POLITICS

On Tuesday, New York City Comptroller Brad Lander was arrested by several masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents at a courthouse in Manhattan as he attempted to steer an individual past immigration authorities. That same day, masked agents outside a Walmart in Pico Rivera detained two individuals — one a target of immigration enforcement, the other a U.S. citizen who tried to intervene.

These two scenes from opposite sides of the country illustrate what has become a more common problem: federal agents wearing masks to avoid recognition. On Thursday, masked individuals said to be affiliated with the Department of Homeland Security descended on a Home Depot in Hollywood and on Dodger Stadium.

Masking is not good law enforcement practice. It may contradict Homeland Security regulations, while potentially providing cover for some officers to violate constitutional and civil rights. It undermines agents’ authority and endangers public safety as well.

The federal government has no specific policy banning immigration agents from wearing masks. But the fact that such practice is not illegal does not make it acceptable. Department of Homeland Security regulations require immigration officers to identify themselves during an arrest or, in cases of a warrantless arrest, provide a statement explaining how they identified themselves. The use of masks seems to violate the intent of these directives for identification.

ICE agents in masks are becoming disturbingly routine. There were ICE agents in masks at the Los Angeles immigration protests recently, just as there have been at enforcement actions in Minneapolis, Boston, Phoenix and across the country. In March a video of Rumeysa Ozturk, a doctoral student at Tufts University, being detained by masked officers on the street went viral.

There seems to be no uniformity in the face coverings immigration agents wear, which has included ski masks, surgical masks, balaclavas and sunglasses. Such inconsistency across a federal workforce flies in the face of sound policing. Masked agents can confuse both bystanders and ICE targets, which risks people interfering with enforcement actions that look more like kidnappings. The International Assn. of Chiefs of Police has warned that the public “may be intimidated or fearful of officers wearing a face covering, which may heighten their defensive reactions.”

Todd Lyons, acting director of ICE, said earlier this month that immigration agents wear masks to protect themselves. “I’m sorry if people are offended by them wearing masks,” he said, “but I’m not going to let my officers and agents go out there and put their lives on the line, their family on the line, because people don’t like what immigration enforcement is.”

Yet law enforcement jobs come with an assumption of exactly that risk. Consider that the overwhelming majority of police officers, sheriffs and FBI agents fulfill their duties without concealing their faces. Correction officers who deal with prisoners do not wear masks, nor do judges who administer our laws. Because these public employees have such tremendous power, their roles require full transparency.

Besides, ICE agents are increasingly targeting noncriminals, which mitigates the argument that agents require masks for safety. According to the research site Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, about 44% of people in ICE detention as of June 1 have no criminal record.

When ICE agents wear masks, there can be unintended consequences. Lately, there has been a spike in people impersonating agents and engaging in harassment, assault and violence. In April, a Florida woman wore a mask as she posed as an ICE agent and attempted to kidnap her ex-boyfriend’s wife.

Ironically, the Trump administration has a double standard around the idea of people wearing masks. It has demanded that universities bar students from wearing masks during protests. In the aftermath of the Los Angeles immigration protests, the president posted on social media, “From now on, MASKS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED to be worn at protests.” Shouldn’t that principle be applied to both sides?

True, it makes sense for immigration agents to use face coverings when they are making arrests of a high-profile target or conducting an undercover operation. However, masking should be the exception, not the norm. If ICE agents are conducting their duties anonymously, they open the door to potential civil rights and due process violations. The practice gives impunity to agents to make unlawful arrests, without the possibility of public accountability.

Masking can also be seen as a show of intimidation by immigration agents — whether their target is an undocumented migrant or an American citizen, like Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, who was arrested outside a New Jersey detention facility in May. Masked ICE agents give the impression of being a secret police force, which is not good for our democracy.

Last week, two Democratic lawmakers in California introduced a bill that would bar local, state and federal law enforcement officers in California from wearing masks on duty (with certain exceptions). Although this is a step in the right direction, it remains unclear whether such a state measure could be applied to federal agents. Congress should ban the use of masks by immigration agents.

ICE officers should not be allowed to conceal their faces. The public’s need for accountability strongly outweighs any rationale for agents’ anonymity.

Raul A. Reyes is an immigration attorney and contributor to NBC Latino and CNN Opinion. X: @RaulAReyes; Instagram: @raulareyes1

RICHMOND, Calif. — An oil tanker sat docked at Chevron’s sprawling refinery in Richmond, Calif., on Thursday — a visible link between California’s appetite for Amazon crude and the remote rainforest territories where it’s extracted. Just offshore, bundled in puffy jackets against the Bay wind, Indigenous leaders from Ecuador’s Amazon paddled kayaks through choppy waters, calling attention to the oil expansion threatening their lands.

Their visit to California helped prompt the state Senate to introduce a landmark resolution urging officials to examine the state’s role in importing crude from the Amazon. The move comes as Ecuador’s government prepares to auction off 14 new oil blocks — covering more than 2 million hectares of rainforest, much of it Indigenous territory — in a 2026 bidding round known as “Sur Oriente.”

The Indigenous leaders say the move goes against the spirit of a national referendum in which Ecuadorians voted to leave crude oil permanently underground in Yasuni National Park.

The preservation push in Ecuador comes as another South American country that includes part of the Amazon rainforest, Brazil, is moving ahead with plans to further develop oil resources. On Tuesday, Brazil auctioned off several land and offshore potential oil sites near the Amazon River as it aims to expand production in untapped regions despite protests from environmental and Indigenous groups.

Indigenous voices

Juan Bay, president of the Waorani people of Ecuador, said that his delegation’s coming to California was “important so that our voices, our stance, and our struggle can be elevated” and urged Californians to reexamine the source of their crude from the Amazon — ”from Waorani Indigenous territory.”

On Thursday, the Indigenous delegation joined local Californians in Richmond for a kayaking trip near a Chevron refinery, sharing stories about the Amazon and perspectives on climate threats.

For Nadino Calapucha, a spokesperson for the Kichwa Pakkiru people, the visit to California’s Bay Area was deeply moving. Spotting seals in the water and a bird’s nest nearby felt “like a gesture of solidarity from nature itself,” he told the Associated Press on a kayak.

“It was as if the animals were welcoming us,” he said.

The connection between the Amazon and California — both facing environmental threats — was palpable, Calapucha said.

“Being here with our brothers and sisters, with the local communities also fighting — in the end, we feel that the struggle is the same,” he said.

California is the largest global consumer of Amazon oil, with much of it refined and used in the state as fuel. Ecuador is the region’s top producer of onshore crude.

Bay highlighted a March ruling by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which found that Ecuador had violated the rights of the area’s Indigenous groups by allowing oil operations in and around a site known as Block 43.

The court ordered the government to halt extraction in protected areas and uphold the 2023 referendum banning drilling in Yasuni National Park, where the country’s largest crude reserve lies, estimated around 1.7 billion barrels.

Bay appealed to the California government to reconsider if it “should continue receiving crude from the Amazon” — or continue to be “complicit in the violation of rights” happening on Indigenous territory.

Defending Indigenous rights

State Sen. Josh Becker (D-Menlo Park), who introduced the new resolution, praised the visiting leaders for defending their land and the global climate.

“Their communities are on the front lines asserting their rights and resisting oil extraction,” Becker said on the Senate floor on Monday. “They are defenders of a living rainforest that stores carbon, regulates the global climate, and sustains life.”

Long criticized by environmental justice advocates, the refinery has processed millions of barrels of Amazon crude, fueling concerns over pollution, public health, and the state’s role in rainforest destruction.

The delegation also helped launch a new report by Amazon Watch, an Oakland-based nonprofit dedicated to the protection of the Amazon Basin, which outlines the climate, legal and financial risks of operating in Indigenous territories without consent.

‘Addiction to Amazon crude’

Kevin Koenig, Amazon Watch’s director for climate, energy and extraction industry, said the effects of Amazon crude extend far beyond Ecuador. He joined the Ecuadorian delegation on the kayaking trip Thursday.

“The Golden State, if it wants to be a climate leader, needs to take action,” he told AP. “California has an addiction to Amazon crude.”

Californians need to “recognize their responsibility and their complicity in driving demand for Amazon crude and the impact that that is having on Indigenous people, on their rights, on the biodiversity and the climate,” he added.

California’s future is closely tied to the Amazon’s — the state relies on the rainforest’s role in climate regulation and rainfall, Koenig said, warning that continued Amazon crude imports contribute to the destruction increasing California’s vulnerability to drought and wildfires.

He said environmental and public health damage tied to oil drilling is not confined to South America.

“We’re seeing the same impacts from the oil well to the wheel here in California, where communities are suffering from contamination, health impacts, dirty water,” he said. “It’s time that California lead an energy transition.”

California, one of the world’s largest economies and a major importer of Amazon crude, must take stronger climate action, Koenig added, and called on the state to phase out its reliance on oil linked to deforestation, human rights abuses, pollution and climate damage.

The resolution commends the Indigenous communities of Ecuador for their struggle in defending the rainforest and Indigenous rights.

It also marks the first time California would examine how its energy consumption may contribute to the region’s deforestation and cultural loss. The resolution is expected to be up for a vote within a few weeks, according to Koenig.

Grattan and Vasquez write for the Associated Press.

I’ve watched two disturbing videos in the past day of federal authorities acting with frightening disregard for decency and democracy as they arrest immigrants.

At least, I think they are federal authorities. But these days, who knows?

The alleged officers detaining hundreds if not thousands of people each day in California and across the country are often masked. They sometimes refuse to answer questions, including which agency they represent. They threaten force — and even use it to make arrests of bystanders — when they are challenged.

In the first video I watched, a man in an unmarked car detains another man sitting on a bus bench in Pasadena. The man presumed to be a federal agent has on a vest that simply says “Police” and a cheap black ski mask that covers every bit of his face — the kind that looks like it was purchased on Amazon and that we have previously most associated with criminals such as robbers and rapists. A few of his colleagues are in the background, some also seemingly masked.

If these men approached me or one of my kids dressed like that, I would run. I would fight. I would certainly not take his word that he was “police” and had the right to force me into his car.

In the second video, another presumed federal agent jumps out of his unmarked vehicle and draws his weapon on a civilian attempting to take a photo of the license plate.

Yes — he points his gun at a civilian who is not threatening him or committing a crime. Folks, maybe you consider it a bad idea to try to photograph what may or may not be a legitimate police operation, but it is not illegal. This alleged officer appears to have simply not liked what was happening, and threatened to shoot the person upsetting him. The man taking the photo ran away, but what would have happened had he not?

These actions by alleged authorities are examples of impunity, and it is what happens when accountability is lost.

“It’s terrifying to be assaulted by people that you can’t be sure are law enforcement and who seem to be hiding their identity from you,” David Sklansky told me. He’s a law professor at Stanford and an expert on policing. He said there are times when secrecy by authorities can be justified, but it should be the exception, not the rule.

“The seizure of people by agents of the state who don’t identify themselves as agents of the state is a tool that has a long and ugly history of being used by authoritarian regimes,” he said.

ICE has claimed that its officers have a need and right to remain anonymous because threats and attacks against them have dramatically increased. The agency has been publicizing that its staff has seen a 413% increase in assaults against them, and that they and their families have been doxxed.

Speaking on the New York Times podcast “The Daily,” President Trump’s top border policy advisor, Tom Homan, said that his officers are doing the best they can under difficult circumstances.

“It’s not about intimidation,” Homan said. “ICE officers are wearing masks because they’ve been doxxed by the thousands. Their families have been doxxed. ICE officers’ pictures have shown up on trees and telephone poles. Death threats are sky-high. I know because I’ve been doxxed 1,000 times myself.”

You know what? I believe ICE officers are getting doxxed and threatened.

Any violent attack on law enforcement should be condemned.

