More stories

  • in

    California Educator Is Charged With Molesting 8 Children

    David Braff was first accused of misconduct years ago but has since held a series of school jobs. The authorities are investigating the possibility of additional victims. A Los Angeles assistant principal was arrested on Friday and charged with molesting eight children between 2015 and 2019, while he was working as an elementary school counselor in Ventura County. The defendant, David Lane Braff Jr., 42, of Thousand Oaks, Calif., is accused of molesting children aged 6 to 10 in an office at McKevett Elementary School in the Santa Paula Unified School District, roughly 70 miles west of Los Angeles. The charges emerged out of a cold case sexual abuse unit, Ventura County District Attorney Erik Nasarenko said. He noted that officials at McKevett Elementary had reached out to authorities at the time of the alleged incidents.Nevertheless, Mr. Braff has held several jobs in public education since and has also volunteered in a number of programs for children.Mr. Nasarenko described an “extensive search for the possibility of other victims at other school sites and locations.” “This shakes the very foundation of the notion of a school site as a safe learning environment,” he said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Kamala Harris had a whirlwind 107-day campaign. What’s next for her?

    Whatever happened to Kamala Harris? For 107 days she was everywhere, filling TV screens and campaign rallies in her whirlwind bid for the White House. Then, with election defeat by Donald Trump, it all ended as abruptly as it began. The rest is silence.“The vice-president has taken time off to go spend time with her family,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters on Thursday, acknowledging that Harris is holidaying in Hawaii with husband Doug Emhoff. “She has worked very hard for the last four years, and her taking a couple of days to be with her family, good for her.”With Trump’s special brand of chaos already dominating the Washington agenda, Harris’s vice-presidency is clearly in a winding down. When she formally leaves office on 20 January, she will face her first spell as a private citizen since she was elected San Francisco’s district attorney in 2003.Speculation has already begun as to what might come next. While Harris, 60, has not announced any specific plans, supporters suggest that options include a move into the private sector, a return to California politics – or another presidential run in 2028.Bakari Sellers, a close ally of Harris and former representative from South Carolina, said: “She can do anything she wants to do. She’s more than capable. She’s given this country more than enough. She can go to the private sector and make money. She can go to a law school and teach.“She can be governor of California and pretty much clear the field. She can run for president again. Or she can just say to hell with it and go and spend time with Dougie. That decision hasn’t been made yet but her options are plentiful.”The last incumbent vice-president to lose an election was Al Gore in 2000. He went on to make an Oscar-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, and win the Nobel peace prize for his efforts to combat the climate crisis.Election losers since then have included John Kerry, later a secretary of state, and John McCain and Mitt Romney, both of whom served in the Senate. Hillary Clinton wrote a book about her 2016 defeat entitled What Happened, while the 2020 election loser, Trump, bounced back to regain the White House earlier this month.Harris might be tempted by a spell in the private sector. Law firms and lobbying groups would welcome her legal background and political connections. Alternatively she could contribute to the policy debate by joining a thinktank or launching her own advocacy organisation.She could also write a book offering her perspective on her time in Joe Biden’s White House, including its internal tensions, and her hastily improvised campaign against Trump. Its level of candour would probably depend on whether she is planning a return to the political arena.California governor Gavin Newsom is term-limited in 2026, raising the prospect of Harris seeking to make more history by becoming the state’s first female governor. As a former California senator and attorney general, she enjoys high name recognition in the state and would have no problem attracting donors.Harris would be following in the footsteps of Richard Nixon, who lost the 1960 presidential election and ran for California governor two years later. But he lost that race, too. He told reporters: “You don’t have Nixon to kick around any more, because, gentlemen, this is my last news conference.” He roared back to win the presidency in 1968.View image in fullscreenHarris would, however, face competition from fellow Democrats in 2026. Lieutenant governor Eleni Kounalakis, a longtime Harris ally, has already announced her candidacy, potentially setting up a contentious primary contest.Bill Whalen, a political consultant and speechwriter who has worked for California governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Pete Wilson, said: “There’s a gubernatorial race sitting there waiting for her if she wants it. If you look at the polls, there is no clear frontrunner. If she were to jump in, she would immediately push most Democrats out of the race and, given California’s politics, if it’s her versus a Republican in November, she would be a cinch to win it.”The governorship of California, the most populous state in the US, would offer a high-profile platform that could keep Harris in the national spotlight and potentially position her for a future presidential run. Like Newsom, Harris could style herself as a leader of the Democratic resistance to Trump.But focusing on a gubernatorial race could detract from Harris’s efforts to build national support and momentum for a potential 2028 presidential campaign. Whalen, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University in California, said: “The question is, does she want to be a governor or does she want to be a president? If she wants to be president, then governor is not the right path because she would have to run for that office in 2026 and pivot right around and run for president in 2027.”If Harris became governor, she might have to wait until 2032 for another White House bid. Whalen commented: “That’s a long time to wait in politics. If she wants to run for president again, then it’s pretty simple: she and Gavin Newsom and [Illinois governor] JB Pritzker and others have to figure out who is the tip of the spear of the so-called resistance. That would be the card for her to play.”Democrats are still shellshocked by Harris’s 312-to-226 defeat by Trump in the electoral college. But as of Thursday’s count, she was trailing Trump by only 1.7% in the national popular vote. She had a total of 74.3m votes, the third-highest popular vote total in history after Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2024.The idea of Harris making another bid for the White House in 2028 is already being floated. She retains access to the Democratic party’s most extensive donor network.A Morning Consult opinion poll this week found that 43% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents said they would vote for Harris if the party’s 2028 presidential primary were held today. She was well ahead of transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg at 9% and Newsom at 8%.But precedent is against her. Democrats have historically shown little appetite for re-nominating candidates who previously lost presidential elections, as Gore could testify. Moreover, following the defeats of both Clinton and Harris, the party will undoubtedly grapple with whether they want to put forward a woman for the third time. Democrats may also be inclined to move on from the Biden-Harris era and seek fresh faces.Chris Scott, who was coalitions director for Harris during the campaign, said: “I have no idea what she plans on doing next. I have definitely heard the reports, as have a lot of folks around her, of her potentially running for governor. It would be a great thing for California if that was what she decided to do and it also keeps her in the conversation.”Scott pointed to Harris’s strong advocacy for issues such as reproductive rights and economic opportunity. “There is a chance that she could run in 2028 again. Obviously a lot of things have to look different next time around. But a loss here does not negate that she has been an outstanding public servant for her entire career. It is my hope that we have not seen the last of her in politics.” More

