtroom 3, distributing weapons bought by Angela Davis to three inmates, including one on trial for assaulting a prison guard. They took the judge, prosecutor and three jurors hostage. An hour later, the judge and three of the perpetrators were dead.

The vigilantes failed to break the legal system.

Today, a new crop of radicals in California is pursuing that goal by other means. These activists hope to infiltrate the judiciary and use the levers of power to upend American justice.

Los Angeles County is the seat of the revolution. Across two recent election cycles, hard-left activists spent nearly $1 million on a slate of judicial candidates, electing three judges committed to remaking the county’s criminal-justice system. For the ideologues behind the campaign, this the opening move in what they hope will be a national takeover of the judiciary.

One architect of the takeover is La Defensa, a “femme-led” advocacy organization whose founders want to end incarceration in Los Angeles County. The group says that it “belong[s] to” several “communities,” namely “Chicanx, queer, immigrant, undocumented, working class people with incarcerated loved ones.”

La Defensa was founded in 2020 by current LA council member Eunisses Hernandez and Ivette Alé-Ferlito, both of whom want to abolish prisons.

“Electing progressive judges serves as a harm-reduction measure that disrupts power, it can only be effective as part of a broader abolitionist strategy,” Alé-Ferlito wrote in 2023. “It will take collective action to end incarceration in all its forms.”

The group is becoming a powerhouse. Its political arm, Justice PAC, has received high-dollar donations from Liz Simons, heiress to Renaissance Technology founder Jim Simons’s fortune, and Patty Quillin, the wife of Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings. La Defensa is linked to the Soros-funded Tides Advocacy network.

Many judges are former prosecutors who believe in punishing criminals. La Defensa wants to change that. As part of its “Defenders of Justice” slate, the group funded the judicial campaigns of six former defense attorneys and one civil rights lawyer across the 2022 and 2024 election cycles. Multiple candidates on the slate seemed to sympathize more with criminals than with their victims.

La Defensa’s PAC spent at least $910,000 on judicial candidates from 2022 through 2024. Their donations helped elect three former public defenders: George Turner Jr., Ericka Wiley and Holly Hancock. The new judges’ backgrounds and ideologies open a window onto La Defensa’s vision for the future of LA County’s justice system and beyond.

Turner is a committed radical. He studied race, class, and gender as an undergraduate at the University of California, Los Angeles, before attending UCLA’s law school, where he studied under some of the founders of critical race theory, including Kimberlé Crenshaw. After graduating, he served as a public defender in Los Angeles County. He named his three sons after his “favorite revolutionaries,” including slave-rebellion leader Nat Turner, black nationalist Malcolm X and Chicago Black Panther leader Fred Hampton.

Turner’s educational background and years defending accused criminals have apparently convinced him that America’s criminal-justice system is racist. He’s even come up with a novel analogy for a courtroom.

“It’s kind of like a slave ship,” Turner said on a podcast in 2020. “I see black men brought in in chains every day in a big wooden box and someone decides whether or not they’re going to be free or not. And it’s my job to do what I can to try to get them out.”

He and other candidates on the “Defenders” slate believe that crime is often caused by factors like poverty. The idea: If you provide housing, jobs and other services, crime will plummet.

“Circumstances are the reason why [most people] come before the court,” Turner said. “Putting folks in cages, it just doesn’t work.”

In keeping with that view, Turner centered his campaign on the fight against “mass incarceration.” He pledged to focus on applying laws “aimed at decreasing the number of those incarcerated” to “help create a more just and equitable society.”

Turner appealed to a broad coalition of left-wing voters. He was endorsed by supposedly mainstream groups like the LA County Democratic Party, the Public Defenders Union Local 148, California Progressive Alliance and the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor. He also won support from the Los Angeles County chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, which said it backed Turner over “ghouls who built their careers throwing people in jail.”

Another “Defenders” judge is Ericka Wiley. She spent more than two decades as a Los Angeles County deputy public defender, handling cases ranging from traffic infractions to capital murder. Wiley ran for judge after attending La Defensa’s judicial leadership academy, which taught candidates how to campaign, raise money and reach voters.

She is aligned with La Defensa’s anti-carceral agenda. She has suggested that the violent crime problem in Los Angeles is “exaggerat[ed]” and called for the dismantling of “systems that . . . support mass incarceration.”

Holly Hancock, a former flight attendant turned public defender, won her judicial election in 2022. She thinks “diversity” will fix supposed problems with the criminal-justice system.

“Los Angeles County deserves diversity . . . diversity of race, diversity of ethnicity, diversity of gender, gender fluidity,” she said at a campaign event. “Background determines behavior.”

On a podcast in 2022, Hancock outlined her vision to “deconstruct” the justice system. She endorsed “sound healing” and healing circles that bring criminals and victims together to discuss crime. “I just want to get on the bench so . . . I can try all these crazy things,” she said.

We reached out to La Defensa, Eunisses Hernandez, and the three judges named in this story. La Defensa and Hernandez did not respond, and the judges declined to comment.

The three judges are variously assigned to children, family, small claims,and unlawful detainermatters, and likely aren’t dealing much with hardened criminals. But for La Defensa, this is only a start.

Alé-Ferlito believes Los Angeles is laying the groundwork for a national takeover. La Defensa endorsed a candidate for LA city attorney. Eventually, it seeks to overturn America’s entire 237-year-old judicial system.

“We’re actually clearing the path for judicial transformation,” she said, “all the way up to the Supreme Court.”

Christopher F. Rufo is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a contributing editor of City Journal, and the author of America’s Cultural Revolution. Austen Hufford is a senior investigative reporter at City Journal.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 2h ago

City News and Politics San Diego County Paid $30 Million for Two Jail Deaths: Who Answers for the Next One? – California Globe

Thumbnail californiaglobe.com
1 Upvotes

Settlements land on taxpayers, but no public ledger ties each payout to a fix

By Jose Navarro, October 15, 2026 1:05 pm

San Diego County has paid about $30 million in two years to settle two wrongful-death lawsuits over deaths in its jails. Supervisors approved $16 million for the family of Hayden Schuck last October, believed to be the largest wrongful-death settlement in county history, after a $15 million settlement in 2024 over the death of Elisa Serna.

What I could not find in public records is who inside county government answers for the next one.

Schuck was 22. He died March 16, 2022, at Central Jail, less than a week after an arrest on suspicion of drunken driving. The county failed to preserve 55 hours of surveillance footage from outside his cell. A federal judge sanctioned the county and ruled that jurors could assume the footage would have reflected badly on it, the Times of San Diego reported.