And while we are at it, I don’t have any issue with deporting dangerous criminals. For today, I’m leaving aside the issue of whether Trump’s aggressive drive to deport people is good or bad. This isn’t about what is happening with these deportations, but about how authorities are exercising their power.

Threatening a law enforcement official is a crime. Doxxing is a crime. These agencies have the resources to track down, arrest and prosecute anyone who breaks those laws. They should absolutely do that.

Instead, federal authorities are hiding, apparently too frightened of online provocateurs and in-person hecklers to do their duty in plain sight.

But judges are being doxxed and don’t wear masks. Journalists are being doxxed and don’t wear masks. Politicians are being doxxed — and even killed — and are still doing their jobs out in the open. Which raises the question: Is it really not about intimidation?

“Quite frankly, I’ve had lots of guns pointed at me. I’ve had lots of threats against my life,” Lt. Diane Goldstein told me. “I never once wore a mask because I was afraid.”

Goldstein is the executive director of the Law Enforcement Action Partnership, a nonprofit composed of justice system authorities who advocate for better policies. She was also the first female lieutenant in the Redondo Beach Police Department, where she worked for more than 20 years, including on undercover assignments.

She points out that accountability demands some way to attach actions to individuals. Take that officer who pulled the gun on the license plate photographer.

“If one of my officers would have done that, I would have put him on an administrative leave, taken his gun away and initiated an internal affairs investigation,” she said. “There is no constitutional reason for him to jump out of a car and point a gun in that type of aggressive fashion at an ordinary citizen.”

However, we likely will never get to ask that officer what he was thinking — if he saw a threat that justified lethal force — because there is no easy way of identifying him. Forget who he is personally, we don’t even know what agency he is from.

“You have no idea if it’s the FBI, if it’s the DEA, if it’s ICE, if it’s CBP,” said Goldstein, rattling off the acronyms for various federal authorities. “There is no accountability and transparency.”

Sklansky points out that accountability doesn’t necessarily require a name or face. Although there is no law that requires it, federal authorities could simply put their badge number and agency name someplace visible. Voila! Accountability and safety for officers.

“Lots of law enforcement works this way,” he said.

Failing to provide any kind of trustworthy identification causes its own dangers, both Sklansky and Goldstein told me. People are required by law not to interfere with law enforcement doing their duty. But if you don’t know it’s law enforcement and fear you are witnessing an attack or are the victim of one, the situation is different.

Goldstein said that she worries about violence if bystanders think they are in the midst of a crime, or that local law enforcement will be called to intervene in what appears to be a kidnapping or assault.

“People can’t tell if they’re crooks or they’re law enforcement,” Goldstein said of officers who mask or hide their affiliation.

“Someone’s going to get hurt. A citizen is going to get hurt, a local cop is going to get hurt or a federal agent is going to get hurt. Their tactics are dangerous and putting the community in danger,” she said.

That fear that people are posing as law enforcement is real. Last week, a Minnesota legislator and her husband were killed by a gunman posing as a police officer. That same gunman earlier also went to the home of another politician and his wife and shot them as well, though they are expected to survive — their 28-year-old daughter called 911 after being shielded from the bullets by her mom.

The shooter banged on the front door of his victims, demanding to be let inside because he was law enforcement. Since then, articles are popping up, pointing out that people have a right to ask questions before just assuming that guy with the badge is really a cop.

After that attack, St. Cloud Police Chief Jeff Oxton sought to quell fears of fake cops roaming the streets by putting out a statement that stressed that it is “important that our public has confidence in the identification of our police officers.”

Of course it is important. In fact, it’s vital to democracy and public safety. The might of law derives from our trust in those empowered to enforce it, our willingness to respect their authority because it comes with both boundaries and responsibilities. The death of George Floyd and the protests that followed show just how tenuous, and how vital, that trust is.

An anonymous man in a ski mask does not inspire that trust, and does not deserve it.

An independent commission is urging the California Legislature to establish a new local authority to oversee and coordinate rebuilding after the most destructive fires in Los Angeles County history.

The call for state legislation to create the new rebuilding authority is one of the top proposals of the 20-member Blue Ribbon Commission on Climate Action and Fire-Safe Recovery, which on Friday issued its final recommendations.

Commission members said the new entity would be critical to manage the monumental rebuilding efforts after the January firestorms, which claimed at least 29 lives and destroyed 18,000 homes and other properties.

“The severity of the situation needs extraordinary measures. Business as usual just won’t work,” said Cecilia Estolano, a commission member and former CEO of the Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency.

The commission said the proposed Resilient Rebuilding Authority would streamline complex recovery efforts and prioritize the return of residents and businesses as neighborhoods are rebuilt in Altadena and Pacific Palisades.

The authority would use tax-increment financing and other funding sources to buy fire-razed lots that property owners want to sell and guide the rebuilding process — selecting developers and coordinating construction at scale. Those displaced by the fires would get first priority for the new homes.

The commission’s members said this would bring a coordinated approach, avoiding a free-for-all in which investors snap up properties and make new homes unaffordable for displaced people. The authority, the report said, is “designed to counterbalance the forces that drive displacement and inequality in the aftermath of disasters.”

“Left to business as usual, you will see this being driven by land speculation,” Estolano said. The aim is “a more balanced rebuilding, rather than one that’s purely determined by the marketplace.”

Under the commission’s recommendation, the Resilient Rebuilding Authority would be led by a board with members appointed by the governor, state lawmakers and local governments, and with citizen advisory boards providing guidance.

The commission also proposed asking voters to approve a ballot measure to create a new Los Angeles County Fire Control District, funded through a property tax, to focus on wildfire prevention, vegetation management and other efforts to reduce fire risks.

The panel said a property tax or fee, which would require voter approval, could either be assessed on properties in a certain area, or could be assessed county-wide, with higher fees in areas facing high fire hazards that require more investments.

The new district would be charged with creating and maintaining “greenspace buffer zones” between homes and open lands, and taking other measures to safeguard fire-vulnerable neighborhoods.

In all, the commission presented more than 50 recommendations, with a focus on rebuilding after the Palisades and Eaton fires in ways that prepare neighborhoods to better withstand intense wildfires worsened by climate change, and that also help address global warming by encouraging construction of all-electric homes.

The panel said L.A. County should fast-track permitting for all-electric homes, and the state should provide incentives to encourage electrification and solar power. The commission’s report says the new authority should “advance resilience and clean energy objectives.”

The Blue Ribbon Commission was formed by Los Angeles County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath and includes representatives of businesses, local government, civic organizations and environmental groups.

“Key strategies like defensible space, solar with battery backup, and all-electric construction don’t just safeguard homes — they cut costs and protect our environment,” Horvath said, adding that the panel’s proposals lay the groundwork for a “climate-smart, fire-safe future.”

The commission, which had presented its initial proposals in May, said in its report that the fires represented one of the costliest climate disasters in U.S. history and a “harbinger of future risks facing the region in terms of extreme drought, weather, heat, and fire.”

The commission said its goal is to “enable communities to rise out of the ashes stronger.”

“Bold, coordinated action is needed to counter the risks of displacement, rising insurance costs, and deepening community vulnerability to future climate events,” the commission’s report says. “By acting decisively, Greater Los Angeles can become a model for climate-resilient, equitable recovery.”

Some of the commission’s other recommendations include changes such as:

• expanding the federal government’s fire debris removal program;
• standardizing soil testing and cleanup;
• ensuring that construction meets “fire-hardened” building standards and that building codes maximize spacing between buildings;
• creating “buffer zones” with appropriate vegetation to reduce fire risks;
• prioritizing additional water storage capacity in neighborhoods, and systems with external sprinklers to douse homes, parks and schools;
• and creating a voluntary program to “shift development from high-risk, constrained, or uninsurable parcels to more suitable sites.”

Some of these steps can be taken by city or county leaders, utilities or other entities.

Matt Petersen, the commission’s chair and chief executive of Los Angeles Cleantech Incubator, which works with startups to promote renewable energy, said the enormous task of rebuilding demands “additional resources and coordination and economies of scale that we think can only come through this authority.”

Similar development authorities have been set up to oversee rebuilding in areas devastated by other major disasters, such as the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, the 1994 Northridge earthquake, the 9/11 attacks and Hurricane Katrina.

More than 40 academic experts from UCLA provided support to the commission, advising members on recovery and rebuilding after disasters.

“Without intentional, deliberate leadership by government, and by government that’s accountable to the communities, an unmanaged recovery process will only widen disparities,” said Megan Mullin, faculty director of the UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation, who led the university team. “That is seen over and over again through disaster recovery processes.”

Mullin said with strong guidance, government can streamline rebuilding in a way “that makes these communities more fire-safe, more climate-resilient.”

“We cannot ignore the importance of climate change in driving this growing fire hazard that’s looming for the Los Angeles region, and actually throughout the Southwest,” she said. “We can make it as easy as possible for people to rebuild, but to rebuild in a way that will leave them more protected going forward.”

Estolano, the former L.A. redevelopment chief, was displaced from her home in Altadena by the Eaton fire. The home, which she had rented, was damaged by the fire and smoke, and she moved to Los Feliz.

“What I loved most about that community is that it was a mix of incomes. It was a vibrant place with a lot of local commerce,” she said.

She said unless a rebuilding authority is established that can buy properties and hold down land values, that sort of community won’t come back.

“The authority could enable a fair price and give these folks a chance as their first look to return back to what homes will be rebuilt,” she said. “And that will not happen without an authority.”

The commission also called for the city, county and state to work with the new authority to launch a campaign to secure philanthropic contributions to support rebuilding, aiming to raise $200 million over the next 1-2 years, and to help leverage additional financial resources.

RICHMOND, Va. — Democrats in Virginia have built up a hefty fundraising advantage for their effort to reclaim the governor’s mansion in a November election that is seen as a bellwether for the party in power in Washington ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Democrat Abigail Spanberger, a former CIA case manager turned congresswoman, has a more than 2-to-1 fundraising advantage over her GOP opponent for governor, Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears, who has struggled to draw support from her fellow Republicans. Both were unopposed for their party’s nominations and were able to focus on the fall general election without having to overcome a challenge in this week’s primaries. The match-up means Virginia is all but certain to elect the state’s first female governor.

Spanberger has amassed $6.5 million toward her campaign for governor over the last two months after raising $6.7 million between January and March, according to the nonpartisan Virginia Public Access Project. Combined with the money Spanberger raised in 2024, she has gathered $22.8 million and still has $14.3 million in her coffers.

Earle-Sears, meanwhile, spent more than she earned between April and June, bringing in $3.5 million and spending $4.6 million. Between January and March, she also raised a little over $3.1 million. In total, she has raked in nearly $9.2 million since launching her campaign last September. Now, she has a little under $3 million in the bank, according to Virginia Public Access Project data.

In a statement, Earle-Sears’ campaign said the candidate is putting forward a message for Virginians that money can’t buy.

“Clearly the Spanberger campaign needs a lot of help attempting to erase Abigail’s bad voting record on issues that actually matter to Virginians,” press secretary Peyton Vogel said in an email. “This race isn’t being bought — it’s being built on a message that matters.”

Virginia is one of two states, along with New Jersey, that host statewide elections this year. The contests will be closely watched as a measure of whether voters in the shadow of Washington will embrace President Trump’s aggressive effort to overhaul the federal government, or be repelled by it.

Democrats’ outsized fundraising lead ahead of the primaries may reflect local Democratic enthusiasm and the party’s ability to push people to the polls in light of Trump being in office. Mark J. Rozell, dean of George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government, also referenced the noticeable frostiness among leading state Republicans. The party’s statewide nominees have yet to campaign together, despite securing their nominations at the end of April.

“Enthusiasm drives fundraising and in Virginia right now the Democrats’ voting base has much greater enthusiasm“ than Republicans, Rozell said. ”It is reminiscent of Trump’s first term in office when Democratic fundraising and ultimately voting overwhelmed the Republicans in Virginia.”