  • in

    Rare ‘Doomsday Fish’ Found on California Beach by Woman Going for a Walk

    In Japanese mythology, the deep-sea-dwelling oarfish is a harbinger of impending disaster. For scientists in California, where three oarfish have washed up in recent months, it’s an exciting find.Everything seemed picture-perfect on a recent day at Grandview Beach in Encinitas, Calif. — the waves shimmered under the California sun, and locals sunbathed and swam.Everything, except for one thing: the mysterious deep-sea creature that had washed up on the shore.“What is that?” Alison Laferriere recalled thinking. She saw something long and skinny on the beach while walking her dog: “It looked like it could be some garbage or something.”But when she got closer, Ms. Laferriere, a doctorate student at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, recognized the find immediately. She had a rare close-up view of the oarfish, a striking creature from the depths of the ocean that has eluded researchers over the decades.With its long eel-like body, gaping mouth and bright red dorsal fins, it’s no surprise that the oarfish calls to mind a sea monster. Japanese mythology suggests that the appearance of the fish can signify impending earthquakes: Many have even wondered if reports of a dozen oarfish washing up on various parts of Japan’s coast were perhaps a harbinger of the catastrophic 2011 earthquake that devastated northern Japan. The superstition was so popular that researchers in Japan addressed it, publishing a paper in 2019 that debunked any significant link.Still, the eerie mythology returns with every sighting of the oarfish — hence its nickname as the “doomsday fish.”More superstitious Californians might be spooked, but researchers are thrilled at the rare opportunity. At least three have washed up on Californian shores in recent months, including a 12-foot-long specimen in August, according to the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. In all, only 22 have been documented by scientists since the 20th century.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Newsom Heads to California Counties That Voted for Trump

    Gov. Gavin Newsom acknowledged that residents were frustrated by economic problems and said that Democrats needed to address their concerns.On Thursday, Gov. Gavin Newsom will make the first of three post-election visits to California counties that Donald J. Trump won in the presidential race, reaching out to working-class voters in the Central Valley who remain frustrated by economic woes.The appearance in Fresno, to unveil a new economic development system, comes as interviews and polls have shown that economic and class divisions were key to Mr. Trump’s return to power.With Democrats still mulling over their presidential and congressional losses, Mr. Newsom said in an interview on Wednesday that his party needed to learn from the recent election and to address the struggles of American workers.“A lot of people feel like they’re losing their identity or losing their future,” Mr. Newsom said. “Message received.”A leading Democrat who has been viewed as a potential 2028 presidential contender, California’s governor has long been a pointed critic of Mr. Trump. Over the past two and a half weeks, he has indicated that he expects his state and the Trump administration to repeat the pitched battle they waged during Mr. Trump’s first term, when California sued the federal government more than 120 times.The governor’s immediate response after the Nov. 5 election was to call his state’s Democrat-dominated legislature into an emergency special session that would start in December. Mr. Newsom urged Democrats to “stand firm” against expected efforts by Mr. Trump to deport immigrants, further limit reproductive rights and weaken environmental regulation.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    El gobernador de California aplaza su decisión sobre los hermanos Menendez