The Serna case followed a similar arc. Her 2019 death at the Las Colinas Detention and Reentry Facility ended in an agreement of roughly $15 million, with the county paying $14 million and a contracted medical provider $1 million, per the same Union-Tribune analysis. Together, the two cases cost the county about $30 million.

The pattern is not new. A California State Auditor review counted 185 deaths in San Diego County jails from 2006 to 2020, the highest per-capita rate among the counties compared, the Associated Press reported. The auditor found that the Sheriff’s Department did not adequately assess inmates’ physical and mental health, and that the civilian oversight board skipped nearly a third of the deaths. San Diego’s settlements over those fifteen years totaled nearly $9 million. Two cases in two years have now cost more than three times that.

Where does the money come from?

Payouts approved by the Board of Supervisors come from the county treasury, and the cost then feeds into the sheriff’s contribution to the county’s public-liability fund. County records cited by the San Diego Union-Tribune show that contribution growing from about $8.3 million in 2015-16 to nearly $50 million in 2025, according to a summary of that reporting.

That is a fair point in the department’s favor, because some of the cost lands on its books. But a contribution formula is not a bill tied to specific failures. I found no public report that matches each settlement to what changed afterward.

That growth is about $42 million a year more than a decade ago. Every dollar of it competes with programs residents notice, such as senior meals, shelter beds and after-school care. I do not claim that any particular program was cut because of a settlement. The point is narrower: the county should be able to show taxpayers the tradeoff. As Supervisor Terra Lawson-Remer put it when the Board expanded jail oversight in September, “the legal liability falls on the county as a whole, so this is a financial issue as well as a moral issue.”

Sheriff Kelly Martinez deserves a fair hearing. She says she was not in office for many of the deaths at issue, and her office points to added medical staff, updated intake screening and new review roles to flag in-custody deaths faster. The numbers moved in the right direction: deaths peaked at 19 in 2022, fell to 13 in 2023 and nine in 2024, and stood at eight in 2025 as of September, according to Corrections1.

Bookings have risen and more people arrive with serious medical and behavioral-health needs, which makes the work harder. Credit is due. So is context: jail deaths since 2006 now exceed 250.

Oversight is catching up slowly. On September 9, the Board voted 4-1 to let the Citizens’ Law Enforcement Review Board investigate jail medical staff and contractors, whose conduct it previously could not fully review. In three years the board dismissed at least 75 allegations against health care providers for lack of jurisdiction. Its findings remain advisory.

An independent study of just over twelve years of in-custody deaths across seven facilities was published in April and scheduled for a public meeting on May 7. I did not find a public county response to its recommendations.

Los Angeles shows where an unexamined pattern leads. LA Public Press found that LAPD misconduct has cost the city $384 million since September 2019 across nearly 2,000 claims, paid from the general fund.

City Controller Kenneth Mejia called liability payouts “a major reason that the City is in a fiscal emergency.” Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez says the payouts leave less money for services such as sidewalks and street lights. LA County requires a corrective action plan for sheriff settlements over $100,000. Hernandez says similar reports on police cases have not reached the council.

San Diego can avoid that path with three steps that need no new law. First, publish an annual settlement report by department that lists the amount, the category of claim and what changed afterward. Second, require a corrective action plan for every settlement above $100,000 before the Board votes, as Los Angeles County already does for its sheriff. Third, show the tradeoff in the budget: during hearings, the Board should state how liability contributions and reserves compare with the programs competing for the same dollars.

Families who lose a relative in custody deserve accountability, and taxpayers deserve a ledger. A settlement closes a lawsuit. It should not close the question of what went wrong, or who is responsible for fixing it.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 3h ago

State vs Federal Tenth Amendment Issues 🏛 Justice Dept. sues California, seeks to stop state from counting 20,000 ballots - Los Angeles Times

Thumbnail
latimes.com
1 Upvotes
Many of the flagged voters are in L.A. County. State officials say the federal data are unreliable and the demand comes too close to the election.
Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin has alleged that there may be more than 190,000 noncitizens registered to vote in California.

The Trump administration on Thursday sued California over its handling of voter fraud claims, asking a federal court to immediately bar the state from counting ballots from about 20,000 voters statewide — many in Los Angeles County — whom the administration alleges are “likely noncitizens.”

The lawsuit is highly unusual, particularly given that California voters have already begun voting in the Nov. 3 midterms via mail ballots, experts said.

It’s also highly inappropriate and based on questionable federal data that have proved wildly inaccurate in other states, state officials said.

“This is a sad, desperate attempt by Trump to use his politicized Justice Department to try to suppress California voters just three weeks before Election Day,” Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on X. “Courts have made clear the federal government has no role in running state elections. We will defend free and fair elections in the Golden State and call out every authoritarian attempt to undermine our democracy.”

U.S. Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche, in his own statement, defended the lawsuit.

“State-facilitated voter fraud is unacceptable in the United States of America,” he said. “If found responsible in a court of law, the State of California will have seriously undermined confidence in our electoral system and violated laws that protect our nation’s representative system of government.”

The lawsuit states that “as part of an investigation into unlawful voting,” U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services conducted a “multiagency and multilevel review” of state voter and federal citizenship data and determined with “high confidence” that around 20,000 “likely noncitizens” are registered to vote in the state.

It then forwarded those names to Homeland Security Investigations, which conducted its own investigation and concluded the same, the lawsuit says.

“This means that, consistent with state law, nearly 20,000 noncitizens in California have been sent a vote-by-mail ballot to participate in the federal election (or will receive one), with many addresses listed in Los Angeles County,” the lawsuit alleges.

The lawsuit comes two days after Acting Deputy Atty. Gen. Trent McCotter wrote to California Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Dean Logan, head of the L.A. County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk’s office, giving them 48 hours to set aside the same ballots in order to investigate those voters’ citizenship status.

McCotter had said the Trump administration would be forced to file for emergency relief in the courts if Weber and Logan did not comply.

The lawsuit comes about three months after Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin wrote his own letter to Weber, alleging that there may be more than 190,000 noncitizens registered to vote in California.

The lawsuit makes no mention of that prior estimate, or why Homeland Security’s initial estimate was so much larger than its current estimate. It does say that USCIS identifying with “high confidence” that a voter is a likely noncitizen “means that the match between voter information on the voting roll and USCIS’ internal records is strong and consistent based on multiple identifiers that support a strong identity link.”

It also said, “The Federal Government notified California months ago that numerous noncitizens may be registered to vote in California. Despite knowing that California must send vote-by-mail ballots to every registered voter, the State made no serious attempt to work with the Federal Government to determine whether noncitizens are registered to vote.”