Money does not guarantee success, however. In the last Virginia governor’s race, former Gov. Terry McAuliffe outspent Republican Glenn Youngkin, who had invested $20 million of his own money in the race. Youngkin still clinched the election by nearly two points.

Youngkin, who is term-limited from seeking reelection, has offered more than $21,000 in support to Earle-Sears through his political action committee.

When asked whether he would donate more, his PAC responded, “Governor Youngkin is working to elect the entire GOP ticket and is urging all Virginians to support the commonsense team this November to keep Virginia winning.”

The Democrats’ fundraising advantage isn’t confined to the governor’s race.

State Sen. Ghazala Hashmi, who eked out a primary win in a close three-way contest for lieutenant governor, raised nearly $1.8 million in her primary race and has $462,000 remaining.

The Republican nominee, conservative talk-radio host John Reid, raised nearly $312,000 since launching his campaign and has $116,000 remaining.

The only statewide GOP candidate with a fundraising lead, incumbent Attorney General Jason Miyares, has $2.3 million in the bank after raising a total of $4.6 million. His Democratic opponent, Jay Jones, has raised $2.7 million. He had about $493,000 left at the beginning of June, reports show.

This year, all three Democratic statewide candidates are backed by Clean Virginia, a political group that pushes for clean energy and often takes on legislative challenges against Dominion Energy, Virginia’s largest utility.

The two groups are some of the most influential entities lobbying on state politics and policy. With energy demand likely to be a key issue in November, their influence could be significant.

According to the nonpartisan public-access group, Spanberger has taken in $465,000 from the environmental organization. On Tuesday, Clean Virginia endorsed Hashmi’s candidacy for lieutenant governor, following its previous donations to her state Senate campaign committee.

During his campaign, Jones also received $1.5 million from Clean Virginia, while his primary opponent, Democrat Shannon Taylor, accepted $800,000 from Dominion Energy between 2024 and 2025. Clean Virginia released attack ads targeting Taylor for accepting Dominion money.

The energy utility has become entangled in other statewide battles. On the Republican ticket, Earle-Sears accepted $50,000 from Dominion in March. Miyares also gained $450,000 from the utility so far this year.

Clean Virginia has donated to both Democrats and Republicans, including to candidates running for the House of Delegates, where all 100 members are up for reelection in November.

Democrats who control the legislature are hoping to keep or expand their thin majority and amend the state’s Constitution to protect rights to voting, marriage equality and abortion.

Democratic candidates have raised about $16.9 million in those races, with $3.2 million stemming from House Speaker Don Scott.

Meanwhile, Republicans have raised $8.8 million, with former Minority Leader Todd Gilbert earning over $643,000, and newly tapped Minority Leader Terry Kilgore raising nearly $470,000.

Diaz writes for the Associated Press.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding Tennessee’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors is leaving transgender children and their parents uncertain and anxious about the future.

The court on Wednesday handed President Trump’s administration and Republican-led states a significant victory by effectively protecting them from at least some of the legal challenges against many efforts to repeal safeguards for transgender people.

The case stems from a Tennessee law banning puberty blockers and hormone treatments for transgender minors. Opponents of gender-affirming care say people who transition when they’re young could later regret it.

Families of transgender children argue the ban amounts to unlawful sex discrimination and violates the constitutional rights of vulnerable Americans.

Student says ruling creates an unwelcome world

Eli Givens, who is transgender and testified against Tennessee’s gender-affirming care bill in 2023, said it’s devastating that lawmakers “who have called us degenerates, have told us that we’re living in fiction” are celebrating the court’s ruling.

The nonbinary college student from Spring Hill received mastectomy surgery in 2022 at age 17. They said the legislation inspired their advocacy, and they attended the Supreme Court arguments in the case last December, on their 20th birthday.

“We’re not making a world that trans youth are welcomed or allowed to be a part of,” Givens said. “And so, it’s just a really scary kind of future we might have.”

Jennifer Solomon, who supports parents and families at the LGBTQ+ rights group Equality Florida, called the ruling a decision “that one day will embarrass the courts.”

“This is a decision that every parent should be concerned about,” she said. “When politicians are able to make a decision that overrides your ability to medically make decisions for your children, every family should worry.”

Conservative activists take credit

Chloe Cole, a conservative activist known for speaking about her gender-transition reversal, posted on social media after the court’s decision that “every child in America is now safer.”

Cole was cited as an example by Tennessee Republicans as one of the reasons the law was needed.

Matt Walsh, an activist who was one of the early backers of Tennessee’s law, applauded the high court. Three years ago, Walsh shared videos on social media of a doctor saying gender-affirming procedures are “huge moneymakers” for hospitals and a staffer saying anyone with a religious objection should quit.

“This is a truly historic victory and I’m grateful to be a part of it, along with so many others who have fought relentlessly for years,” Walsh posted on social media.

Fears of what’s next after Supreme Court decision

Rosie Emrich is worried the court decision will embolden legislators in New Hampshire, where legislation banning hormone treatments and puberty blockers for children is expected to reach the governor’s desk.

Lawmakers are weighing whether to block the treatments from minors already receiving them, like Emrich’s 9-year-old child.

“It’s definitely disappointing, and I’m trying to figure out how I’m going to talk to my kid about it,” Emrich said.

Emrich said she and her husband have considered moving from New Hampshire and are waiting to see what will happen.

“The hard part is, like, I’ve grown up here, my husband has grown up here, we very much want to raise our family here,” she said. “And we don’t want to leave if we don t have to.”

A move across the country and other hurdles

Erica Barker and her family moved from Jackson, Mississippi, to North Las Vegas, Nevada, a little over two years ago so one of her children could start receiving gender-affirming care.

Barker’s transgender daughter, then 12, had been in therapy for three years, and the family agreed it was time for medical treatments.

Mississippi passed a ban on gender-affirming care for minors the next year, which Barker said she saw coming.

Barker said the move was complicated, involving a new job for her husband and two mortgages when their Mississippi home was slow to sell, but it also brought access to care for her daughter, now 14.

“Our hearts are hurting for folks who are not having the same experience,” Barker said.

In another state with a ban on gender-affirming care for minors, Oklahoma resident Erika Dubose said finding care for her 17-year-old nonbinary child, Sydney Gebhardt, involves a four-hour drive to Kansas and getting prescriptions filled in Oregon and mailed to their home.

“I just wish the younger folks wouldn’t have to go through this,” Gebhardt said. “These folks deserve to be focusing on their academics and hanging out with their friends and making memories with their families and planning out a safe and happy future.”

Mother says gender-affirming care saves lives

Sarah Moskanos, who lives near Milwaukee, said her 14-year-old transgender daughter went through nearly a decade of counseling before she started medical gender-affirming care but has been sure since the age of 4 that she identified as a girl.

“I would say that there is decades of research on this very thing,” she said. “And we know what works and we know what will save trans kids’ lives is gender-affirming care.”

Wisconsin doesn’t have a gender-affirming care ban, but Moskanos said getting her daughter that care has not been easy. She now worries about what the future holds.

“We are but one election cycle away from disaster for my kid,” she said.

Vowing not to disappear

Mo Jenkins, a 26-year-old transgender Texas native and legislative staffer at the state Capitol, said she began taking hormone therapy at 16 years old and has been on and off treatment since then.

“My transition was out of survival,” Jenkins said.

Texas outlawed gender-affirming care for minors two years ago, and in May, the Legislature passed a bill tightly defining a man and a woman by their sex characteristics.

“I’m not surprised at the ruling. I am disheartened,” Jenkins said. “Trans people are not going to disappear.”

Mattise, Mulvihill and Seewer write for the Associated Press. Mulvihill reported from Cherry Hill, N.J., and Seewer reported from Toledo, Ohio. AP journalists Susan Haigh in Hartford, Conn.; Kenya Hunter in Atlanta; Laura Bargfeld in Chicago; Nadia Lathan in Austin, Texas; and Daniel Kozin in Pinecrest, Fla., contributed to this report.

For years we’ve read stories about antidemocratic countries abroad — supreme leaders acting with impunity, masked agents rounding up residents, troops in the streets, crackdowns on peaceful protests, intimidation and arrests of opposition figures, show-of-force military parades and political assassinations.

For a time this month, I was abroad. And the antidemocratic country I was reading about was my own.

Tuning out the news on vacation proved impossible. Every day brought another must-read outrage, reflecting the punitive policies and hateful climate that wannabe strongman Donald Trump has fostered in the United States.

From the vantage of an ocean away, even as a visitor in a developing country with problems of its own, I read about events back home with the clarity of the proverbial 38,000-feet view: The news added up to a picture of a proud nation slipping into the authoritarian ways modeled by the kleptocratic dictators that President Trump so admires.

For perspective, I reread President Reagan’s farewell address: Trump has taken America far from the shining “city upon a hill” that Reagan, yesteryear’s Republican icon, evoked. And far from our self-image as a land of immigrants and a bastion of freedom, democracy and the rule of law. Reagan’s city on a hill was “teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace.” If there had to be walls, he said, “the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here.”

That was then.

As I flew off for my break, the U.S. news was dominated by the tawdry breakup of Trump and “first buddy” Elon Musk. But then that sophomoric saga was overshadowed by more serious stuff — starting with military-style raids throughout Los Angeles by thuggish agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, rounding up migrants, including children, for detention and deportation.

It’s a drama that continues from big-city L.A. to small-town Great Barrington, Mass., in heartland hotels, meatpacking plants and restaurants. Descriptions of the shock troops have become too familiar: Many wear face masks and no badges to identify themselves. They often don’t wear recognizable uniforms. They have no warrants but lots of guns. And migrants are disappearing into their unmarked vehicles. To where, families aren’t told; when they find out, it’s often too late to help their loved ones assert their due process rights.

On Day 2 of my vacation, Trump took the all but unprecedented step of federalizing the California National Guard to act against protesters in L.A., over the objections of Gov. Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass and despite police assurances that local law enforcement could handle even the most confrontational of demonstrators. Next came the Marines.

That only seemed to exacerbate the unrest, as drama king Trump, who governs as if he were still scripting a reality TV show, surely intended. With Los Angeles as a testing ground, he may be seeking a pretext to invoke the 1807 Insurrection Act so he can freely deploy the military nationally against any who oppose him. He toyed with the idea during his first presidency. Back then he was constrained by responsible advisors; now he has surrounded himself with sycophants.

Meanwhile, he’s as unnervingly erratic on his deportation policy as on tariffs. First Trump posted that he’d lighten up on farm, restaurant and hotel raids because those industries complained that they were losing “very good, long time workers.” But days later, he ordered ICE to expand its efforts in L.A. and other big cities where Democrats, he lied, “use Illegal Aliens” to cheat in elections and steal jobs from citizens.

Amid the mayhem, the commander in chief traveled to Fort Bragg, N.C., and disgracefully crossed the line that, since the founding, has kept the military out of politics. He goaded the young troops he addressed — reportedly vetted for their political leanings — to cross it too. He started by boasting about reversing former President Joe Biden’s deletion of Confederate traitors’ names from military bases, and throughout encouraged boos against Biden, Newsom, Bass and Democrats generally, and applause for himself. He wore a MAGA cap. Such merch was on sale.

Days later, he got the military parade he’d long wanted. Or maybe not: It was more historical than martial; instead of goose-stepping through the capital, the troops ambled, smiled and made hand hearts. And it was sparsely attended. The nationwide “No Kings” counterprotests were not.

The toll that Trump’s overreach has taken on America’s reputation, especially in just a few weeks in June, has been heavy. Five Democratic politicians detained or arrested. An uncountable number of workers — not criminals, and many here legally — removed and sometimes disappeared from their families, jobs, communities and even the country. Armed military facing down peaceful protesters and protecting ICE and FBI agents as they snatch people off the street without due process.

