Subterms
Shake intensity Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown. All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times More
A federal judge has ruled that Donald Trump’s administration cannot impose mandatory detention on thousands of migrants held by US immigration authorities without first giving them an opportunity to seek release on bond.US district judge Sunshine Sykes in Riverside, California, certified a nationwide class of individuals who were already living in the United States when they were detained and are legally entitled to a hearing to determine whether they can be released on bond while their deportation cases proceed.Sykes ruled last week that the Trump administration’s policy adopted in July of denying bond hearings to migrants detained during domestic enforcement operations in the US was illegal, joining dozens of other federal judges. While those decisions involved individual migrants or small groups, Sykes on Tuesday extended her ruling nationwide.About 65,000 people were in immigration detention in the US as of last week, according to government data.The Trump administration has argued that individuals’ differing circumstances required the issue to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, but Sykes said that being deprived of the right to a bond hearing was an injury common to the class.“Such common injury can be resolved in a single stroke upon the determination that the new policy is in violation of (migrants’) due process rights,” wrote Sykes, an appointee of Joe Biden.The US Department of Justice and lawyers for the four migrants who filed the lawsuit did not immediately respond to requests for comment.Under federal immigration law, “applicants for admission” to the United States are subject to mandatory detention while their cases proceed in immigration courts.Bucking a longstanding interpretation of the law, the Trump administration in July said that non-citizens already residing in the United States, and not only those who arrive at a port of entry at the border, qualify as applicants for admission.Sykes in her ruling last week disagreed, saying the law makes a clear distinction between existing US residents and new arrivals. More
The Trump administration’s ICE raids across southern California have had disastrous effects on the region’s immigrants and swept up US citizens in the process, community leaders and residents said at a congressional hearing in Los Angeles on Monday.Andrea Velez, an American arrested by US immigration officials over the summer, described how she was accosted by masked agents while on her way to work. She said she was charged with assaulting an officer and held for two days in a federal detention center, where detainees had to pay for a cup in order to have water. The charges against her were ultimately dismissed due to what her attorney described as a lack of evidence.Democrats organized the hours-long congressional oversight hearing in Los Angeles in order to hear testimony about the impacts of Donald Trump’s sweeping deportation agenda, and look at alleged civil rights abuses by federal agents and the “unlawful” detention of US citizens.“Every person in our country has a right to due process, regardless of immigration status. It’s critical that the Oversight Committee document and hold accountable those that are defying the constitution, violating civil rights, and terrorizing families and communities,” Robert Garcia, a Democratic California congressman, said in a statement.The White House said earlier this month that the federal government had arrested more than 150,000 undocumented immigrants and deported nearly 140,000 people since Trump took office.His administration has made southern California a focal point for its aggressive mass deportation campaign. Federal agents have descended on car washes and Home Depot stores, and near schools and workplaces, leaving southern California communities in fear and parks and churches empty. The federal government has been accused of “blatant racial profiling” and civil rights violations.“Right now we are living an American nightmare,” said Jasmine Crockett, a Democratic representative from Texas.The situation has left lasting effects on southern California communities and residents affected by the raids.Velez said in her testimony: “I still live with the trauma everyday.”Karen Bass, LA’s mayor, described the raids as “an attack from our own federal government” and an affront to cities and people across the US.“We will hold every federal agency accountable, and we will relentlessly defend the rights of every resident in Los Angeles – and across this nation,” Bass said. “Reports that Angelenos, including US citizens, were forcibly held, physically attacked, and deprived of their freedom without cause are not only outrageous – they are intolerable.”Garcia on Monday announced the creation of a new oversight dashboard documenting “verified incidents of possible misconduct and abuse” during federal immigration enforcement operations”.The US Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to the Guardian’s request for comment. More