The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for more information as to how the 190,000 figure dropped to 20,000.

In a letter back to McCotter, Weber noted both figures and accused the Trump administration of pushing forward to disenfranchise voters at the last minute before the midterms based on shoddy data work and no certainty that those voters are ineligible.

“Nowhere has the federal government clarified the basis for suspecting — not even confirming with any level of certainty — the listed individuals are non-citizens. And as one court recently noted, the federal government’s citizenship records are ‘known to be unreliable,’” Weber wrote, referring to a case brought against the Justice Department by the organization Common Cause. “To give just one example, in a similar incident in the State of Nevada, DHS initially alleged that Nevada’s voter roll included nearly 16,000 potential non-citizens. However, after working with the State of Nevada, DHS officials failed to establish that a single non-citizen was on the voter rolls.”

Weber called it “remarkable” that the Justice Department would demand that her office “review and confirm the citizenship status of each of the approximately 20,000 individuals on the list on the eve of an election and within a mere 48 hours” despite providing no clear evidence that those individuals are wrongly registered.

“This is an emergency of the DOJ’s creation,” Weber wrote. “California’s election administration will continue to be governed by applicable federal and state law, not by unsubstantiated claims and outrageous demands.”

First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, the lead federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, posted about the lawsuit on X, noting the 48-window given to Weber and Logan had lapsed and writing, “Time is up for California.”

“This is not political or controversial,” he wrote. “We will not allow California to dilute the votes of American citizens.”

The Trump administration’s lawsuit says that while the U.S. “actively investigates and prosecutes incidents of unlawful voting,” it “is not practicable or feasible for the United States to investigate before the 2026 election concludes thousands, let alone tens of thousands, of individuals that two federal investigative offices identified on the California voter roster as likely being sent vote-by-mail ballots.”

Because of that, it argues, “California is thus knowingly imposing an obstacle on the United States’ ability to enforce [federal election law] by facilitating unlawful voting rather than working with the Federal Government to prevent it,” and the state is therefore legally barred from sending mail ballots to the 20,000 voters Homeland Security has flagged.

It asks the federal court in the Central District of California to declare the state’s actions — including providing and counting ballots for those 20,000 people — to be barred by law and in violation of the Supremacy Clause, and to issue an injunction barring the state from counting those ballots in federal elections “until those individuals’ citizenship status can be verified.”

The Trump administration’s attempts to use immigration data to reach conclusions about California voter rolls and intervene in California’s election is already being challenged in a separate federal case in the district of Washington, D.C., brought by attorneys with the UCLA Voting Rights Project on behalf of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA, and a California voter named Pedro Trujillo.

The UCLA attorneys filed their own emergency petition Thursday to preclude the Justice Department from moving forward with such actions against California, citing the letters McCotter sent to Weber and Logan.

A judge in that case ordered the parties to meet and file a status report with the court by Friday as to when each side would be able to brief the court on the issue.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 3h ago

Elections News and Politics LA mayor candidates Karen Bass, Nithya Raman to appear in back-to-back forums – Daily News

Thumbnail
dailynews.com
1 Upvotes

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and City Councilmember Nithya Raman will make their cases to downtown Los Angeles residents Thursday night during separate, back-to-back mayoral candidate forums, two days after trading sharp criticism over homelessness and public safety during a televised debate.

The forums will begin at 6 p.m. Thursday at Clifton’s Republic, 648 S. Broadway, and are being hosted by the Downtown Los Angeles Residents Association in partnership with the South Park Neighborhood Association, LA River Artists and Business Association and DTLA Proud.

Each candidate will participate in a separate 40-minute session, answering the same questions submitted by downtown residents.

The forums come after Bass and Raman exchanged harsh words Tuesday during a televised debate, criticizing one another’s records on homelessness, public safety and other issues facing the city ahead of the Nov. 3 general election.

During the debate, Bass touted her administration’s efforts to reduce homelessness through her signature Inside Safe initiative and to encourage construction of affordable housing.

ALSO SEE: Bass, Raman swap sharp-edged allegations in televised LA mayoral debate

Raman, who represents the 4th Council District, countered that the city has made insufficient progress despite spending hundreds of millions of dollars on homelessness programs.

“Under this mayor’s leadership, we have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into an incredibly expensive program, Inside Safe, which has been unaccountable to the public, for which she (Bass) has refused audits, and which has brought down homelessness a little bit, but at extraordinary cost,” Raman said.

Bass, meanwhile, criticized Raman’s leadership of the City Council’s homelessness committee and her opposition to expanding restrictions on homeless encampments under the city’s anti-camping ordinance, known as 41.18.

“If you cannot manage the work of your committee, how on earth are you going to manage the second largest city in the country?” Bass said.

Raman defended her record, pointing to a nearly 50% reduction in homelessness in her council district and her work on tenant protections.

The candidates also clashed over the leadership of Los Angeles Police Department Chief Jim McDonnell.

Raman said she would seek to replace McDonnell, arguing that he had lost the trust of Angelenos, particularly over the department’s response to federal immigration enforcement operations.

“I believe he’s lost the trust of Angelenos, especially in response to the ICE raids. It is not a unilateral decision by the mayor. It takes agreement with the police commission, even agreement with the council. I will work toward it while keeping the safety of Angelenos paramount,” Raman said.

Bass criticized the prospect of replacing the police chief as Los Angeles prepares to host the 2028 Olympic Games, arguing that a change in leadership could destabilize the department.

The candidates also discussed officer-involved shootings, police transparency, housing and economic development.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 1d ago

Elections News and Politics Justice Dept. demands California prove citizenship for lists of voters or withhold ballots - Los Angeles Times

Thumbnail
latimes.com
86 Upvotes

The U.S. Department of Justice has ratcheted up its pressure campaign on California election officials to ferret out alleged voter fraud ahead of the Nov. 3 midterm election, demanding that officials statewide prove the U.S. citizenship of voters flagged by the federal government as potential noncitizens, or withhold or set aside their ballots.

Acting Deputy Atty. Gen. R. Trent McCotter made the demand — which experts called highly questionable at a time when votes are already being cast — in letters to state elections officials Tuesday, including California Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Dean Logan, head of the L.A. County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk’s office.

The letters, reviewed by The Times, call on the state officials to respond to the Justice Department within 48 hours.

McCotter wrote that the Justice Department had provided Logan’s office with a “password-protected thumb drive with a list of names the Federal Government believes are likely noncitizens who were sent a vote-by-mail ballot” for the Nov. 3 election.