On Tuesday, California Sen. Alex Padilla — who five days earlier had been wrestled to the floor and handcuffed by federal agents for interrupting Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem as she claimed Trump’s actions were liberating L.A. from socialists — delivered an emotional speech in the Senate. In U.S. history, he said, “we’ve had tumult. But we’ve never had a tyrant as a commander in chief.”

Until now.

Reagan ended his farewell with a sentiment that was inarguable 36 years ago: America, he said, “is still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom.” No longer. Even many citizens live in fear for their freedoms; I’ve heard from them. And I’ve felt it myself — no more so than when I was out of the country, looking back from afar.

@Jackiekcalmes @jackiecalmes.bsky.social @jkcalmes

This past week Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and President Trump spoke at a rally. Trump’s speech seemed familiar: Disparage Los Angeles (“trash heap”). Criticize Gov. Gavin Newsom and Mayor Karen Bass (“incompetent, and they paid troublemakers, agitators and insurrectionists”). Restate grievances about the 2020 election (“rigged and stolen”). Chide the crowd to support the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (“You better push your favorite congressmen”).

But this speech was different from his others. The location was Ft. Bragg in North Carolina — and the audience was mostly soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division, the “All Americans.” Internal unit communications revealed soldiers at the rally were screened based on political leanings and physical appearance. “If soldiers have political views that are in opposition to the current administration,” the guidance advised, “and they don’t want to be in the audience then they need to speak with their leadership and get swapped out.”

So what followed was to be expected. A sea of young soldiers in uniform — selected for their preference for the president — cheering and clapping for partisan commentary. This obviously violates Defense Department regulations. Heck, it’s even spelled out in a handy Pentagon FAQ:

Q. Can I ever wear my uniform when I attend political events?

A. No; military members must refrain from participating in political activity while in military uniform in accordance with both DoDD 1344.10 and DoDI 1344.01. This prohibition applies to all Armed Forces members.

But what happened during Trump’s appearance at the Army base is worse than breaking regs. The commander in chief forced an important unit to choose sides. He broke the All Americans in two. In essence, his statement to the troops there was: “Those who like me and my politics, come to my rally. The rest of you — beat it.” (Maybe we should start calling them the “Some Americans.”)

Imagine what it was like the day after. The soldiers who chose not to attend wondered how their next rating would go. Some lieutenant from California worried if his commander now has a problem with where he’s from — and is checking whether he was at the rally. Maybe it’s better if he wasn’t, and he instead chose to abide by Defense regulations?

No matter which way you lean, that speech injected partisan acid into the 82nd Airborne. And it will drip down and corrode from the stars at the top to the lowest-ranking private.

Militaries require extraordinary cohesion to function in combat. For those of us who’ve chosen this profession, one thing is burned into our brains from that very first day our hair’s shorn off: We’re all we’ve got. There’s nobody else. When you are hundreds and thousands of miles away from everyone else you’ve ever known, and you’re there for weeks and months and a year, you realize just how important the person next to you is, regardless of where they’ve come from, who their parents are, or whether their community votes red or blue.

Fighting units are like five separate fingers that form a fist. Partisan acid burns and weakens our fist.

Then there are the indirect effects. This speech damaged the military’s standing with a large swath of America. The image of soldiers cheering the partisan applause lines of a commander in chief who just sent thousands of troops to Los Angeles over the state’s objections? Not a good look.

These optics risk ruining the military’s trust with roughly half of America. The military is the last remaining federal institution that a majority of Americans trust “a great deal.” But it’s been slipping since the last Trump administration and may fall under 50%. Yet the military requires firm trust to fund and fill critical needs.

That’s important because not everyone wants to serve in the military. Many would prefer not to think about the expected self-sacrifice, or the daily discomforts of military discipline. Moreover, not everyone is even able to serve in the military. Roughly three-quarters of young Americans can’t qualify.

What if someone who would have been the next Mike Mullen — Los Angeles native, Navy admiral and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs — gets turned off by this rally and opts against the Naval Academy?

Then zoom out a little. What if much of California takes offense at this speech, not to mention at the soldiers and Marines so recently forced upon the local and state governments?

California hosts more active-duty troops than any other state — by a wide margin. It’s also the biggest donor state in the country, contributing $83 billion more to the federal government than it receives. The bases and other strategic locations up and down the Pacific Coast are beyond value. California is America’s strong right arm.

To sever California’s support for the military is simply unthinkable. It just can’t happen. We’ve got to fix this.

The first fix is simple. Hold troops to the accepted standards. Hegseth’s most recent book argued that the Defense Department has “an integrity and accountability problem.” Here’s the secretary’s chance to show America he stands for standards.

But we know mistakes happen, and this could become a powerful teachable moment: When the commander in chief orders troops to such an event, the only acceptable demeanor is the stone cold silence the generals and admirals of the Joint Chiefs display at the State of the Union, regardless of their politics and regardless of what the president is saying. Just a few years ago, two Marines in a similarly awful situation did just this right thing.

A further fix calls for more individuals to act: The roughly 7,500 retired generals and admirals in America need to speak up. The military profession’s nonpartisan ethic is at a breaking point. They know the old military saying: When you spot something substandard, and you fail to correct it, then you’ve just set a new standard.

The reason many of these retired senior officers often don’t speak out is their fear that defending neutrality risks having a political impact. Yet their continued silence carries a grave institutional effect — the slow-motion suicide of the profession that gave them their stars.

The president mentioned Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee in his speech, and it’s too bad his speechwriter didn’t include a certain anecdote that would’ve fit the occasion. When the Civil War was over and terms were being agreed upon at Appomattox Court House, Lee noticed Col. Ely Parker, a Tonawanda Seneca man serving on Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant’s staff. Lee quipped, “I am glad to see one real American here.”

To which Parker replied, “We are all Americans.” Since that very moment, we’ve been one country and one Army, All Americans, indivisible and inseparable from society.

If only we can keep it.

ML Cavanaugh is the author of the forthcoming book “Best Scar Wins: How You Can Be More Than You Were Before.” @MLCavanaugh

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decided Thursday to leave troops in Los Angeles in the hands of the Trump administration while California’s objections are litigated in federal court, finding the president had broad — though not “unreviewable” — authority to deploy the military in American cities.

“We disagree with Defendants’ primary argument that the President’s decision to federalize members of the California National Guard … is completely insulated from judicial review,” Judge Mark J. Bennett of Honolulu, a Trump appointee, wrote for the appellate panel. “Nonetheless, we are persuaded that, under longstanding precedent interpreting the statutory predecessor … our review of that decision must be highly deferential.”

Legal scholars said the decision was expected — particularly as the 9th Circuit has moved from the country’s most liberal to one of its most “balanced” since the start of Trump’s first term.

“It’s critically important for the people to understand just how much power Congress has given the president through these statutes,” said Eric Merriam, a professor of legal studies at Central Florida University and an appellate military judge.

“Judges for hundreds of years now have given extreme deference to the president in national security decisions, [including] use of the military,” the expert went on. “There is no other area of law where the president or executive gets that level of deference.”

The appellate panel sharply questioned both sides during Tuesday’s hearing, appearing to reject the federal government’s assertion that courts had no right to review the president’s actions, while also undercutting California’s claim that President Trump had overstepped his authority in sending troops to L.A. to quell a “rebellion against the authority of the United States.”

“All three judges seemed skeptical of the arguments that each party was making in its most extreme form,” said Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice.

“I was impressed with the questions,” she went on. “I think they were fair questions, I think they were hard questions. I think the judges were wrestling with the right issues.”

The ruling Thursday largely returns the issue to U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer.

Unlike Breyer, whose temporary restraining order on June 12 would have returned control of the National Guard to California, the appellate court largely avoided the question of whether the facts on the ground in Los Angeles amounted to a “rebellion.”

Instead, the ruling focused on the limits of presidential power.

Bennett’s opinion directly refuted the argument — made by Assistant Atty. Gen. Brett Shumate in Tuesday’s hearing — that the decision to federalize National Guard troops was “unreviewable.”

“Defendants argue that this language precludes review,” the judge wrote. “[But Supreme Court precedent] does not compel us to accept the federal government’s position that the President could federalize the National Guard based on no evidence whatsoever, and that courts would be unable to review a decision that was obviously absurd or made in bad faith.”

He also quoted at length from the 1932 Supreme Court decision in Sterling vs. Constantin, writing “[t]he nature of the [president’s] power also necessarily implies that there is a permitted range of honest judgment as to the measures to be taken in meeting force with force, in suppressing violence and restoring order.”

Shumate told the judge he didn’t know the case when Bennett asked him about it early in Tuesday’s hearing.

“That is a key case in that line of cases, and the fact he was not aware of it is extraordinary,” Goitein said.

Merriam agreed — to a point.

“That’s a nightmare we have in law school — it’s a nightmare I’ve had as an appellate judge,” the scholar said.

However, “it’s actually a good thing that the attorney representing the U.S. was not planning to talk about martial law in front of the 9th Circuit,” Merriam said.

One thing Thursday’s ruling did not touch is whether the administration violated the Posse Comitatus Act by deputizing the military to act as civilian law enforcement — an allegation California leveled in its original complaint, but which Breyer effectively tabled last week.

“The Posse Comitatus Act claim has not been resolved because it was essentially not ripe last Thursday,” when troops had just arrived, Goitein said. “It is ripe now.”

“Even if the 9th Circuit agrees with the federal government on everything, we could see a ruling from the district court next week that could limit what troops can do on the ground,” she said.

In the meantime, residents of an increasingly quiet Los Angeles will have to live with the growing number of federal troops.

“[Congress] didn’t limit rebellion to specific types of facts,” Merriam said. “As much as [Angelenos] might say, ‘This is crazy! There’s not a rebellion going on in L.A. right now,’ this is where we are with the law.”

Members of the Italian soccer team Juventus visited with President Trump in the Oval Office on Wednesday afternoon.

Exactly why the gathering took place remains largely a mystery.

Six of the team’s players (Weston McKennie, Timothy Weah, Manuel Locatelli, Federico Gatti, Teun Koopmeiners and Dusan Vlahovic), their coach Igor Tudor, a handful of team executives and FIFA president Gianni Infantino stopped by hours before Juventus’ FIFA Club World Cup game against United Arab Emirates’ Al Ain that night at Audi Field.

Trump was presented with a Juventus jersey and one for next year’s World Cup, which the United States will be co-host with Canada and Mexico. But as Trump took questions from the media for about 15 minutes during the event, very little soccer was discussed.

Instead, the players stood behind him patiently — fidgeting now and then, their faces mainly expressionless — as Trump answered questions that mostly related to the potential of U.S. involvement in Israel’s war against Iran.

Later that night, speaking to a different group of reporters after his team’s 5-0 victory over Al Ain, Weah called the White House experience “a bit weird” and implied he and the other players weren’t given the option of declining the visit.

“They told us that we have to go and I had no choice but to go,” said Weah, a U.S. men’s national team member whose father George is a past winner of the prestigious France Football Ballon d’Or award and was the president of Liberia from 2018-2024. “So [I] showed up.”

FIFA declined to comment. The White House and Juventus did not respond to requests for comment from The Times.

While Weah said he thought his first White House visit “was a cool experience,” he added that “I’m not one for the politics, so it wasn’t that exciting.”

“When [Trump] started talking about all the politics with Iran and everything, it’s kind of like, I just want to play football, man,” Weah said.

Fellow USMNT player McKennie had made critical comments about Trump during the Black Lives Matter movement in June 2020.

Juventus players Weston McKennie, left, and Tim Weah take a selfie outside the White House after they and other team members met with President Trump in the Oval Office on Wednesday.

(Alex Brandon / Associated Press)

“I don’t think that Trump is the right one for the job as the president,” McKennie said at the time. “I think he’s ignorant. I don’t support him a bit. I don’t think he’s a man to stand by his word. In my eyes, you can call him racist.”