The justice department sued California on Thursday for allowing undocumented college students to pay in-state tuition for public universities, alleging the policy harms US citizens.The lawsuit, filed in the US district court for the eastern district of California, marks the third time this week that the Trump administration has sued California. In addition to challenging the state’s in-state tuition policy, the lawsuit argues that California unlawfully extends eligibility for scholarships and subsidized loans to undocumented students.Among the defendants are the state, top California officials, and the state’s two public university systems: the University of California and California State University.“Federal law prohibits aliens illegally present in the United States from receiving in-state tuition benefits that are denied to out-of-state US citizens,” reads the complaint. “There are no exceptions.”California law does allow some students to qualify for in-state tuition rates, which are lower than out-of-state tuition, even if they technically qualify as non-residents. This includes students who have had “three full-time years or the equivalent at any combination” of California high school, California adult high school, or California community college.The California Dream Act, two bills passed in 2011, permits undocumented students to apply for, and obtain, state-based financial assistance, according to San Francisco State University. Undocumented students cannot receive federal financial aid for college.The justice department’s civil complaint alleges that California policy on undocumented student tuition is “unconstitutional” and wants a judge to “declare it illegal and permanently enjoin its enforcement”.“California is illegally discriminating against American students and families by offering exclusive tuition benefits for non-citizens,” said Pamela Bondi, the US attorney general. “This marks our third lawsuit against California in one week – we will continue bringing litigation against California until the state ceases its flagrant disregard for federal law.”The Trump administration has filed similar lawsuits against policies in other states, including Illinois, Oklahoma, Minnesota, Kentucky and Texas. Half the country now has similar laws to California’s.In June, after the administration sued, Texas ended its decades-old law. And Florida last year scrapped its law that allowed in-state tuition for high school graduates who weren’t in the country legally.Supporters of the state tuition breaks argue that they don’t violate federal law if they provide the same rates to US citizens in the same circumstances – meaning they are residents of the state and graduates of one of its high schools. The California Dream Act also allows such students to apply for state-funded financial aid.Many of the students were brought to the US by their parents when they were children, and supporters of the laws say they are as much a part of their communities as US citizens.The complaint cites an executive order signed in February that directs federal departments and agencies to block undocumented people from receiving public benefits. Another executive order signed in April directs officials to stop enforcing laws and practices that favor undocumented people over US citizens. The lawsuit argues that the Republican president’s orders enforce federal immigration laws.The University of California defended its decades-old in-state tuition policy.“While we will, of course, comply with the law as determined by the courts, we believe our policies and practices are consistent with current legal standards,” it said in a statement.The lawsuit comes weeks after the California supreme xourt let stand a lower-court ruling that the University of California’s policy barring students without legal status in the US from campus jobs is discriminatory and must be reconsidered.University system officials had warned that the decision would put them in a precarious position as they negotiate with the Trump administration after the withdrawal of federal research funds.The UC is dealing with federal grant suspensions and a White House demand that it pay a $1bn fine over allegations, including antisemitism and the illegal consideration of race in admitting students to its Los Angeles campus.The California State University system is the nation’s largest and among its most diverse, with more than 460,000 students. More than a quarter of undergraduates are first-generation college students, according to the university system.The University of California serves about 300,000 students. More
The justice department is investigating how two Trump allies handled the investigation into whether California senator, Adam Schiff, committed mortgage fraud, according to a copy of a subpoena obtained by the Guardian and a person familiar with the matter.The office of the deputy attorney general Todd Blanche is overseeing the inquiry, which appears to have developed as an offshoot of the main case into Schiff – a notable development since the justice department is essentially investigating activities of two close allies of the president.A federal grand jury in Maryland, where prosecutors are investigating the mortgage allegations against Schiff, issued the subpoena to Christine Bish, an associate of federal housing finance agency (FHFA) chief Bill Pulte and a Republican congressional candidate in California.The subpoena asked Bish, who previously filed an ethics complaint against Schiff accusing him of mortgage fraud, to provide her communications with Pulte, people claiming to work on his behalf, and people claiming to work on behalf of Ed Martin, the