    Gavin Newson dijo que esperará a que el nuevo fiscal de distrito del condado de Los Ángeles haga su propia revisión sobre el caso antes de considerar la petición de una nueva sentencia.El gobernador de California, Gavin Newsom, dijo el lunes que no tomaría una decisión sobre la concesión de clemencia a Lyle y Erik Menendez, quienes mataron a sus padres en su casa de Beverly Hills en 1989, sino hasta después de que el fiscal de distrito entrante en el condado de Los Ángeles lleve a cabo su propia revisión del caso.El actual fiscal del distrito, George Gascón, pidió al juez en octubre que volviera a sentenciar a los hermanos, que fueron declarados culpables de asesinato en primer grado y condenados a cadena perpetua sin libertad condicional. Por ese entones, los hermanos solicitaron clemencia al gobernador, y Gascón escribió una carta en apoyo de la petición.Pero Gascón perdió su candidatura a la reelección este mes frente a Nathan Hochman, un ex fiscal federal que prometió ser más duro con la delincuencia, y el cambio en el liderazgo ha arrojado algunas dudas sobre si la petición seguirá adelante.“El gobernador respeta el papel del fiscal de distrito para garantizar que se haga justicia y reconoce que los votantes han confiado en el fiscal electo Hochman para llevar a cabo esta responsabilidad”, dijo el despacho de Newsom en un comunicado el lunes. “El gobernador se remitirá a la revisión y análisis del fiscal de distrito electo del caso Menendez antes de tomar cualquier decisión de clemencia”.Hochman ha dicho públicamente que llevará a cabo su propia revisión del caso después de asumir el cargo el 3 de diciembre, y que podría pedir al juez del Tribunal Superior de Los Ángeles que supervisa la petición que retrase una audiencia prevista para el 11 de diciembre.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Menendez Brothers Clemency Decision Is on Hold, Newsom Says

    Gov. Gavin Newsom of California said he would hold off deciding whether to grant clemency to Lyle and Erik Menendez until after the incoming Los Angeles County district attorney reviewed the case.Gov. Gavin Newsom of California said on Monday that he would not make a decision on granting clemency to Lyle and Erik Menendez, who killed their parents in their Beverly Hills home in 1989, until after the incoming district attorney in Los Angeles County conducted his own review of the case.The current district attorney, George Gascón, asked a judge in October to resentence the brothers, who were convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole. Around the same time, the brothers petitioned the governor for clemency, and Mr. Gascón wrote a letter in support of the request.But Mr. Gascón lost his re-election bid this month to Nathan Hochman, a former federal prosecutor who vowed to be tougher on crime, and the change in leadership has cast some doubt on whether the resentencing bid will move forward.“The governor respects the role of the district attorney in ensuring justice is served and recognizes that voters have entrusted District Attorney-elect Hochman to carry out this responsibility,” Mr. Newsom’s office said in a statement on Monday. “The governor will defer to the D.A.-elect’s review and analysis of the Menendez case prior to making any clemency decisions.”Mr. Hochman has said publicly that he will conduct his own review of the case after he is sworn into office on Dec. 3, and that he may ask the Los Angeles Superior Court judge overseeing the resentencing petition to delay a hearing scheduled for Dec. 11.“Once I take office on Dec. 3, I look forward to putting in the hard work to thoroughly review the facts and law of the Menendez case, including reviewing the confidential prison files, the transcripts of the two trials and the voluminous exhibits, as well as speaking with the prosecutors, defense attorneys and victim family members,” Mr. Hochman said in a statement on Monday.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    ACLU files lawsuit to gain information about Trump mass deportation plans