“We request that you review the list within 48 hours to determine whether any citizens are listed. For individuals whom you cannot independently confirm citizenship status, we request that you immediately instruct the appropriate elections officials to segregate — not cancel — those individuals’ vote-by-mail ballots until their citizenship status can be determined,” McCotter wrote to both Weber and Logan.

Voters on the federal list who haven’t already been sent a ballot should not be sent one until their citizenship is verified, while ballots already returned by voters on the list should not be counted until their citizenship is verified, McCotter wrote.

Neither Weber’s office nor Logan’s office immediately responded to a request for comment Wednesday.

Weber has previously questioned the basis for a claim by Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin in July that there may be more than 190,000 noncitizen voters on California rolls, and rebuffed Trump administration offers to work with her office to purge state polls of such ineligible voters ahead of November without additional information on how it reached its conclusions.

Similar Trump administration lists have been shown in other states to be substantially inaccurate, and to include many voters who are indeed citizens. Election experts say that makes the demand on California — where ballots have already been mailed out — even more concerning.

“One must question why the DOJ would violate its own rules about investigating elections close to election day, and over a week after they knew the state had already mailed ballots out, particularly when their past claims have been full of errors,” said David Becker, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research.

Becker noted the Trump administration alleged that there were nearly 16,000 noncitizens registered in Nevada, later reduced that number to 185 after additional scrutiny, and then determined all of them were in fact citizens.

The Justice Department, in a statement to The Times, defended its demands to California — saying it “should not be controversial, as the criminal statute is clear: only American citizens may vote in federal elections. It is a federal crime for noncitizens to vote in U.S. elections, and the DOJ is asking California to ensure that is not occurring.”

McCotter wrote that if Weber cannot implement his demands for how to segregate ballots and verify voter citizenship for those on the federal list, the Justice Department “will have no choice but to seek emergency relief” — an apparent reference to seeking court intervention.

McCotter copied on the letters First Assistant U.S. Atty. Bill Essayli, the lead federal prosecutor in Los Angeles whose office has previously sent Logan’s office a series of grand jury subpoenas for individual voter records as part of a criminal investigation into illegal voting.

Essayli’s office referred questions to the Justice Department. California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office referred questions on the threat of litigation to Weber and Logan’s offices.

Rick Hasen, director of the Safeguarding Democracy Project at UCLA Law, said he is “not aware of anything like this ever happening this close to an election,” and that it may in fact be illegal under the National Voter Registration Act, which “prevents systematic purges of voters 90 days before the election.”

He said the question of whether that preclusion against purges applies to the removal of noncitizens is an issue that is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, in an Arizona case the high court will hear in December, but that the Justice Department’s actions strike him as “legally questionable.”

Hasen said the “whole point of that 90-day rule is to prevent the inadvertent disenfranchisement of eligible voters by mistake in the rush before the election,” and that risk is increased by the inaccuracies of similar lists presented by the Trump administration in other states. “So if there is an attempt to go to court — if DOJ tries to sue over this — they might have a hard time getting a judge to agree that this is something that the registrar must do or even can do.”

The fact that elections officials are already busy receiving and pre-processing ballots would only bolster the state’s position in such a case, Hasen said.

“It’s obviously not a convenient time,” he said. “And given the fact that the lists have proven to be wildly inaccurate, at least in other states, it might be sending the registrar on a wild goose chase, when they have more relevant things to do in the election.”

But that “chaos” may be the point, Hasen said. “This is potentially another example of DOJ just making the work of state and local election administrators — which is already quite difficult and stressful — even harder,” he said.

The Justice Department in recent weeks has announced scattered arrests of alleged noncitizen voters around the country, and Trump administration officials — including Essayli — have pointed to such arrests as proof that noncitizens are voting illegally.

Such voting does happen, Hasen said, but after months of the administration aggressively searching for such voters, the relatively small number of arrests “belies the contention that it’s widespread” or criminal, with many of the few cases identified the result of “administrative error or misunderstanding” rather than an intent to illegally cast ballots.

In his letters to Weber and Logan, McCotter wrote that allowing “noncitizens to vote cancels citizen votes,” and that ferreting out illegal noncitizen voters is a joint responsibility of state and federal officials.

“States are responsible for voter registration, and the Federal Government is responsible for maintaining immigration records to enable verification of citizenship,” he wrote. “Working together, we can more effectively protect against voter dilution and promote election integrity.”


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 7h ago

Governor News and Politics Why California Gov. Gavin Newsom is all over your social feeds

Thumbnail
calmatters.org
2 Upvotes

Last month, while signing a bill to provide a tax credit for struggling local news outlets, Gov. Gavin Newsom reminisced about the days when reporters thronged around him when he was mayor of San Francisco — right around the time tech platforms swept into town and permanently disrupted the media industry.

“There’s not a lot of you,” he said to the assembled Capitol press corps, with whom he said he had enjoyed an “awkwardly healthy” relationship over two terms as governor. “There’s not enough.”

Left unsaid was how much he’s taken advantage of the industry’s transformation in his own political rise.

The past two decades of media contraction have allowed government officials in every town to talk less to traditional news outlets. Instead they talk directly with voters and constituents on their own platforms.

That allows them to dodge tough questions and independent media coverage where they’re “not controlling the narrative,” said Menlo College political science professor Melissa Michelson. Politicians have sought this for decades, Michelson said, but only in recent years — when over half of U.S. adults get news through social media — have they seen it as more important than traditional media.

Newsom has exploited the trend with unique energy, and is now preparing to leave office after eight years as governor as one of the Democratic Party’s most prolific communicators.

The potential 2028 presidential contender has been a Twitch stream guest, a Substacker and a podcast bro. He never stops posting. He picks fights, on X especially, with right-wing media, an industry he is both critical of and fascinated with.

Some of his communications are done on campaign accounts, but much of the jousting comes from his taxpayer-funded governor’s office communications staff, who have played a major role in casting Newsom as the leading Democrat pushing back against the Trump administration in areas well beyond the boundaries of state policy.

During his second term, the post-pandemic, post-recall election Newsom has grown his press and communications team into an around-the-clock, content-creating media operation, even as he rarely takes questions from the media in Sacramento and his agencies shun interview requests. He nearly doubled his communications staff since the pandemic, even adding a full-time photographer, making $212,000 a year, whose LinkedIn profile describes his job as focusing on the office’s “visual messaging, public perception and narrative development.” Doing it all

Newsom has 24 taxpayer-funded employees on his official communications team who are collectively paid at least $2.6 million a year, including staff who scout locations for events and camera operators who livestream them. That’s up from 12 in January 2020, a year into his first term.