Still, during his introductory comments, Trump briefly singled out Weah and McKennie as “my American players” when he mentioned that night’s game.

“Good luck,” he said while shaking both of their hands in what had the potential to be an awkward moment. “I hope you guys are the two best players on the field.”

That’s not to say, however, that there weren’t any awkward moments. Because there were — none more so than when Trump brought up “men playing in women’s sports,” then looked over his right shoulder and asked: “Could a woman make your team, fellas? Tell me. You think?”

When no players answered, Trump said, “You’re being nice,” then turned to face the other direction and asked the same question.

“We have a very good women’s team,” Juventus general manager Damien Comolli replied.

Trump asked, “But they should be playing with women, right?”

When he got no response, Trump smiled and turned back toward the reporters.

“See, they’re very diplomatic,” he said.

Trump made a couple of other attempts to involve the soccer contingent in the discussion. At one point, the president used the word “stealth” when discussing U.S. military planes, then turned around and remarked, “You guys want to be stealthy tonight. You can be stealthy — you’ll never lose, right?”

The players did not seem to respond.

For the final question of the session, a reporter favorably compared Trump’s border policy to that of former President Biden and asked, “What do you attribute that success to?”

Trump looked behind him and stated, “See, that’s what I call a good question, fellas.”

Once again, the players did not appear to respond.

BEERSHEBA, Israel — As Israel and Iran exchanged more attacks on Thursday, President Trump sought to keep open the door to diplomacy on Tehran’s nuclear program, saying he would make up his mind within two weeks on whether the U.S. military will get directly involved in the conflict.

“Based on the fact that there’s a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,” Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, told reporters, reading out Trump’s statement.

Trump has been weighing whether to attack Iran by striking its well-defended Fordo uranium enrichment facility, which is buried under a mountain and widely considered to be out of reach of all but America’s “bunker-buster” bombs.

Earlier in the day, Israel’s defense minister threatened Iran’s supreme leader after Iranian missiles crashed into a major hospital in southern Israel and hit residential buildings near Tel Aviv, wounding at least 240 people. As rescuers wheeled patients out of the smoldering hospital, Israeli warplanes launched their latest attack on Iran’s nuclear program.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz blamed Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei for Thursday’s barrage and said the military “has been instructed and knows that in order to achieve all of its goals, this man absolutely should not continue to exist.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he trusted that Trump would “do what’s best for America.”

“I can tell you that they’re already helping a lot,” Netanyahu said from the rubble and shattered glass around the Soroka Medical Center in Israel’s southern city of Beersheba.

The open conflict between Israel and Iran erupted last Friday with a surprise wave of Israeli airstrikes targeting nuclear and military sites, top generals and nuclear scientists. At least 639 people, including 263 civilians, have been killed in Iran and more than 1,300 wounded, according to a Washington-based Iranian human rights group.

Iran has retaliated by firing hundreds of missiles and drones, killing at least 24 people in Israel and wounding hundreds.

More than 200 wounded, including dozens in the hospital strike

At least 240 people were wounded by the latest Iranian attack on Israel, including 80 patients and medical workers wounded in the strike on the Soroka Medical Center. The vast majority were lightly wounded, as much of the hospital building had been evacuated in recent days.

Israel’s Home Front Command said that one of the Iranian ballistic missiles fired Thursday morning had been rigged with fragmenting cluster munitions. Rather than a conventional warhead, a cluster munition warhead carries dozens of submunitions that can explode on impact, showering small bomblets around a large area and posing major safety risks on the ground. The Israeli military did not say where that missile had been fired.

Iranian officials insisted that they had not sought to strike the hospital and claimed the attack hit a facility belonging to the Israeli military’s elite technological unit, called C4i. The website for the Gav-Yam Negev advanced technologies park, some 2 miles from the hospital, said C4i had a branch campus in the area.

The Israeli army did not respond to a request for comment. An Israeli military official, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with regulations, acknowledged that there was no specific intelligence that Iran had planned to target the hospital.

Many hospitals in Israel, including Soroka, had activated emergency plans in the last week. They converted parking garages to wards and transferred vulnerable patients underground.

Israel also has a fortified, subterranean blood bank that kicked into action after Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack ignited the latest war in the Gaza Strip.

Doctors at Soroka said that the Iranian missile struck almost immediately after air raid sirens went off, causing a loud explosion that could be heard from a safe room. The strike inflicted the greatest damage on an old surgery building and affected key infrastructure, including gas, water and air-conditioning systems, the medical center said.

The hospital, which provides services to around 1 million residents of Israel’s south, had been caring for 700 patients at the time of the attack. After the strike, the hospital closed to all patients except for life-threatening cases.

Iran has fired 450 missiles and 1,000 drones at Israel since the conflict began, according to Israeli army estimates, though most have been shot down by Israel’s multitiered air defenses.

Iran rejects calls to surrender or end its nuclear program

Iran has long maintained its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. But it is the only non-nuclear-weapon state to enrich uranium up to 60%, a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%.

Israel is widely believed to be the only country with a nuclear weapons program in the Middle East, but has never acknowledged the existence of its arsenal.

In the last few days, the Israeli air campaign has targeted Iran’s enrichment site at Natanz, centrifuge workshops around Tehran, a nuclear site in Isfahan and what the army assesses to be most of Iran’s ballistic missile launchers. The destruction of those launchers has contributed to the steady decline in Iranian attacks since the start of the conflict.

On Thursday, antiaircraft artillery was clearly audible across Tehran and witnesses in the central city of Isfahan reported seeing antiaircraft fire after nightfall.

In announcing that he would take up to two more weeks to decide whether to strike Iran, President Trump opened up diplomatic options with the apparent hope Iran would make concessions after suffering major military losses.

Already, a new diplomatic initiative seemed to be underway as Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi prepared to travel Friday to Geneva for meetings with the European Union’s top diplomat, and with his counterparts from the United Kingdom, France and Germany.

But at least publicly, Iran has struck a hard line.

Iran’s supreme leader on Wednesday rejected U.S. calls for surrender and warned that any American military involvement by the Americans would cause “irreparable damage to them.”

Parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf on Thursday criticized Trump for using military pressure to gain an advantage in nuclear negotiations.

“The delusional American president knows that he cannot impose peace on us by imposing war and threatening us,” he said.

Iran agreed to redesign Arak to address nuclear concerns

Israel’s military said Thursday its fighter jets targeted the Arak heavy water reactor, some 155 miles southwest of Tehran, in order to prevent it from being used to produce plutonium.

Iranian state TV said there was “no radiation danger whatsoever” around the Arak site, which it said had been evacuated ahead of the strike.

Heavy water helps cool nuclear reactors, but it produces plutonium as a byproduct that can potentially be used in nuclear weapons. That would provide Iran another path to the bomb beyond enriched uranium, should it choose to pursue the weapon.

Iran had agreed under its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers to redesign the facility to alleviate proliferation concerns. That work was never completed.

The reactor became a point of contention after Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal in 2018. Ali Akbar Salehi, a high-ranking nuclear official in Iran, said in 2019 that Tehran bought extra parts to replace a portion of the reactor that it had poured concrete into under the deal.

Israel said strikes were carried out “in order to prevent the reactor from being restored and used for nuclear weapons development.”

The International Atomic Energy Agency has said that due to restrictions imposed by Iran on inspectors, the U.N. nuclear watchdog has lost “continuity of knowledge” about Iran’s heavy water production — meaning it could not absolutely verify Tehran’s production and stockpile.

Mednick, Melzer and Gambrell write for the Associated Press. Melzer reported from Tel Aviv, and Gambrell from Dubai. AP writer Melanie Lidman in Tel Aviv and Ellen Knickmeyer in Washington contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — President Trump honored Juneteenth in each of his first four years as president, even before it became a federal holiday. He even claimed once to have made it “famous.”

But on this year’s Juneteenth holiday on Thursday, the usually talkative president kept silent about a day important to Black Americans for marking the end of slavery in the country he leads again.

No words about it from his lips, on paper or through his social media site.

Asked whether Trump would commemorate Juneteenth in any way, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters: “I’m not tracking his signature on a proclamation today. I know this is a federal holiday. I want to thank all of you for showing up to work. We are certainly here. We’re working 24/7 right now.”

Asked in a follow-up question whether Trump might recognize the occasion another way or on another day, Leavitt said, “I just answered that question for you.”

Trump’s silence was a sharp contrast from his prior acknowledgment of the holiday. Juneteenth celebrates the end of slavery in the United States by commemorating June 19, 1865, when Union soldiers brought the news of freedom to enslaved Black people in Galveston, Texas. Their freedom came more than two years after President Abraham Lincoln liberated slaves in the Confederacy by signing the Emancipation Proclamation during the Civil War.

Trump’s quiet on the issue also deviated from White House guidance that Trump planned to sign a Juneteenth proclamation. Leavitt didn’t explain the change. Trump held no public events Thursday, but he shared statements about Iran, the TikTok app and Fed chairman Jerome Powell on his social media site.

He had more to say about Juneteenth in yearly statements in his first term.

In 2017, Trump invoked the “soulful festivities and emotional rejoicing” that swept through the Galveston crowd when a major general delivered the news that all enslaved people were free.

He told the Galveston story in each of the next three years. “Together, we honor the unbreakable spirit and countless contributions of generations of African Americans to the story of American greatness,” he added in his 2018 statement.

In 2019: “Across our country, the contributions of African Americans continue to enrich every facet of American life.”

In 2020: “June reminds us of both the unimaginable injustice of slavery and the incomparable joy that must have attended emancipation. It is both a remembrance of a blight on our history and a celebration of our Nation’s unsurpassed ability to triumph over darkness.”

In 2020, after suspending his campaign rallies because of the COVID-19 pandemic, Trump chose Tulsa, Okla., as the place to resume his public gatherings, and scheduled a rally for June 19. But the decision met with such fierce criticism that Trump postponed the event by a day.

Black leaders had said it was offensive for Trump to choose June 19 and Tulsa for a campaign event, given the significance of Juneteenth and Tulsa being the place where, in 1921, a white mob looted and burned that city’s Greenwood district, an economically thriving area referred to as Black Wall Street. As many as 300 Black Tulsans were killed, and thousands were temporarily held in internment camps overseen by the National Guard.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal days before the rally, Trump tried to put a positive spin on the situation by claiming that he had made Juneteenth “famous.” He said he changed the rally date out of respect for two African American friends and supporters.

“I did something good. I made it famous. I made Juneteenth very famous,” Trump said. “It’s actually an important event, it’s an important time. But nobody had heard of it. Very few people have heard of it.”

Generations of Black Americans celebrated Juneteenth long before it became a federal holiday in 2021 with the stroke of former President Joe Biden’s pen.

Later in 2020, Trump sought to woo Black voters with a series of campaign promises, including establishing Juneteenth as a federal holiday.

He lost the election, and that made it possible for Biden to sign the legislation establishing Juneteenth as the newest federal holiday.

Last year, Biden spoke briefly at a holiday concert on the South Lawn that featured performances by Gladys Knight and Patti LaBelle. Former Vice President Kamala Harris danced onstage with gospel singer Kirk Franklin.

Biden was spending this year’s holiday in Galveston, Texas, where he was set to speak at a historic African Methodist Episcopal church.

Superville writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Calvin Woodward contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — The day after immigration raids began in Los Angeles, Rep. Norma Torres (D-Pomona) and three other members of Congress were denied entry to the immigrant detention facility inside the Roybal Federal Building.

The lawmakers were attempting an unannounced inspection, a common and long-standing practice under congressional oversight powers.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials said too many protesters were present on June 7 and officers deployed chemical agents multiple times. In a letter later to acting ICE Director Todd Lyons, Torres said she ended up in the emergency room for respiratory treatment. She also said the protest had been small and peaceful.