head of the justice department’s weaponization committee. The subpoena also asks for communications with Robert Bowes and Scott Strauss.Bish told CNN that when she went before the grand jury, prosecutors “seemed more concerned” about looking into whether “there was conspiracy or collusion between me and Pulte or me and Ed Martin”.ABC News reported that Bowes – who claims to be a financial fraud expert – reached out to Bish and spoke to her without knowledge of Maryland prosecutors or FBI agents. Strauss also reached out to her and asked that she send documents about Schiff to a private email, ABC reported.Both Pulte and Martin are strongly aligned with Trump and have helped him deploy the levers of the federal government to punish political enemies, including Schiff and the New York attorney general, Letitia James.According to MS NOW, the investigation is examining whether Pulte and Martin improperly assigned unauthorized people to help investigate mortgage fraud claims against Schiff and possibly James.Blanche and the attorney general, Pam Bondi, have shown some resistance to the mortgage fraud prosecutions. Earlier this year, they tried to protect Erik Siebert, the top federal prosecutor in Virginia, from being fired after he resisted efforts to charge James. They were unsuccessful. Siebert resigned, and Trump installed Lindsey Halligan, who moved ahead with charges against James and former FBI director James Comey.The inquiry may be a pre-emptive effort by the justice department to get ahead of expected defenses from Schiff in the event he is indicted. But if misconduct is discovered on the part of Pulte or Martin, it could doom the case. The case against Schiff has stalled as prosecutors have failed to produce adequate evidence, NBC reported last month.A lawyer for Schiff did not immediately respond to a request for comment, and the justice department declined to comment.Pulte has criminally referred Schiff, James, Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook and California congressman Eric Swalwell to the justice department for alleged mortgage fraud, all deny wrongdoing.Pulte’s tactics have repeatedly come under scrutiny. He has bypassed the FHFA’s inspector general, the office usually responsible for handling mortgage fraud accusations. And last week, the Wall Street Journal reported he removed ethics officials who were looking into whether FHFA officials had improperly accessed James’ mortgage information. More
The Trump administration cannot fine the University of California or summarily cut the school system’s federal funding over claims it allows antisemitism or other forms of discrimination, a federal judge ruled late on Friday in a sharply worded decision.US district judge Rita Lin in San Francisco issued a preliminary injunction barring the administration from cancelling funding to the university based on alleged discrimination without giving notice to affected faculty and conducting a hearing, among other requirements.The administration over the summer demanded the University of California, Los Angeles, pay $1.2bn to restore frozen research funding and ensure eligibility for future funding after accusing the school of allowing antisemitism on campus. UCLA was the first public university to be targeted by the administration over allegations of civil rights violations.It has also frozen or paused federal funding over similar claims against private colleges, including Columbia University.In her ruling, Lin said labor unions and other groups representing UC faculty, students and employees had provided “overwhelming evidence” that the Trump administration was “engaged in a concerted campaign to purge ‘woke’, ‘left’ and ‘socialist’ viewpoints from our country’s leading universities”.“Agency officials, as well as the president and vice-president, have repeatedly and publicly announced a playbook of initiating civil rights investigations of pre-eminent universities to justify cutting off federal funding, with the goal of bringing universities to their knees and forcing them to change their ideological tune,” Lin wrote.She added: “It is undisputed that this precise playbook is now being executed at the University of California.”At UC, which is facing a series of civil rights investigations, she found the administration had engaged in “coercive and retaliatory conduct in violation of the first amendment and 10th amendment”.Messages sent to the White House and the US Department of Justice after hours on Friday were not immediately returned. Lin’s order will remain in effect indefinitely.The president of the University of California, James B Milliken, has said the size of the UCLA fine would devastate the UC system, whose campuses are viewed as some of the top public colleges in the nation.UC is in settlement talks with the administration and is not a party to the lawsuit before Lin, who was nominated to the bench by Joe Biden, a Democrat. In a statement, the university system said it “remains committed to protecting the mission, governance and academic freedom of the university”.The administration has demanded UCLA comply with its views on gender identity and establish a process to make sure foreign students are not admitted if they are likely to engage in anti-American, anti-western or antisemitic “disruptions or harassment”, among other requirements outlined in a settlement proposal made public in October.The