The only other governor with a comparable communications staff was Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, an international media sensation whose office credentialed 400 reporters in his first term and held weekly press briefings, said former spokesperson Margita Thompson. Today during one of Newsom’s rare Sacramento press conferences, between 10 and 20 reporters regularly attend. The office stopped issuing its own press credentials years ago.

Newsom’s office payroll includes several spokespeople, writers and researchers who explain state policy. It also has a four-person team of Tiktok- and pop-culture-savvy Gen Z digital staff who churn out a drumbeat of social media content on official accounts.

The size of Newsom’s communications operation reflects his “do it all” style of governing.

He won office with a long list of lofty priorities from expanding healthcare and universal preschool to fighting climate change, and created new state departments for issues previously left to other governments, like a homelessness agency and a state surgeon general’s office. He has expanded the size of the state government to an all-time high.

Newsom treats publicity as part of that public policy strategy, said Erin Mellon, a director of communications for Newsom from 2020 to 2024.

“If you’re not actually telling people about what you’re doing, then doing it doesn’t make a difference because they can’t take advantage of that” policy or program, Mellon said of Newsom’s thinking. “When someone had a problem with the state of California, even if it was a local issue, it reflected on him, on his role and his job as governor. He would insert himself.”

Her team had the inside joke “Everything is a comms problem” printed on mugs, Mellon said.

It’s a stark contrast from the lean, budget-cutting days of his Democratic predecessor Gov. Jerry Brown, who presided over the state’s recovery from the Great Recession. Brown, gruff and unpolished, ran a famously small press shop and often eschewed weighing in on issues. The office had eight staffers at its height — including interns — and borrowed photographers from other agencies.

“He was like, ‘I don’t have to have an opinion on everything that happens and I don’t want to,’” recalled a former spokesperson, Elizabeth Ashford. “I don’t think he was that interested in new media. Newsom is.”

Bob Salladay, a former journalist and Newsom’s senior adviser for communications, said most of his staff’s time is still spent responding to traditional media inquiries and explaining state policy to national reporters and a hollowed-out state press corps. The growth of the communications staff, he said, is “responding to the volume of work that the governor is doing.”

“You cannot overstate the difference between this governor and past governors in terms of what they’re involved in doing,” said Salladay, who makes $242,000 a year. “That generates a huge amount of inquiries into the office.”

The team also takes significant liberties beyond policy communications.

The digital staff’s output includes fan edits of Newsom set to Nicki Minaj and an X post of a pixelated image implying something tawdry about Trump’s chin flesh that got 30 million views. Newsom’s official accounts used a slew of memes and mockery last summer as they promoted both California’s resistance to Trump’s National Guard deployment in LA and Newsom’s anti-GOP gerrymandering initiative. His press office’s X account gained half a million followers last August alone, Newsom’s office said.

There is also more overt overlap with the political side of Newsom’s operation. Izzy Gardon, the spokesperson behind much of Newsom’s more combative public image, has accompanied the governor on his political travels to red and swing states ahead of a likely 2028 presidential run. This summer, Salladay said Gardon moved into a part-time role with the office, now making half his $185,000-a-year state salary and doing political work for Newsom during his unpaid time. Other staff take personal time to volunteer for Newsom’s campaign, he said. ‘If we were Trumpian’

The relentless drumbeat of snarky posts from the governor’s official press office and Newsom’s foray into podcasting and other media known to be frequented by young men online have gotten him plenty of attention ahead of his anticipated decision.

Celinda Lake, a Democratic strategist and pollster who has worked with other politicians considering 2028 runs, said Newsom stands out in the party for his unique comfort communicating on platforms that tend to be dominated by younger, insurgent progressives or conservatives. She called his digital operation “very effective” and “one of the best out there.”

“He has mastered being able to set the agenda and being able to get other people to respond to him,” she said.

The strategies are not without criticism. Rob Stutzman, a Republican strategist who was once a spokesperson for Schwarzenegger, said Newsom has blurred ethical lines by using his office “to basically run a political account” in ways that mirror how the president treats his political opponents and the press.

Newsom’s office tells conservative writers they are not “real journalists.” The social media posts range from routine policy announcements to AI-generated memes boosting Newsom and sexualized taunts at Republicans. The account frequently engages in fights with the right, scorning them for their alignment with Trump, who is widely unpopular in California. In a recent flurry of posts, Newsom’s office called for California’s GOP congressmembers to condemn Trump’s declaration to “let (Iran) take out Los Angeles or San Diego.” When Republican-turned-independent Kevin Kiley responded that he criticized the comment, Newsom’s office wrote it was insufficient and replied, “You’re a weak little noodle.”

“Trump has changed the norms,” Stutzman said. “And Newsom, his operation basically adopted the Trump playbook.”

But for every alleged offense Newsom’s team points to a bigger one from the president, like his recent taxpayer-paid pro-Trump political ads. Newsom himself has attested to satirizing Trump’s rhetoric to to call attention to the president’s many disputes with California, like his withholding of federal aid in the wake of the January 2025 Los Angeles wildfires.

“These last two years with Trump are different than any other moment in modern American history, so you have to deal with it in different ways,” Salladay said. He added later, “If we were Trumpian, we would have cut off the California Post by now. But we work with them every day,” referring to the Rupert Murdoch-owned offshoot of the New York Post that started publishing in January. Countering the right

Two full-time staff members are assigned to “rapid response,” which involves fact-checking claims and misinformation about Newsom, his policies and his governance of California on four social media platforms, as well as pushing traditional media outlets to change things they deem incorrect.

The office boasts of requesting 453 corrections since 2024. Salladay said the rapid response operation grew out of narratives on right-wing media and social media about the Los Angeles fires, crime and the state’s business climate.

He denied that the effort amounts to using state funds to burnish Newsom’s political image. Misinformed notions of California, he said, could result in policy decisions that affect constituents, like the federal government withholding aid.

“When people tell you San Francisco is a hellhole or California is driving out businesses, that’s the propaganda we have to counter,” he said. “That is a state operation. We are defending the state and we have a right to do that, because the narrative can be incredibly damaging.”

In 2025, the Public Policy Institute of California found the number of business headquarters leaving California annually increased between 2011 and 2021, but found their share of all business activity was small, as was the overall effect on jobs.

But even as Newsom’s subordinates argue with and dismiss right-wing media outlets online, he maintains a fascination and friendliness with many of them. In 2025, in the wake of bruising election losses for the Democratic Party and young men tilting rightward hard, he shocked fellow liberals by launching a podcast, “This is Gavin Newsom,” featuring a string of conservative activists and media figures as guests.