Torres is one of many Democratic members of Congress, from states including California, New York and Illinois, who have been denied entry to immigrant detention facilities in recent weeks.

Jim Townsend, director of the Carl Levin Center for Oversight and Democracy at Wayne State University in Michigan, said the denials mark a profound — and illegal — shift from past practice.

“Denying members of Congress access to facilities is a direct assault on our system of checks and balances,” he said. “What members of Congress are trying to do now is to be part of a proud bipartisan tradition of what we like to call oversight by showing up.”

Subsequent attempts by lawmakers to inspect the facility inside the Roybal Building have also been unsuccessful.

Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Los Angeles), who was with Torres the day she was hospitalized, went back twice more — on June 9 and on Tuesday — and was rebuffed. Torres and Rep. Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park) tried at separate times Wednesday and were both denied.

Gomez and other Democrats have pointed to a federal statute, detailed in yearly appropriations packages since 2020, which states that funds may not be used to prevent a member of Congress “from entering, for the purpose of conducting oversight, any facility operated by or for the Department of Homeland Security used to detain or otherwise house aliens …”

The statute also states that nothing in that section “may be construed to require a Member of Congress to provide prior notice of the intent to enter a facility” for the purpose of conducting oversight. Under the statute, federal officials may require at least 24 hours notice for a visit by congressional staff — but not members themselves.

Under ICE guidelines published this month for members of Congress and their staff, the agency requests at least 72 hours notice from lawmakers and requires at least 24 hours notice from staff.

The agency says it has discretion to deny or reschedule a visit if an emergency arises or the safety of the facility is jeopardized, though such contingencies are not mentioned in the law.

Gomez said an ICE official called him Tuesday to say that oversight law doesn’t apply to the downtown L.A. facility because it is a field office, not a detention facility.

“Well it does say Metropolitan Detention Center right here in big, bold letters,” he says in a video posted afterward on social media, gesturing toward a sign outside the building. “But they say this is a processing center. So I smell bull—.”

Department of Homeland Security police patrol the street after detaining a protester at the Edward R. Roybal Federal Building in downtown L.A. on June 12.

(Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times)

If no one is technically being detained, Gomez said he rhetorically asked the official during their call, are they free to leave?

Torres visited the facility in February by setting up an appointment, her staff said. She got another appointment for last Saturday, but ICE canceled it because of the protests. When members emailed ICE to set up a new appointment, they got no response.

Gomez said he believes ICE doesn’t want lawmakers to see field offices because of poor conditions and lack of attorney access because of ramped-up arrests that have reportedly left some detainees there overnight without beds and limited food.

In some cases, lawmakers have had success showing up unannounced. On Friday, Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Redlands) toured the Adelanto ICE Processing Facility, north of San Bernardino. After being denied entry to the Adelanto Facility on June 8, Chu and four other California Democrats were allowed in on Tuesday.

“Just because ICE has opened their doors to a few members of Congress does not excuse their inflammatory tactics to meet deportation quotas,” said Rep. Mark Takano (D-Riverside), who visited Adelanto with Chu. “Accountability means showing a consistent pattern of accessibility, not just a one-off event.”

The representatives learned the facility is now at full capacity with 1,100 detainees, up from 300 a month ago. Chu said they spoke to detainees from the L.A. raids, who she said were not criminals and who are now living in inhumane conditions — without enough food, unable to change their underwear for 10 days or to call their families and lawyers.

Chu said the group arrived early and stood in the lobby to avoid a repeat of their previous attempt, when facility guards kept them off the property by locking a fence.

Tom Homan, President Trump’s border policy advisor, departs a meeting with Republican senators who are working to cancel $9.4 billion in spending already approved by Congress at the Capitol in Washington on June 11.

(J. Scott Applewhite / Associated Press)

In an interview with The Times this month, Trump’s chief border policy advisor Tom Homan said members of Congress are welcome to conduct oversight, but that they must contact the facility first to make arrangements. The agency has to look after the safety and security of the facility, officers and detainees, he said.

“Please go in and look at them,” he said. “They’re the best facilities that money can buy, the highest detention standards in the industry. But there’s a right way and wrong way to do it.”

Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary for Homeland Security, said in a statement to The Times that requests for visits are needed because “ICE law enforcement have seen a surge in assaults, disruptions and obstructions to enforcement, including by politicians themselves.”

She added that requests for visits should be made with enough time — “a week is sufficient” — to not interfere with the president’s authority under Article II of the Constitution to oversee executive branch functions.

DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin, flanked by Deputy Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Madison Sheahan, left, and acting Director of ICE Todd Lyons, speaks during a news conference in Washington on May 21.

(Jose Luis Magana / Associated Press)

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, slammed the guidance Wednesday on X.

“This unlawful policy is a smokescreen to deny Member visits to ICE offices across the country, which are holding migrants — and sometimes even U.S. citizens — for days at a time,” he wrote. “They are therefore facilities and are subject to oversight and inspection at any time. DHS pretending otherwise is simply their latest lie.”

Townsend, the congressional oversight expert, said the practice goes back to when President Truman was a senator and established a committee to investigate problems among contractors who were supplying the World War II effort.

“That committee conducted hundreds of field visits, and they would show up unannounced in many instances,” Townsend said.

More recently, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) drove to the Pentagon in 1983 and demanded access to ask questions about overspending after being stonewalled, he said, by Department of Defense officials.

The Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution to mean that Congress has wide authority to conduct oversight to show up unannounced in order to secure accurate information, Townsend said.

National Guard members stand at post at the Edward R. Roybal Federal Building in Los Angeles on June 10.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)

Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said the Trump administration is trying to hide the truth from the public. Last week, Padilla was shoved out of a news conference, forced to the ground and handcuffed after attempting to question Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.

“The Trump administration has done everything in their power but to provide transparency to the American people about their mission in Los Angeles,” he said during an impassioned floor speech Wednesday in which he cried recounting the ordeal.

In an interview Wednesday with Newsmax, McLaughlin accused Democratic lawmakers of using oversight as an excuse to stage publicity stunts.

“The Democrats are reeling,” she said. “They have no actual message and so they’re doing this to get more attention and to manufacture viral moments.”

On Tuesday, Gomez wore a suit jacket with his congressional lapel pin and carried his congressional ID card and business card in his hand — “so there would be no mistake” as to who he was. He said he was concerned that what happened to Padilla could also happen to him. He was denied access anyway.

Gomez said federal officials should be fined each time they deny oversight access to members of Congress. He said he and other members are also discussing whether to file a lawsuit to compel access.

“When you have an administration that is operating outside the bounds of the law, they’re basically saying, ‘What recourse do you have? Can you force us? You don’t have an army. We don’t need to listen to you,’” Gomez said. “Then you have to put some real teeth into it.”

Times staff writer Nathan Solis in Los Angeles contributed to this report.

More than a dozen religious leaders from an array of faiths marched to the steps of the Federal Building in downtown Los Angeles on Wednesday night, flowers in hand, calling for an end to the federal immigration raids they say have torn families apart and resulted in racial profiling.

At the start of the procession in Plaza Olvera, the Rev. Tanya Lopez, senior pastor at Downey Memorial Christian Church, recounted how last week she watched as plainclothes federal agents swarmed a constituent in the parking lot of her church. Despite her attempts to intervene, she said, the man was detained, and she doesn’t know where he is now.

“All of our faith traditions teach us to love our neighbor, to leave the world with less suffering than when we find it, and this is creating trauma that will be unable to be undone for generations,” Lopez said.

Religious leaders from multiple faiths left flowers on the steps of the Federal Building in downtown Los Angeles in honor of people detained in recent immigration raids.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Federal enforcement actions have played out across Southern California this week as the Trump administration carries out its vows to do mass deportations of immigrants in the country without documentation. Initially, President Trump focused his rhetoric on those who had committed violent crimes. But shortly after he took office, his administration made clear that it considers anyone in the country without authorization to be a criminal.

The raids — which have spanned bus stops, Home Depot parking lots, swap meets, farms and factories — have prompted many immigrants to go into hiding, and in some cases, to self-deport.

The religious leaders marching Wednesday called for a halt to the raids, saying immigrants are integral to the Los Angeles community and deserve to be treated with respect and dignity, regardless of documentation status.

They carried their message through downtown, marching from Plaza Olvera to the Federal Building, dressed in colorful garb reflecting Jewish, Sikh, Muslim and Catholic traditions, and uniting in song and prayer, in Spanish and English.

They called out to God, Creator, the Holy One, and prayed for healing and justice. They prayed for the hundreds of people who have been detained and deported and the families they’ve left behind.

Father Brendan Busse of Dolores Mission Church looks out over the crowd participating in an interfaith protest Wednesday in downtown Los Angeles.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

In the crowd, Talia Guppy held purple flowers to her chest as she sang along. Guppy said she learned that members of her Episcopalian church, St. Stephen’s Hollywood, had been detained during the raid of the Ambiance Apparel factory in downtown L.A. Her church has since moved its services online to accommodate people afraid to venture from their homes.

“We’re out here for them,” she said. “We’re going to keep the hope and keep the faith until we get justice for them.”

At the end of the procession, the marchers approached the steps of the Federal Building. Officers from the Department of Homeland Security poured out of the building and guarded the entrance as clergy leaders lined the steps. Inside, behind semireflective doors, rows of U.S. Marines stood at the ready.

The leaders called for peace and laid flowers on the steps in tribute to those who have been detained.

“We come with flowers, and we will keep coming with flowers as long as our loved ones are held in cages,” said Valarie Kaur, a Sikh leader. She turned her attention to the officers at the doors, who stood stoic, and questioned how they wanted to be remembered by history. Then she placed flowers by their feet.

Sikh leader Valarie Kaur leaves a flower at the feet of federal officers standing guard at the Federal Building in downtown Los Angeles.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

In the crowd, protesters held signs with images of the Virgin Mary and Mexican flags. The clergy asked them to be ready to defend their neighbors in the coming days.

Father Brendan Busse, a Jesuit priest at the Dolores Mission Church in Boyle Heights, said he has felt the impact of the raids within his church. Devoted members are no longer in the pews. Others call asking whether it is safe to come to church. The fear is palpable.

“We need to be a safe space for people, not just in our church, but in the whole neighborhood,” he said. “I can’t guarantee to anybody that we are a totally safe space, but to at least give them a sense that in the difficult moment we’re at, that we stand together.”

This article is part of The Times’ equity reporting initiative, funded by the James Irvine Foundation, exploring the challenges facing low-income workers and the efforts being made to address California’s economic divide.

ST. PAUL, Minn. — Hundreds of people, some clutching candles or carrying flowers to lay in front of a memorial, gathered outside Minnesota’s Capitol on Wednesday evening for a vigil to remember a prominent state lawmaker and her husband who were gunned down at their home.

As a brass quintet from the Minnesota Orchestra played, Gov. Tim Walz wiped away tears and comforted attendees at the gathering for former House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, who were killed early Saturday in the northern Minneapolis suburbs.

Colin Hortman, the Hortmans’ son, embraced Walz and lay a photo of his parents on the memorial.

The memorial, which sprang up outside the Capitol after the killings, features flowers, American flags, photos and sticky notes with such messages as, “Thank you for always believing in me and in Minnesota” and “We got this from here. Thank you for everything.”

Wednesday’s vigil also included a Native American drum circle, a string quartet and the crowd singing “Amazing Grace.”

Around the gathering, there was a heavy police presence, with law enforcement blocking off streets leading up to the Capitol and state troopers standing guard.

The event didn’t include a speaking program and attendees were instructed not to bring signs of any kind.

The man charged in federal and state court with killing the Hortmans, Vance Boelter, is also accused of shooting another Democratic lawmaker, Sen. John Hoffman, and his wife, Yvette, at their home a few miles away in Champlin. They survived and are recovering. Federal prosecutors have declined to speculate about a motive.