administration has previously struck deals with Brown University for $50m and Columbia University for $221m.Lin cited declarations by UC faculty and staff that the administration’s moves were prompting them to stop teaching or researching topics they were “afraid were too ‘left’ or ‘woke’”.Her injunction also blocks the administration from “conditioning the grant or continuance of federal funding on the UC’s agreement to any measures that would violate the rights of plaintiffs’ members under the first amendment”.She cited efforts to force the UC schools to screen international students based on “’anti-western” or “‘anti-American’” views, restrict research and teaching, or adopt specific definitions of “male” and “female” as examples of such measures.Donald Trump has decried elite colleges as overrun by liberalism and antisemitism.His administration has launched investigations of dozens of universities, claiming they have failed to end the use of racial preferences in violation of civil rights law. The Republican administration says diversity, equity and inclusion efforts discriminate against white and Asian American students. More
A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration from withholding federal funding and threatening hefty fines against the University of California amid the administration’s attempts to coerce elite US universities into adopting and promoting conservative ideals.US district judge Rita Lin of San Francisco issued the preliminary injunction late Friday, saying the government was not allowed to demand payments from the California school system over the administration’s claims that it violates civil rights by allowing antisemitism and practising affirmative action.In her ruling, Lin said that the plaintiffs – who include UC faculty, researchers and students – have submitted “overwhelming evidence” illustrating the Trump administration’s “concerted campaign to purge ‘woke,’ ‘left’ and ‘socialist’ viewpoints from our country’s leading universities”.Lin ruled that the government had a “playbook of initiating civil rights investigations” at universities in order to cut federal funding, “bringing universities to their knees and forcing them to change their ideological tune”.In July, the Trump administration froze $584m in federal funding for the University of California, Los Angeles, while accusing the university of discrimination and violating civil rights over its handling of the 2024 pro-Palestinian protests on campus. The administration claimed UCLA was “acting with deliberate indifference in creating a hostile educational environment for Jewish and Israeli students”.In October, the administration proposed a deal to nine prominent universities in the US that promised funding in exchange for schools imposing policies and changes that included banning race or sex as considerations in admissions and hiring and removing departments that “purposefully punish, belittle and even spark violence against conservative ideas”.While the University of California school system was not offered the deal, the University of Southern California – a private institution – was.California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, responded to the offer with a warning that any California universities that signed Trump’s proposed settlement would lose their state funding.Democracy Forward, a progressive legal advocacy group, called the Trump administration’s efforts to influence policy at universities “strong-arm tactics”.“This is not just a harmful attempt to stifle speech, it is a betrayal of the constitution and a dangerous step toward autocracy,” the group said in a statement. More
The justice department on Thursday joined a lawsuit brought by California Republicans to block the state’s new congressional map, escalating a legal battle over a redistricting effort designed to give Democrats a better chance of retaking the House of Representatives next year.The lawsuit, filed in federal court in California, challenges the congressional map championed by Gavin Newsom, the state’s Democratic governor, in response to a Republican gerrymander in Texas, sought by Donald Trump. The justice department’s intervention in the case sets up a high-profile showdown between the Trump administration and Newsom, one of the president’s chief antagonists and a possible 2028 contender.“California’s redistricting scheme is a brazen power grab that tramples on civil rights and mocks the democratic process,” said Pam Bondi, the US attorney general. “Governor Newsom’s attempt to entrench one-party rule and silence millions of Californians will not stand.”Democrats have expressed confidence that the newly approved maps will withstand a legal challenge.“These losers lost at the ballot box and soon they will also lose in court,” Brandon Richards, a Newsom spokesperson, said in a statement.Republicans brought the lawsuit the morning after California voters decisively approved the redistricting measure, known as Proposition 50, which suspended the maps drawn by the state’s independent commission and installed new House districts designed to help Democrats secure up to five GOP-held seats. It was the most significant counterpunch by Democrats in the unprecedented redistricting war that began in Texas and spread across the country as Trump attempts to secure House Republicans’ fragile majority for the final years of his second term.The plaintiffs assert that California’s map improperly used race as a factor to heavily favor Hispanic voters in violation of the US constitution. It asks a judge to block California from taking effect.