Pitched as a way to have friendly debate with his ideological opposites and to learn from right-wing communications successes, he launched the show with Charlie Kirk. The conservative activist put Newsom in a defensive position with a string of questionable claims about California schools, asserting their libraries contained pornography and that they were teaching “against white people.” On the show, Newsom also agreed with Kirk that it’s unfair for trans girls to play girls’ sports, and laughingly helped Kirk analyze how a 2024 campaign ad about Vice President Kamala Harris’ support for gender reassignment surgery for prisoners was bad optics for Democrats.

It got Newsom a lot of attention and turned some heads on the right. Thompson, the former Schwarzenegger spokesperson, said she was alerted to the podcast a few months later by a conservative friend, who was surprised that in an episode with the conservative podcast host Shawn Ryan, Newsom talked of hunting and accepted a gift gun. (Earlier this year Newsom, in a financial disclosure, revealed he never took possession of the gun and his office would not say whether it’s in California.)

“I liked that he’s going places where he is unexpected,” Thompson said, though she was turned off by the “bro talk.”

Since then, the podcast, which is produced by iHeartRadio and for which Newsom is not paid, has taken a more expected liberal turn. Newsom has used it to promote Democrats, push last year for his successful gerrymandering initiative Prop. 50 and to discuss AI policy. But every few episodes, he returns to figures from the right, most recently Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy.

Newsom spokesperson Anthony York said Newsom picks most of the guests from his personal contact list, calling the show “a reflection of who he is and his interests.”

Newsom said last month that he hopes to keep the podcast going after he leaves office in January.

Lake, the national strategist, said Newsom will have no trouble maintaining public attention.

“The race starts Jan. 1, 2027,” she said. “He’s set up the infrastructure to keep it going.”


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 7h ago

Elections News and Politics Opinion | CA ballot props fuel longstanding tax-and-spending war

Thumbnail
calmatters.org
2 Upvotes

California voters will pass judgment on 14 statewide ballot measures this year and all but two of them relate, in some manner, to financing public services.

Collectively they represent the latest version of what fiscal policy buffs call “ballot box budgeting” — persuading voters to prioritize or limit how funds are raised and spent rather than leaving those issues to elected officials.

This election’s most contentious measure, Proposition 40, typifies the underlying philosophical conflict that has raged ever since voters passed Proposition 13, the state’s iconic limit on property taxes, nearly a half-century ago.

Prop. 13 embodied the belief that high taxes undercut Californians’ ability to enhance the welfare of their own families. Prop. 40, which would impose a 5% tax on the wealth of California’s billionaires, reflects the counter-contention that expansive public services better serve the well-being of all Californians.

Before Prop. 13 made the June 1978 ballot, the initiative process almost never dealt with tax and spending issues, a yearly summary from the secretary of state’s office indicates. Implicitly, voters were content to leave such money matters to elected state and local officials.

Prop. 13 reduced property taxes that had been the fundamental revenue source for local governments and school systems. It also made raising taxes of all kinds more difficult.

Prop. 13’s jolting impact also encouraged the use of ballot measures process not only to affect public finance issues but policies of all kinds. Succeeding elections saw an explosion of proposals dealing with such issues as punishment for crimes, immigration, affirmative action and same-sex marriage.

The two measures on this year’s ballot that don’t deal with taxes and spending typify that trend. Proposition 39 would require voters to show identifying documents and Proposition 45 would reduce use of the California Environmental Quality Act to block projects.

However, taxes and spending continued to dominate post-Prop. 13 elections, beginning in 1979 with a special election called by then-Gov. Jerry Brown to pass Proposition 4, a cap on state spending known as the “Gann Limit” for Paul Gann, a co-author of Prop. 13 with fellow tax gadfly Howard Jarvis.

Brown had strenuously opposed Prop. 13 but after its passage declared himself to be a “born-again tax cutter” and joined with Gann to persuade voters to approve the spending limit. It continues to be a factor in fashioning an annual state budget.

A much bigger budget factor is Proposition 98, a 1988 measure sponsored by the California Teachers Association to cushion Prop. 13’s impact on school finances. Prop. 98 contains a complex formula to guarantee a certain level of state education aid that works out to about 40% of general fund revenues.

The teachers’ union is opposing this year’s Prop. 40, the wealth tax on billionaires, which designates all but a small percentage of its revenue for healthcare, excluding Prop. 98. The conflict illustrates how ballot box budgeting pits interest groups against each other, even those on the same side in their underlying battle with anti-tax forces.

Speaking of which, anti-tax groups such as the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association have continued to press their cause, staving off efforts to change Prop. 13 and promoting tax limits.

This year, they are pushing Proposition 43, which would increase the vote requirement to approve some local taxes. And they’re opposing the California Teachers Association’s Proposition 3, which would make permanent a temporary tax on high-income Californians that was initially passed in 2012 at Brown’s behest during his second stint as governor.

During the 17th century, a conflict known as the 30 Years War raged in Europe. Today California’s war over taxes and spending is already 48 years old and, as this year’s array of ballot measures indicates, it shows no sign of ending.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 11h ago

Ai Technology and Science Patients: All my best tips on how to opt out of data sharing - CalMatters

Thumbnail
calmatters.org
4 Upvotes

CalMatters and The Markup’s reporting has found that opting out of data sharing is much more difficult than it needs to be because deceptive designs or “dark patterns” make it more work to say no than to say yes. Research has found that when given the choice, people prefer to have more fine-grained control over how their medical data is shared or used.

In the last year, I registered as a patient at 25 clinics and hospitals across seven states and spent hundreds of hours reviewing consent forms, privacy policies and marketing forms to see whether I could actually opt out of sharing my data. Sometimes, opting out was simple. Other times — like in our most recent reporting on MyChart and University Hospitals in Ohio — the process was extremely convoluted.