    The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a lawsuit against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) seeking more information about how the agency might carry out Donald Trump’s plans for a mass deportation program.The US president-elect has vowed to deport millions of undocumented immigrants upon taking office, a threat that he has doubled down on since winning the presidential race earlier this month. On Monday, Trump confirmed a report that he intended to declare a national emergency to activate military resources as part of the mass deportation operation.The new lawsuit comes after the ACLU Foundation of Southern California (ACLU SoCal) filed a Freedom of Information Act (Foia) request seeking details on how Ice’s privately chartered flights might be expanded to expedite deportations. According to the ACLU, Ice failed to respond to the Foia request, which was filed in August.“For months, the ACLU has been preparing for the possibility of a mass detention and deportation program, and Foia litigation has been a central part of our roadmap,” said Kyle Virgien, senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s national prison project. “A second Trump administration underscores the urgency of our litigation.”According to the ACLU, planes chartered by the Ice Air Operations network assisted in the deportation of more than 140,000 people last year, and immigrant rights’ advocates fear that the program could be vastly expanded to further Trump’s agenda.“Little is known about how President-elect Trump would carry out its mass deportation agenda, but what we do know is that this proposal has already instilled fear among immigrant communities,” said Eva Bitran, director of immigrants’ rights at ACLU SoCal. “The public has a right to know how its taxpayer dollars could be used to fund deportation flights that would tear apart not only families, but also our communities.”The lawsuit demands that Ice turn over documents outlining any air transportation-related contracts, the ground transportation used to move noncitizens and the air fields that the agency has access to.“The Freedom of Information Act requires federal agencies to disclose information requested by the public,” said Sophie Mancall-Bitel, a partner at Mayer Brown LLP, which joined the lawsuit. “It’s more important than ever that we understand what federal resources could be used to forcibly remove people from the United States.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump’s transition team did not immediately respond to news of the lawsuit. More

  • in

    How Trump 2.0 might affect the wildfire crisis: ‘The harms will be more lasting’