“Race cannot be used as a proxy to advance political interests, but that is precisely what the California General Assembly did with Prop 50,” Jesus Osete, the second-highest ranking official in the Civil Rights Division, said in a statement, quoting from the lawsuit. “Californians were sold an illegal, racially gerrymandered map, but the US Constitution prohibits its use in 2026 and beyond.”The plaintiffs are being represented by the Dhillon Law Group, which was founded by Harmeet Dhillon, who is now assistant attorney general overseeing the US Department of Justice civil rights division. The firm also represented California Republicans earlier this year in their unsuccessful attempt to prevent the special election from taking place.Dhillon has been recused from this case, the justice department said.Unlike elsewhere, where Republican state legislatures have enacted gerrymanders, California’s plan required voter approval, which it received last week, with nearly 65% of the vote.Democrats need to flip just a handful of Republican-held House seats to take control of the chamber in next year’s midterm election. The party that holds the majority will shape the final years of Trump’s second term in the White House, determining whether a unified Republican Congress will continue to deliver on his agenda or whether he will be met with resistance, investigations and possibly even a third impeachment attempt. More
Seven people detained at California’s largest Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center have sued the US government, alleging they have been denied essential medications, frequently go hungry and are housed in a “decrepit” facility.The federal class-action complaint filed against ICE on Wednesday challenges the “inhumane conditions” at the California City detention center, which opened in late August inside a shuttered state prison. The suit alleges “life-threatening” medical neglect, with the plaintiffs saying they have been denied cancer treatment, basic disability accommodations and regular insulin for diabetes.The facility is run by CoreCivic, a private prison corporation, which is not a named defendant.Residents have raised alarms about the facility for two months, with some describing it as a “torture chamber” and “hell on earth” in interviews.California City is located in the remote Mojave desert, 100 miles (160km) north-east of Los Angeles. It can hold more than 2,500 people, increasing ICE’s California detention capacity by 36%. It currently detains more than 800 people, lawyers say.Tricia McLaughlin, a Department of Homeland Security assistant secretary, said in an email that claims of “subprime conditions” at the detention center were “false”, writing: “No one is denied access to proper medical care.”The suit, which alleges constitutional violations, describes conditions as “dire”, saying: “Sewage bubbles up from the shower drains, and insects crawl up and down the walls of the cells. People are locked in concrete cells the size of a parking space for hours on end.”Temperatures inside are “frigid”, and detained residents who cannot afford to buy roughly $20 sweatshirts “suffer in the cold, some wearing socks on their arms as makeshift sleeves”, the complaint alleges; meals are “paltry”, and people who cannot afford to buy supplemental food go hungry.Even though residents are detained for civil immigration violations, not criminal offenses, California City “operates even more restrictively and punitively than a prison”, the lawyers say. Families are forced to visit their relatives behind glass, with parents denied the ability to hug or touch their children, and the facility “sharply limits access to lawyers, leaving people bewildered and largely incommunicado”, the suit alleges.McLaughlin of the DHS said detained people were provided three meals a day and dietitians evaluated the meals to “ensure they meet the appropriate standards”. She said they “have access to phones to communicate with their family members and lawyers”, adding: “ICE has higher detention standards than most US prisons.”The residents are coming forward as the homeland security department continues to ramp up immigration raids nationally, bolstered by $45bn to expand ICE capacity, with the goal of detaining more than 100,000 people. Civil rights lawsuits have repeatedly raised concerns about detention conditions across the country.The plaintiffs are represented by the Prison Law Office, the Keker Van Nest and Peters law firm, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the California Collaborative for Immigrant Justice.Requests for medical attention “go unanswered for weeks or are never answered at all”, the complaint states. People with disabilities have allegedly struggled to access essential services, including wheelchairs. One man, whose glasses were confiscated at intake and had difficulty seeing objects in front of him, fell getting off his bunkbed and was hospitalized, the suit says.Jose Ruiz Canizales, a detained plaintiff who is deaf and does not speak, has been at California City since 29 August, but has only communicated once with staff through a sign language interpreter via video, the complaint says. When he tries