For patients that are interested in opting out, here are my best tips to get started:

Get the forms in advance. A provider’s office will often send you a link 24 to 48 hours in advance of your appointment. Sometimes, you can download them off a hospital website. I usually search online for keywords like “consent forms + hospital name.” Getting the forms early means you can take many of the steps below at home, instead of under time pressure immediately before your appointment.
Nice to have: Keep a dedicated phone number and email address for health visits. It’s not always possible, but if you can, get a dedicated phone number such as through Google Voice’s free plan or the paid Burner app. Set up a new email inbox just for healthcare appointments, such as with Gmail or Proton Mail. When filling out contact information for appointments or creating a patient portal account, use your dedicated phone number and email address. This step makes it easier for you to track all the forms health providers send you, and potentially, to track your data trail in the future.
Use the screen recorder already installed on your phone, computer or tablet to record your screen as you read through the forms, so you have a copy of what you sign. Here are instructions for iPhones and tablets and Android devices. On a Mac computer, press Command + Shift + 5 and select the Record button (looks like a bullseye).
Read or skim for specific terms like opt-out, withdraw consent, restrict, refuse, responsibility, optional, authorization.
Read or skim the privacy policy for clues about what instructions to follow to opt out. Every healthcare provider should have a privacy policy. Sometimes, a privacy policy will give you the email address or phone number of who to contact to opt out of sharing your data. You can contact them ahead of your appointment to try and opt out.
Arrive early to your appointment. Like 45 minutes early. Politely request paper forms. On paper workflows, you can skip ahead without being forced to engage with voluntary forms that are bundled in with required forms. Many privacy-conscious patients also try to cross out terms they disagree with, which they date and initial. But keep in mind, some forms explicitly note that changes to those forms are not binding.
Take photos or videos of the forms you sign. And when you return the forms to a receptionist, politely ask them to provide you with a photocopy of your signed and completed forms. Keeping your own records is important, and sometimes obtaining them later can be a kafkaesque process.
If you are struggling to get a copy of a form you filled out, or if there are terms you’d like to opt out of but you can’t figure out how, try politely asking the front desk or a provider how to proceed. If they do not know, try the following:
    At a smaller clinic: Ask the front desk who you can speak to about “patient administrative records” or “clinic management.” They probably aren’t on site, but you should be able to get a person or a department’s name and an email or phone number.
    At a bigger clinic or hospital: Look for the “HIPAA Compliance” or ethics office or department on their website. When you find their phone number or email, call and leave a message (it is very unlikely someone will pick up the phone). By email, write to them about your concern, provide a copy of or describe what the terms are and explain that you would like to opt out, or ask them for the opt-out instructions.
If none of the above works, one more place you can try is the “medical records” department at many hospitals. That work may be outsourced to another company. Get the name and contact of the department or the company by asking at an information desk. Then ask the medical records contact how you can opt-out.
Email me if you get stuck, or have questions. I might not know the answer, but I might be able to help you strategize to get it. Or, if you figure something out that unlocks an opt-out, I’d be glad to hear about it! arosenblat@calmatters.org
If you think your rights have been violated, submit a complaint to the Office for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Peter Swire, the White House coordinator for the HIPAA privacy rule under President Bill Clinton, recommends involving HIPAA enforcers to weigh in on practices. “You can bring complaints when you’re only 80% sure. A complaint is a complaint. Then, they’re supposed to look at it with their expertise,” he said. HHS can issue guidance or address enforcement concerns through their FAQ page in response.

r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 8h ago

Ai Technology and Science AI robots are roaming L.A. grocery store aisles. Shoppers and workers are worried - Los Angeles Times

Thumbnail
latimes.com
2 Upvotes

The robot takeover looks a lot different from what we see in Hollywood thrillers.

Even as artificial intelligence-powered humanoid robots dance, box and beat human running-speed records, the physical bots showing up in our daily lives in Los Angeles are less Terminator and more R2-D2.

On a Wednesday afternoon at Ralphs on Pico Boulevard, a skinny, six-foot-tall tower of sensors rolled through the aisles. It made low beeping noises, its lights flickering purple and green. A small screen on the top of the tower had two blinking eyes and a small line of text. “Hi, I’m Tally!”

“Robot! Robot!” a young boy yelled. Some adults looked confused; others laughed.

Ricardo Valadez, a 62-year-old real estate agent from Mid-City and Ralphs regular, said he felt like the robot was stalking him around the store but was reassured by an employee that it just checks the shelves to see what is missing or out of place.

“I was kind of like, ‘What the hell is that?’” Valadez said. “I don’t know why; I felt that it was following me.”

With a recent rollout in some L.A. grocery stores, the inventory bot, built by Burlingame-based company Simbe Robotics, joins the other free-range forms of physical AI that are already a part of everyday life in L.A. such as food-delivery bots and Waymos.

From inventory management to marketing and checkout, retailers are increasingly adopting automation. The retail automation market could jump to $77 billion by 2034 from $28 billion in 2025, according to estimates from market research company Fortune Business Insights.

Simbe says more than 3,000 of its bots have been contracted to monitor shelves worldwide. Kroger, the parent company of Ralphs, is using hundreds of them after pilot projects that started in Indianapolis and Cincinnati, and recently spread to California.

“Simbe provides shelf intelligence technology that helps store teams more easily identify and address products that are low or out of stock, giving associates better information to support store operations and serve shoppers,” said a spokesperson for Simbe Robotics in an email.

Simbe says Tally helps employees dedicate more time to shoppers. In January, the company revealed its latest model of the robot, Tally 4.0, which uses newer Nvidia chips and software that speeds up scanning shelves to create insights.

Tally alerts employees to any misplaced or out-of-stock items. Simbe said the robot “is designed to understand shelf conditions, not identify or track humans.”

In a recent news release, Simbe said its bots do more than count; they help stores determine the best shelf placement and pricing for products.

“Every deployment expands Simbe’s understanding of how conditions change, revealing patterns across entire store chains—from inventory availability and product location to prices, promotions, and merchandising conditions,” the release said.

Other retailers in Los Angeles have also introduced Tally to their aisles, such as Bristol Farms in Santa Monica. Tally has also been spotted at retailers across the country, including Kroger, Lowe’s, Tesco and BJ’s.

“Last year, Kroger began using robotic technology to gain real-time insights on product inventory,” a Ralphs spokesperson said. “This technology means our associates can more easily and quickly identify and address shelves where products are low or out of stock.”

The spokesperson declined to provide information about how many Tally bots have been deployed at its Los Angeles locations. A LinkedIn post from a store manager at Kroger-operated Smith’s Food and Drug stores said Kroger deployed its 500th robot across all of Kroger in August.

During Kroger’s earnings announcement in March, Chief Financial Officer David Kennerley said the company was “investing aggressively” in artificial intelligence and that has helped it save money.

Rachel Fournier, an employee at Ralphs on Vermont Avenue and Adams Boulevard, said the Tally bot “just showed up out of nowhere” a few months ago.

“One day, they were there wandering around the store,” she said.

Unions are concerned the bots — which Simbe claims can save employees up to 50 hours of work per week — could put human employees out of work.