Boelter’s attorneys have declined to comment on the charges.

Hortman had served as the top House Democratic leader since 2017, and six years as speaker, starting in 2019. Under a power-sharing deal after the 2024 election left the House tied, her title became speaker emerita and Republican Rep. Lisa Demuth became speaker.

Walz has described Hortman as his closest political ally and “the most consequential Speaker in state history.”

The Hortmans were alumni of the University of Minnesota, which held a midday memorial gathering on the Minneapolis campus.

Rebecca Cunningham, the university’s president, spoke during the event about the grief and outrage people are grappling with along with questions about how things got to this point.

“I don’t have the answers to these questions but I know that finding answers starts with the coming together in community as we are today,” she said.

Funeral information for the Hortmans has not been announced.

Vancleave and Golden write for the Associated Press. Golden reported from Seattle. AP writer Steve Karnowski in Minneapolis contributed to this report.

President Trump on Thursday signed an executive order giving TikTok a 90-day extension to work out a deal with the U.S. government that addresses security concerns over the app’s ties to China.

Significant pressure has been placed on TikTok, known for its popular social video app, after a law was signed in 2024 that required TikTok’s Chinese parent company ByteDance to sell its U.S. operations of TikTok or the app would be banned in the U.S.

The new order signed by Trump will give TikTok an extension until Sept. 17. During that period, the Justice Department will not enforce the 2024 law that would have banned TikTok in the country or impose penalties on companies that distribute TikTok, the order said.

“We are grateful for President Trump’s leadership and support in ensuring that TikTok continues to be available for more than 170 million American users and 7.5 million U.S. businesses that rely on the platform as we continue to work with Vice President Vance’s Office,” TikTok said in a statement.

TikTok has a large presence in Southern California, with offices in Culver City that serve as the company’s U.S. headquarters, and many video creators in the L.A. area produce content for TikTok.

The app has interested buyers, including Amazon and an investment group led by Frank McCourt, a former Dodgers owner, whose bid includes “Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary. San Francisco artificial intelligence company Perplexity said in March it wants to “rebuild the TikTok algorithm.”

Five California women sued a Fresno County school system Wednesday, alleging officials brushed aside claims they were being sexually assaulted by a second-grade teacher who was later convicted of similar abuse.

The case against the Clovis Unified School District comes amid a tidal wave of sexual abuse litigation that has left lawmakers scrambling to stop misconduct — and schools struggling to pay settlements owed to victims suing over crimes that stretch back decades.

The latest case dates back to the late 1990s and early 2000s. Plaintiff Samantha Muñoz, now a 28-year-old mother of two, is among those alleging she was abused by then-Fancher Creek Elementary School teacher Neng Yang.

Muñoz claims in the lawsuit that Yang began molesting her in 2004, when she was his 7-year-old student. By that time, the lawsuit says, girls had been complaining to Clovis Unified School District officials about Yang for years. The teacher was eventually arrested for producing child pornography in 2012, and has spent the past decade in federal prison in San Pedro, where he is serving a 38-year term for sexual exploitation of a minor.

“Clovis Unified was protecting this predator,” said Muñoz. “They continued to have him teaching at that school knowing he was [assaulting students].”

The Times does not typically identify victims of sexual assault, but Muñoz and two of her four co-plaintiffs said they wanted to speak out publicly about what happened.

Kelly Avants, a spokeswoman for Clovis Unified, said the district had not yet received notice of the lawsuit.

“We have not been served with the suit yet, but will review it when we are served and respond accordingly,” Avants said.

The public defender’s office that represented Yang in his criminal case referred questions to federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of California. A spokesperson for that office said they could offer no comment.

“When a teacher saw him showing me child pornography on his phone, school officials interrogated me and then encouraged me to say nothing,” Muñoz said. “I was left in his classroom and he kept abusing me.”

The Fresno case follows a landmark $4-billion settlement this spring over sexual abuse in L.A. County’s juvenile facilities, group and foster homes — believed to be the largest in U.S. history.

On Tuesday, the state’s largest school district, Los Angeles Unified, announced it would sell up to $500 million in bonds to help cover its anticipated sexual abuse liability.

“There’s tremendous cost pressures on school districts,” said Michael Fine, head of California’s Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, which published a report in January estimating state education agencies could be liable for $2 billion to $3 billion for past sexual misconduct. “No matter what, the money’s coming out of their current resources.”

The payouts stem from a series of recent changes to California’s statute of limitations for child sexual assault. Beginning with Assembly Bill 218 in 2019, the state opened a brief window for allegations going back as far as 1940. The law permanently extended the deadline for victims to file child sex abuse claims until age 40, or within five years of realizing a new illness or “psychological injury” as a result of abuse.

“There are definitely school districts out there that feel the state changed the law so the state should pay,” Fine said.

Some in the debate argue only abusers — not cash-strapped schools — should be liable for misconduct.

For most California school districts, the money is likely to come from a public entity risk pool, a collective pot that multiple agencies pay into to cover liabilities such as health insurance and workers’ compensation.

Many pools are assessing their members “retroactive premiums” in an attempt to cover sex abuse suits touched off by the change in the law, Fine said. That means even schools that haven’t been sued face higher operating costs.

“There’s impacts to the classroom whether there’s a claim or not, because they’ve got to pay the retroactive premiums somehow,” he said. “If they were in the pool, they’re on the hook.”

In its report, the agency recommended alternative ways the state and school districts might cover liabilities stemming from the law — including a modified form of receivership for agencies that can’t pay, and a new state victim’s compensation fund — as well as concrete steps to stem abuse.

The latter have been enthusiastically adopted by California lawmakers, including state Sen. Sasha Renée Pérez (D-Alhambra). But other suggestions have been ignored, Fine said.

“There isn’t a bill out there that carries the rest of our recommendations,” he said.

After months spent trying to understand the scale and the magnitude of the liability California institutions are facing, stories like those in the Clovis Unified suit haunt him, Fine said.

“It’s emotionally overwhelming,” he said.

Plaintiffs in the Clovis case described nearly identical abuse stretching back to 1998, when Yang was still a student teacher.

According to Wednesday’s complaint, then-second-grader Tiffany Thrailkill told the Francher Creek principal, vice principal and school counselor that Yang had groped her and forced her to perform oral sex.

“In response, [officials] took the position that Tiffany was lying and referred her to psychological treatment,” the suit alleged.

Despite laws dating back to the 1980s that require abuse to be reported, school officials kept the allegations quiet and never investigated Yang, the suit said.

“Instead of reporting Yang and protecting their students, it appears school officials blamed the girls, looked the other way, and enabled Yang to abuse their students for over a decade,” said Jason Amala, the plaintiffs’ attorney.

Ultimately, Yang was caught by the Central California Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, a partnership between the Clovis Police Department and Homeland Security Investigations.

For Muñoz, the teacher’s conviction was cold comfort. While she believes speaking out about her experience will inspire other victims to come forward, she now faces the agonizing decision of whether to send her nonverbal 4-year-old for early intervention services at the same elementary school where her suit alleges her nightmare began.

“Why would I want to go drop off my son at a place that’s nothing but bad memories?” the mother said. “It’s like signing my life away to the devil again.”

“I just need them to be accountable for who they protected,” Muñoz said.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is pushing for Congress to pass its signature legislation within the next two weeks, before Independence Day, when lawmakers return home for much of the summer. But their deadline appears to be in jeopardy after a Senate version of the bill released this week prompted blowback from influential Republicans in both chambers.

Widespread public opposition

Senate Majority Leader John Thune speaks along with Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) on Tuesday in the Capitol.

(Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)

The proposal, titled the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, is meant to be the legislative vehicle to pass President Trump’s core campaign promises into law. But the overall price tag of the legislation, its cuts to Medicaid and green energy tax credits, and its tax provisions are dividing the Republican caucus.

The GOP infighting comes as new polling shows a sizable majority of Americans disapprove of the bill. A Washington Post/Ipsos poll found that Americans oppose the legislation by 2 to 1, while 64% said they opposed it in a recent KFF Health Tracking Poll.

The House passed its version of the bill last month with a razor-thin majority. But within days, several House Republicans said they regretted their votes over a host of tangential provisions, such as a line that would prohibit states from regulating artificial intelligence over the next decade.

Now, the Senate bill would hike the federal debt limit by $5 trillion — $1 trillion more than the House language — making Trump’s 2017 business tax credits permanent, expanding tax cuts for seniors and slowing the end of green energy tax breaks that had phased out more quickly in the House version.

The Senate language also introduces its own controversial, niche provisions, such as the removal of suppressors — also known as silencers for guns — from regulation under the National Firearms Act.

Gutting Medicaid, raising deficits

The Senate language, drafted by the Senate Finance Committee, also would make even more drastic cuts to Medicaid, capping provider taxes at 3.5% from 6% by 2031 and imposing even more restrictive work requirements. Those provisions risk key votes in the chamber from GOP members who have expressed concern with funding reductions to the program, including Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Shelly Moore Capito of West Virginia and Josh Hawley of Missouri, among others.

After the Finance Committee draft was released, Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Rand Paul of Kentucky, who have advocated for a bill that would reduce annual deficits, said they would not vote for it in its current form. Republicans can only afford to lose three votes in the chamber to pass the bill.

“We’ve got a ways to go on this one,” Johnson said.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, of South Dakota, said he would refer the text to the Appropriations Committee, headed by Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, yet another skeptic of the bill.

“Republicans’ ’One Big Beautiful Bill’ is one huge ugly mess that will come at the cost of working families’ health care,” said Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii). “This bill proposes the biggest cut to Medicaid in history, kicking almost 14 million Americans off their insurance.”

Pushback from both GOP wings

Even if it passes the Senate, reconciliation with House Republicans will be a tall order.

“This bill, as the Senate has produced it, is definitely dead if it were to come over to the House in anything resembling its current form,” said Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, a member of the House Freedom Caucus, which advocates for decreased government spending, in a call with reporters.

But the other end of the House GOP caucus, composed of Republican lawmakers from majority Democratic states, also oppose the Senate bill as is.

Those Republicans successfully advocated to raise the cap in state and local tax deductions, to $40,000 for those making $500,000 or less a year. But the Senate version keeps the SALT provisions as is, extending them at a $10,000 cap.

“That is the deal, and I will not accept a penny less,” said Rep. Mike Lawler of New York. “If the Senate reduces the SALT number, I will vote no, and the bill will fail in the House.”

The White House has intensified its push for passage of the bill next month, warning that failure will have dire consequences. “More than 1.1 million jobs in the manufacturing sector and nearly six million jobs overall will be lost” if Trump’s 2017 tax cuts expire, the administration warned in a statement.

The bill also would provide funding for thousands of more agents at the Department of Homeland Security to perform border enforcement, a top priority for the administration that is currently reaching for unconventional resources — from refugee officers to the armed forces — for assistance in its mass deportation efforts.

“It needs to be passed,” Thune told Fox News this week. “We believe that the president and the House, the Senate, are all going to be on the same page when it’s all said and done, and we’ll get a bill that we could put on his desk that he’ll be happy with, and that the American people will benefit from.”

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Confusion reigns as Trump threatens to intensify L.A. sweeps even as ICE vows shift
The deep dive: The Minnesota Suspect’s Radical Spiritual World
The Times Special: As the Senate loses luster, more members run for governor. Is there a takeaway for Kamala Harris?

More to come,
Michael Wilner

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

For years in this columna, I have repeatedly posed a simple challenge to Archbishop José H. Gomez:

Stand up for Los Angeles, because L.A. needs you.

The head of the largest Catholic diocese in the United States has largely stood athwart the liberal city he’s supposed to minister since he assumed his seat in 2011 but especially since the COVID-19 pandemic. He has railed against “woke” culture and refused to meet with progressive Catholic groups. When the Dodgers in 2023 honored the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, a drag troupe that wears nun’s habits while raising funds for the marginalized, he led a special Mass at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels that amounted to a public exorcism.