    In the days that followed Donald Trump’s election win, flames roared through southern California neighborhoods. On the other side of the country, wildfire smoke clouded the skies in New York and New Jersey.They were haunting reminders of a stark reality: while Trump prepares to take office for a second term, the complicated, and escalating, wildfire crisis will be waiting.As the climate crisis unfolds, communities across the country are spending seasons under smoke-filled skies. Federal firefighters are overworked and underpaid, the cost of fire suppression has climbed, and millions of people are at risk of losing their insurance. Landscapes and homes alike have been reduced to ash as the world continues to warm.The president-elect has offered few plans to address the emergency. Instead, he’s promised to deliver a wave of deregulation, cripple climate-supporting agencies, and clear departments of logistical experts relied upon during disasters.His allies, including the authors of Project 2025, a conservative playbook for a second Trump administration, have recommended privatizing parts of the federal government that now serve the public good.In the past week, Trump’s announcements for key cabinet nominations has already shown he’s begun to solidify an anti-science agenda.“Whatever happens at a broad scale is going to affect our ability to manage risks, respond to emergencies, and plan for the future, “ said University of California climate scientist Daniel Swain. “I don’t see any way there won’t be huge effects.”Here are the challenges ahead:Setting the stakesLooking back at his first term, Trump had a poor record managing large wildfire emergencies – and he had many opportunities. After presiding over the response to destructive blazes that left a devastating toll, including the Camp fire that claimed the lives of 85 people in and around the town of Paradise, in 2020 he told a crowd in Pennsylvania that high-risk fire states such as California, and their residents, were to blame.“I said you gotta clean your floors, you gotta clean your forests – there are many, many years of leaves and broken trees and they’re like, like, so flammable, you touch them and it goes up,” he said. That year, a record 10.2m acres were charred across the US.In a signal of how politicized disaster management in the Trump era became, he added: “Maybe we’re just going to have to make them pay for it because they don’t listen to us.”Such comments raised fears among experts and officials working to protect these landscapes and the neighborhoods near them that Trump didn’t understand the magnitude of the risks US forests faced.He’s been unwilling to embrace the strategies that the scientists and landscape managers recommend to help keep catastrophic fire in check, including a delicate and tailored approach to removing vegetation in overgrown forests, protecting old-growth stands, and following those treatments with prescribed burning.The risks and challenges have only intensified since his first term.Some in the wildfire response communities are hopeful that Trump will cut red tape that’s slowed progress on important forest treatments, but others have highlighted a blunt approach could do more harm than good.Many have voiced concerns over ambitions set out in Project 2025 to curb prescribed burning in favor of increasing timber sales.Meanwhile, federal firefighters are waiting to see whether Trump and a Republican-led Congress will secure long-overdue pay raises.The US Forest Service (USFS), the largest employer of federal firefighters, has seen an exodus of emergency responders over abysmally low pay and gaps in support for the unsustainable and dangerous work they do.Federal firefighters who spend weeks at a time on the fireline and rack up thousands of hours in overtime each summer, make far less than their state- and city-employed counterparts with paychecks that rival those of fast-food employees. That exodus has hampered its ability to keep pace with the year-round firefighting needs.“Doing less with your resources makes a task like fire suppression and fuels management extremely more challenging,” said Jonathan Golden, legislative director of the advocacy group Grassroots Wildland Firefighters.Joe Biden facilitated a temporary pay raise for federal wildland firefighters, but those expire at the end of the year. With Trump promising large cuts to federal budgets and the bureaucrats who operate them, many fear the Republican leadership in Congress won’t push the legislation needed to ensure these essential emergency responders keep their raise.If the pay raises are allowed to expire, many more federal firefighters will walk out the door – right when they are needed most.“The job isn’t going to get any easier,” Golden said. “My hope is that we continue to have a well-staffed and well-funded professional workforce that can answer the call year-round – because that’s what is required.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEmergencies on the riseBillion-dollar weather and climate disasters are on the rise. There was a historic number in the US in 2023 with a total of 28 – surpassing the previous record of 22 in 2022. With more than a month left, there have already been 24 this year.Trump has a history of stalling in the aftermath of natural disasters, opting instead to put a political spin on who receives aid. For wildfires during his first term, that meant threatening California and other Democratic-majority states with delayed or withheld funding to punish them for their political leanings.This time, some fear he may also reduce the amount of aid provided by Fema. Project 2025 has called for a shift in emergency spending, putting the “majority of preparedness and response costs to states and localities instead of the federal government” and either eliminating or armoring grants that fund preparedness to push Trump’s political agenda.The framework advises the next president to remove all unions from the department and only give Fema grants to states, localities and private organizations who “can show that their mission and actions support the broader homeland security mission”, including the deportation of undocumented people.These tactics could hamper both preparedness and recovery from wildfires and other disasters, especially in high-risk blue states such as California and others across the west.The administration has also been advised by Project 2025 authors to dismantle or severely hamper the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, whose forecasting has been essential to warn when dangerous weather arises, and remove all mention of the climate crisis in federal rhetoric and research.Trump’s picks of a former congressman Lee Zeldin to head the Environmental Protection Agency and North Dakota governor Doug Burgum as the Department of Interior secretary – two agencies deeply connected to US climate policy – indicate his strong skepticism of the climate crisis. Zeldin and Burgum have clear directives to oversee rampant deregulation and expedite extraction on public lands.“Folks at federal agencies are already being gently advised to think about the language they use to describe things,” Swain said. He thinks the effects will be far-reaching, especially when it comes to wildfire preparedness and response. Disabling science and weather-focused agencies could reduce important intel that responders rely on, reduce nimbleness and hamper efforts to plan into the future.“A lot of people are thinking this is going to be the second coming of the first Trump administration and I don’t think it’s the right way to be thinking about it,” Swain said.“This time, it’s highly plausible that the disruption and the harms will be a lot deeper and more lasting – it will be much harder to reverse.”Big picture problemsEven before Trump retook the White House, the US was missing the mark on its ambitious climate goals. But scientists and experts have offered clear warnings about how Trump’s policies could accelerate dire outcomes.“Climate change is a huge crisis and we don’t have time to spare,” said Julia Stein, deputy director of the Emmett Institute on climate change and the environment at the UCLA School of Law.Stein pointed to the potential for many of these policies to be challenged in court, much like they were the first time around. States such as California, which is also home to one of the world’s largest economies to back it, are already preparing to challenge Trump’s policies. The directives of the first Trump administration were often legally vulnerable, Stein said, and she thinks they might be again this time around, especially if he attempts to rid the agencies of career bureaucrats and their deep knowledge of how things work.In a state where wildfires are always a risk, California is also bolstering its own approach, doubling down on landscape treatments and investing in preparation, mitigation, and response according to Stein, who noted the $10bn climate bond just passed by voters there that will go toward wildfire prevention and mitigation.Still, fires don’t recognize borders. The threats continue to push into areas that aren’t accustomed to them, and larger swaths of the country will be forced to grapple with smoke. Without partners in federal agencies that manage lands across the US, states will struggle to address the mounting challenges on their own.“Continuing to enforce those laws in California will blunt some of the impact for Californians,” she said. “The unfortunate thing – especially when it comes to climate change – there are going to be national and global consequences for inaction at the federal level.” More