to communicate, staff “often shrug their shoulders, walk away, or laugh at him”. The impact on his mental health was so severe, he was hospitalized for an anxiety attack.Yuri Alexander Roque Campos, another plaintiff, has a heart anomaly requiring daily monitoring and medication, but since he arrived at California City on 5 September, he has been denied medications “for days at a time”, his lawyers wrote, resulting in two emergency hospitalizations for severe chest pain. A hospital doctor allegedly told him “he could die if this were to happen again”, but the lawsuit says he has yet to see a cardiologist and still lacks consistent medication.Sokhean Keo, who previously spoke of his temporary hunger strike to protest about conditions, witnessed a friend’s suicide attempt at the facility and remains traumatized by flashbacks, lawyers wrote.“I’m bringing this lawsuit to try to help end the suffering and pain that I see in here,” Keo said in a statement shared by his attorneys. “ICE is playing with people’s lives, and they treat people like they’re trash, like they’re nothing.”When residents do see doctors, “the care they receive is dangerously poor”, according to the complaint, with providers failing to document exams, address abnormal lab results or order timely treatment.Fernando Viera Reyes, a plaintiff transferred to California City in late August, had a pending biopsy appointment to formally diagnose and begin treatment for prostate cancer, but his request to see a doctor went unanswered for weeks, and he still has not seen a urologist nor received testing for his condition, the suit says. His bloodwork and bleeding with urination suggests his cancer may have metastasized, his lawyers said.Plaintiff Fernando Gomez Ruiz, a father of two and LA resident for 22 years, was arrested by ICE in early October while at a food truck outside a Home Depot, the complaint says. Since his arrival at California City in mid-October, he has not received regular insulin for his diabetes, leading to elevated blood sugar and a “large, oozing ulcer on the bottom of his foot”, the suit says. He says he has been forced to cover his wound with “soiled bandages and bloody shoes” and is worried he will need amputation.The DHS did not respond to the detailed healthcare claims in the lawsuit, but McLaughlin said ICE provided “comprehensive medical care from the moment” people are detained: “This includes medical, dental, and mental health intake screening within 12 hours of arriving at each detention facility, a full health assessment within 14 days of entering ICE custody or arrival at a facility, and access to medical appointments and 24-hour emergency care.” She said ICE “provides necessary accommodations for disabilities”.Ryan Gustin, a CoreCivic spokesperson, declined to comment on the litigation and specific claims, but said in an email on Thursday after publication that the “safety, health and well-being of the individuals entrusted to our care is our top priority”. CoreCivic’s ICE facilities follow federal detention standards, are “monitored very closely by our government partners” and are required to undergo regular reviews and audits to “ensure an appropriate standard of living and care for all”, he said.“We’re proud of our dedicated team at [California City] who work hard every day to keep those in our care safe while providing for their needs,” he said, adding “staff are held to the highest ethical standards” outlined in the company’s “human rights policy”. The company told the Guardian in September that it provided “high-quality healthcare, available 24/7”.The plaintiffs also accused staff of “abusive” behavior and “unreasonable use of force”. On 29 September, staff entered the cell of a person detained in “administrative segregation”, a form of restricted housing, and hit him with riot shields, even though he was already handcuffed, and held him down with their knees on his back, the complaint says.On 3 October, Gustavo Guevara Alarcon, another plaintiff, said he witnessed an officer pepper-spraying a man who did not speak English, after the man did not understand the officer and turned to walk away.In another alleged incident on 9 October described in the lawsuit, people were screaming for help due to an attempted suicide, and a person stepped out of his cell to observe. A staff member, who was holding a drill for maintenance work, ordered the person to get his “ass inside”, threatening to “make a hole in your chest”, and the man allegedly got a disciplinary write-up for being outside his cell.“California City’s punishing conditions are punishing by design,” said Tess Borden, a supervising staff attorney at the Prison Law Office. “ICE and DHS are using detention as a threat to immigrants who decide to stay in America, and they’re making good on that threat at California City. Many people have agreed to deportation, and some even attempt to take their own lives, because the conditions at the facility are so unbearable.”McLaughlin did not respond to accounts of the specific incidents, but said ICE placed people in segregation for “their own protection or protection of others”, adding: “Ensuring the safety, security, and well-being of individuals in our custody is a top priority … ICE is regularly audited and inspected by external agencies to ensure that all ICE facilities comply with performance-based national detention standards.” More