In July, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union branch representing employees in Washington, northeast Oregon and northern Idaho released a statement outlining concerns about deploying Tally across Kroger-owned Fred Meyer locations.

“Union members regularly do this work,” the statement said. “We believe outsourcing our union jobs to robots will erode our unity in the worksite, reduce available hours for those who need them to pay the rent, and threaten the stability of our benefits.”

Ralphs employee Fournier said she and others worry about job automation and whether the bots could be used to monitor employees. With self-checkout and digital shelf tags already reducing the need for employees, some workers wonder what is next.

“Even an inventory job, like now, that’s being shopped out to a computer,” Fournier said. “What are they trying to do here?”

There needs to be more discussion ahead of time and sign-off from employees before more robots are deployed, said a local union.

“Our members should not be finding out about major changes to their workplace only after new technology shows up in their stores,” said Kathy Finn, president of UFCW Local 770. “Checking shelves, identifying out-of-stock products, and maintaining store conditions are all areas where our members perform important work every day.”

While it is not the kind of employee that would be doing inventory, Kroger said this week that it will lay off 3,000 corporate employees over the next three years as it ramps up its use of artificial intelligence to streamline operations.

Some unions have been pushing back on earlier automation efforts at stores.

Last year, union members helped push for an ordinance in Long Beach that requires grocery chains to increase the number of employees relative to self-checkout stands. Meanwhile, consumers are concerned that digital price tags could be used to charge different customers different prices.

The robot makers and the companies using them say the bots aren’t to replace humans; they are just shouldering the less-interesting work to free up human employees to be more productive in other areas.

Still, some grocery store customers worry the robots mark a further reduction of interactions between humans as well as fewer jobs.

Jennifer Boulanger, a 63-year-old Mid-City resident, posted a video on Nextdoor complaining about the new Ralphs bot. “More lost jobs to AI junk,” she said.

Boulanger now wants to shop somewhere with less automation, even if that means dealing with crowded parking lots and a longer drive.

“I’m going to start going to Trader Joe’s more,” she said in an interview.


r/CaliforniaUncensored • • 12h ago

Education News and Politics California school test scores gains fail to offset pandemic loss - Los Angeles Times

Thumbnail
latimes.com
3 Upvotes

This year’s state test scores provided a mixed send-off for the education legacy of Gov. Gavin Newsom, with incremental gains in English and math, but results that continue to fall short of prepandemic achievement levels.

A clear marker of this mixed picture is English language arts: The percent of students scoring proficient or advanced increased by 0.5 of a percentage point to 49.3%. But that was nearly 2 percentage points below the prepandemic tests of 2019. At this pace of improvement, it would take about four more years — or about a decade — to surpass the prepandemic scores.

And, even before the pandemic, about half of the state’s students were not achieving the state’s learning goals.

The gain in math was better, 1.1 percentage points, but only 38.4% of students scored as proficient or better. Math scores would virtually catch up to prepandemic levels by next year at the current pace.

The gain in science, a relatively new test, was better still, a strong increase of 3.3 percentage points, but that brings the proficiency rate to just 36% of students.

Locally, Los Angeles Unified and Compton Unified remained bright spots, with significant sustained gains that continue their surge past prepandemic levels.

Newsom, in a statement, was looking on the glass-half-full side of the ledger.

“These results provide important evidence that our sustained investments are making a difference,” Newsom said. He listed some of those efforts, which include a new grade of school, transitional kindergarten for 4-year-olds; free school meals for all; and community schools, which provide services for students and families beyond academics.

“California is working to ensure students have the resources they need to thrive,” Newsom said. “The continued progress we are seeing is a testament to the hard work of students, families, and educators across the state.”

Newsom also has forwarded record state funding to school systems, although not as much as advocates say the law requires him to provide. That issue is being litigated. Leaders say more, faster progress needed

A more measured summation was offered by Tony Thurmond, the outgoing state superintendent of public instruction.

“California has made important strides in expanding student supports and opportunities, but the pace of academic improvement reminds us that our work is far from finished,” Thurmond said.

State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond also emphasized the need for more progress, while calling attention to notable gains by African American students, Latino students, students from low-income families and students experiencing homelessness.

Black students, for example, made larger-than-average improvements across English, math and science and showed English scoring gains across almost every tested grade. But that still leaves the proficiency rates for Black students at 33.7% for English, 21.5% for math and 20.5% for science. Achievement gaps ranging from about 28 to 49 percentage points still separate them from white and Asian students.

Another area of incremental progress is the percentage of students who are chronically absent, meaning they miss at least 10% of school. The rate of chronic absenteeism was 18.3% of students, approaching 1 in 5 students — an improvement of 1.1 percentage points. But the rate in 2016-17 was 10.8%. Bragging rights for Compton and LAUSD

Scores at Compton Unified and L.A. Unified are outperforming those of the state, with higher proficiency rates in key categories.

In math, Compton students show a 46.5% proficiency rate, up 5.4 percentage points. L.A. Unified students are at 39.7% proficiency, up 3 percentage points. Both are higher than the state’s 38.4% proficiency rate.

In English, 53.8% of Compton students are proficient or better, up 2.8 percentage points from last year. LAUSD is at 48.3%. The state rate is 49.3%.

But for nearly every subset of students, LAUSD scores above the state average for the same group.

Blacks students in Compton and L.A. Unified also showed gains and are significantly higher than the state scores:

English: Compton 48.7%, LAUSD 37.6%, state 33.7%.
Math: Compton 40.7%, LAUSD 27.6%, state 21.5%.

This year, Compton’s Black students gained 4.4 percentage points in English and 6.4 in math, compared with Black students statewide at 0.9 and 1.5.

The positive picture was similar for Latino students:

English: Compton 54.8%, LAUSD 43%, state 39.6%.
Math: Compton 47.6%, LAUSD 33.7%, state 27%.

How state school superintendent candidates’ districts fared

This year, the candidates for state superintendent of public instruction are presidents of their local board of education. Both of their districts have some bragging points.

Republican Sonja Shaw leads Chino Valley Unified, a school district of about 26,000 in San Bernardino County. This school system has consistently scored higher than the state average and showed less pandemic learning loss than many other districts. Since Shaw joined the board in 2022, the district has continued to score above state averages.

Democrat Richard Barrera has been a San Diego Unified board member since 2008 and currently works as a senior advisor to Thurmond. San Diego compares favorably with other large urban school systems, although its competitors would point out that it has fewer students from low-income families than many large urban systems. San Diego’s English score declined this year, after a gain the previous year.