Most perplexingly, the Mexico-born archbishop stayed largely quiet as the Herod that’s Donald Trump promised to clamp down on legal immigration and deport people without legal status during his 2024 presidential run. As head of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops at the end of last decade, Gomez wrote and spoke movingly about the need to treat all immigrants with dignity and fix this country’s broken system once and for all. But his gradual turn to the right as archbishop has gone so far that the National Catholic Reporter, where I’m an occasional contributor, labeled him a “failed culture warrior” when they anointed him their Newsmaker for that year.

Gomez’s devolution was especially dispiriting because L.A. Catholic leaders have taught their American peers how to embrace Latino immigrants ever since Archbishop John Cantwell helped refugees from Mexico’s Cristero War resettle in the city in the 1920s. Clerical legends like Luis Olivares and Richard Estrada transformed La Placita Church near Olvera Street into a sanctuary for Central American immigrants during the 1980s and 1990s in the face of threats from the feds. Gomez’s predecessor, Cardinal Roger Mahony, long drew national attention for attacking anti-immigrant legislation during his sermons and marching alongside immigrant rights protesters, a cross to bear that Gomez never warmed up to.

So when L.A. began to push back against Donald Trump’s immigration raids earlier this month only to see an onerous federal crackdown, I expected Gomez to do little even as L.A.-area priests bore witness to what was happening.

Father Gregory Boyle of Homeboy Industries appeared in a viral video proclaiming the righteous, if well-worn, message that no human being is illegal, but also that “we stand with anybody who’s demonized or left out, or excluded, or seen as disposable … it’s kinda how we roll here.” His fellow Jesuit, Dolores Mission pastor Brendan Busse, was there with activists during a June 9 migra raid at a factory in the Garment District that saw SEIU California president David Huerta arrested for civil disobedience.

I especially admired Father Peter O’Reilly, who was a priest in the L.A. Archdiocese for 44 years before retiring in 2005. The 90-year-old cleric was at Gloria Molina Grand Park on June 8, the day protesters torched Waymo cars, just blocks away from the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels. O’Reilly told a television station in his native Ireland afterward that it was important for him be there to let immigrants know “we were with them and for them.”

Gomez? The archbishop put out a weak-salsa statement around that time about how he was “troubled” by the raids. His Instagram account urged people a few days later to light a candle and pray for peace. That same day, Diocese of Orange Bishop Kevin Vann and his auxiliary bishops posted a letter condemning the raids, which they maintained “invoke our worst instincts” and “spread crippling fear and anxieties upon the hard-working, everyday faithful among us.”

You know things are upside-down in this world when O.C. is more down for immigrant rights than L.A.

Faith leaders lead a prayer vigil in Gloria Molina Grand Park on June 10 to stand in support of community members facing immigration raids in Los Angeles.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

I wanted to blast Gomez last week but held back, praying that he might change for the better. So I’m happy to report he’s starting to.

On June 10, the same day he posted his Instagram call for prayer, the archbishop also attended an evening interfaith vigil along with Boyle, Busse and other faith leaders to tell a crowd of over 1,000 people, “Immigration is about more than politics — it is about us, the kind of people we want to be.” Gomez asked all parishes in the L.A. Archdiocese the following day to hold special Masses with L.A.’s current immigration troubles in mind. He led the lunchtime one in the cathedral, telling parishioners during his homily, “We want to go out and console our neighbors and strengthen their hearts and encourage them to keep the faith.”

Gomez saved his most stinging remarks for this Tuesday in his regular column for Angelus News, the archdiocese’s publication. While not able to resist a shot at the Biden administration, the soft-spoken prelate nevertheless said of Trump’s raids: “This is not policy, it is punishment, and it can only result in cruel and arbitrary outcomes.” Accompanying his thoughts was a photo of a young woman holding a sign that read, “Jesus was an Immigrant” in front of California Highway Patrol officers in riot gear.

“For him to show up was meaningful,” Busse said. Since Trump’s inauguration, Dolores Mission has hosted training for the rapid response networks that have alerted people about immigration raids. “But I hope there’s more. The diocese has a huge capacity for organizing, and I hope that his leadership can move people in a large way.”

Busse said the first instinct of too many religious leaders is “to step back into a place of safety” when controversy emerges. “But there’s also an invitation to be brave and courageous. What we need to do is step into the situation to bring the peace that we’re praying for.”

Joseph Tómas McKellar is executive director of PICO California, a faith-based community organizing network that co-sponsored the interfaith vigil last week where Gomez spoke. The nonprofit used to teach citizenship and English classes in the L.A. Archdiocese and McKellar remembered Gomez attending a gathering of social justice groups in Modesto in 2017 as an active participant “in these small group conversations.”

The PICO California head said Gomez’s recent reemergence from his years in the political wilderness “was deeply encouraging. … Our bishops and the leaders of our denominations have a special responsibility to exercise prophetic leadership. The prophets are the ones who denounce what is broken in this world, but also announce a different vision. I do see him more embracing more that call and that challenge to reflect.”

An archdiocese spokesperson said Gomez was unavailable for comment because he was at a retreat for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Earlier this week , the group released a reflection declaring, “No one can turn a deaf ear to the palpable cries of anxiety and fear heard in communities throughout the country in the wake of a surge in immigration enforcement activities.”

I have no expectations that Archbishop Gomez’s politics will ever fully reflect L.A.’s progressive soul. He remains the only American bishop affiliated with the orthodox Opus Dei movement and sits on the ecclesiastical advisory board for the Napa Institute, an organization of rich Catholics that has labored mightily over the past decade to tilt the church rightward. Its co-founder, Orange County-based multimillionaire developer Tim Busch, wrote earlier this year with no irony that Trump’s administration “is the most Christian I’ve ever seen” and told The Times in 2023 that Gomez “is one of my closest advisors.”

But I’m glad Gomez is moving in the right direction, right when the city needs him the most. I continue to pray his voice gets bolder and stronger and that the region’s millions of Catholics — and all Angelenos, for that matter — follow the archbishop’s call to action to help immigrants while pushing him to do more.

I hope Gomez keeps in his heart what Busse told me near the end of our chat: “If the faith community doesn’t stand up when there’s a moral issue to stand up for, then I don’t know what happens.”

At Pasadena’s AC Hotel earlier this month, dozens of protesters gathered in an effort to confront federal agents who had arrived in town amid demonstrations against the Trump administration’s mass deportation effort.

Pasadena Mayor Victor Gordo was among those present on June 7 as demonstrators holding signs with “ICE out of Pasadena” and other messages chased federal vehicles out of the luxury hotel’s parking garage, cheering and recording it all on their cellphones.

The mayor said the protest forced the agents to leave the place they were using for local accommodations during their L.A. operations, which involved protecting federal buildings downtown.

“Word got out that there were Homeland Security vehicles parked at the hotel,” Gordo told The Times. “People wanted to express their 1st Amendment rights and they did so in a lawful, nonviolent and respectful manner.”

After hours of noisy rallying, the hotel staff asked the feds to pack up their things and go, according to Gordo. By sunset, uniformed agents from the Federal Protective Service, part of the Department of Homeland Security, were seen walking out of the hotel with their bags stacked on a luggage cart in a video of the incident that went viral online. Their vehicles were escorted out of the garage by local police as protesters trailed behind.

Hotels have emerged as hot spots for confrontations between community members and immigration agents. Federal agencies, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, sometimes rent blocks of rooms in places where agents are dispatched for major operations.

Hotels have emerged as hot spots for confrontations between community members and immigration agents.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

The showdown in Pasadena was one of several recent instances of protesters coming together at hotels across the Los Angeles region to put pressure on their proprietors to offer no quarter to federal personnel during the Trump administration’s crackdown. The businesses, which rely on immigrant workers for cleaning and maintenance, have been cast into an awkward position — one that requires balancing politics with protecting their employees.

From Whittier to Hawaiian Gardens to Brea, concerned citizens have repeatedly taken to social media and whisper networks to share locations where they have spotted who they believe are federal agents. And people have followed up on such information by staging protests outside hotels in communities including Long Beach, Downey and Glendale.

Employees at the AC Hotel Pasadena referred inquiries to a spokeswoman, who did not immediately provide a comment. It was back to business as usual Tuesday afternoon at the Marriott property, which opened earlier this year. A man on a plush couch worked on his laptop, a woman sipped a beer at the bar and staff milled about.

Gordo said he had confirmed that there are no longer any Homeland Security agents staying at the property.

The Homeland Security press office did not immediately provide comment, and agencies under the department’s umbrella, including ICE and U.S. Customs and Border Protection, did not respond to inquires.

Protesters have been arrested this month for allegedly interfering with federal officers, and federal agencies have expressed concerns about the repercussions of people “doxxing” agents by sharing their locations and other personal information online.

“People are out there taking photos of the names, their faces and posting them online with death threats to their family and themselves,” Reuters reported acting ICE chief Todd Lyons said last week.

Pasadena police block the entrance to the Hotel Dena in Pasadena last week.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

The crowd-sourced effort to spread information about where federal agents are holed up plays out mostly online.

In some instances, the unverified reports come from people who work at the hotels. Other times, hotel guests or area residents see suspected agents outside or in the lobby, or walk through parking lots in search of federal vehicles.

During the first days after the L.A. enforcement effort began, it was fairly easy to tell where agents were staying by looking for vehicles with agency logos. But it appears that they have caught on to the surveillance tactics of those who would like to see them go home.

On Monday, a Times reporter visited 13 hotels in three Southland counties — from Westchester to Garden Grove to Ontario — where federal immigration agents recently had been rumored to be staying, according to social media posts and alerts on apps and websites dedicated to tracking ICE activity. No vehicles in any of the hotels’ parking lots bore clear visual indications that they were federal agents’ cars, vans or trucks.

At five hotels, employees approached by The Times declined to comment. At three, employees agreed to speak but declined to give their names, citing corporate policies. Two of them said in brief interviews that they were not sure whether agents were staying on the premises. A third, who works at a chain hotel in Anaheim, said he had seen who he believed were ICE agents at the property last week, but they were no longer staying there.

Workers at the Hilton Pasadena show support for community members taking part in a June 12 protest.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

“They didn’t bother anyone,” said the man, who declined to provide his name out of fear of reprisal from his employer or immigration authorities. “There were maybe, like, a dozen of them. It was a little concerning.”

Workers such as him have been subjected to political whiplash in recent days. Last week, President Trump wrote on Truth Social that “Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them.” That same day, a senior ICE official sent guidance to regional ICE officials directing them to avoid raiding farms, hotels and restaurants and instead emphasize other targets.

The development gave hotel employees hope that they were out of the crosshairs. But the Trump administration quickly reversed course, saying this week that there is now no reprieve for hotel workers and others who Trump had praised just days earlier.

Andrew Mark, a pastor at Pasadena Covenant Church, also addressed the crowd at the June 7 rally outside the AC Hotel. He said in an interview that he was impressed — but not surprised — that the community came together and forced change.

“There’s a deep pride in Pasadena. So I think that for agents to be staying in a hotel here, you feel … a sense that we don’t want this to be a place where they can stage and go out and target people,” he said. “The fact that they were based in a hotel in our community was unsettling.”

On Tuesday, Manuel Vicente sat behind his makeshift desk in a soundproof room at the Pasadena Community Job Center, which helps connect day laborers with employment opportunities. As director of Radio Jornalera, he creates audio and video content to help migrant workers, including content that informs them of the rights they have during encounters with immigration enforcement agents.

Vicente said he believes the successful protest at the AC Hotel Pasadena is an example of a saying he likes to quote, “Pueblo salva el pueblo,” or “Only the people save the people.”

“When they were kicked out of the hotel, everybody was excited,” he said. “It was a small victory, but our efforts made a difference. We need to be together to protect our community, to protect our workers.”