West Coast

Subterms

    Latest story

    163 Shares24 Views

    California city partners with US border patrol to surveil beach for migrant boats

    by

    Leaders of the southern California city of San Clemente, located about halfway between Los Angeles and San Diego, are partnering with US Customs and Border Protection to place surveillance cameras along the city’s beach to detect boats carrying passengers attempting to enter the country without authorization.At a Tuesday gathering of the town’s city council, members ordered city manager Andy Hall to begin coordinating with Customs and Border Protection (CBP).Mayor Steven Knoblock – a Republican who was elected in November on a public safety platform – told the Los Angeles Times the cameras are intended to spot fishing boats, called pangas, attempting to dock on San Clemente’s shores and to lower crime rates.“People have observed pangas crammed with illegal aliens, hitting our beach, and then scattering in the community or jumping into a van, which is parked nearby and ready to receive them,” Knoblock told the LA Times.He added: “San Clemente has had significant crime issues with the sophisticated Chilean burglary rings hitting our neighborhoods on a very systematic basis and continues to be a problem.”The state of California has prohibited law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration authorities since 2017, when the state passed its “sanctuary state” law in an effort to prevent mass deportations during the first Trump administration. After Donald Trump’s victory in the November 2024 election, Democratic California governor Gavin Newsom gathered lawmakers for a special legislative session to “Trump-proof” the state. But since wildfires devastated much of southern California, the state is now seeking federal aid to rebuild.Before San Clemente city council members voted to collaborate with CBP on the camera initiative, the city had been considering joining a lawsuit against the state’s sanctuary law.San Clemente will not technically be violating the sanctuary state law by coordinating with CBP. The law specifically prevents law enforcement from cooperating with CBP, but San Clemente does not have its own police force. Instead, the city will work directly with border patrol.Knoblock has proposed installing cameras that operate 24/7 and cover about 7 miles of territory.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“I’m recommending the cameras being aimed oceanward with a rotating telescopic lens and thermal imaging for night viewing,” Knoblock told the LA Times. “This additional visibility will hopefully provide interdiction prior to [migrants] hitting our beaches.”City officials are also considering ways to open access to the footage to the public.This is not Knoblock’s first time challenging California sanctuary laws. As a city council member in 2022 he sponsored a measure calling for California to become a “sanctuary city for life” – in contrast with California’s laws permitting abortion.Nor is it the first time a California city has challenged the state’s sanctuary law for immigrants. In December, the San Diego county sheriff said she would cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement despite state laws prohibiting such activity. More

    More stories

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrat Derek Tran ousts Republican rival in key California House seat

      by

      Democrat Derek Tran ousted Republican Michelle Steel in a southern California House district Wednesday that was specifically drawn to give Asian Americans a stronger voice on Capitol Hill.Steel said in a statement: “Like all journeys, this one is ending for a new one to begin.” When she captured the seat in 2020, Steel joined Washington state Democrat Marilyn Strickland and California Republican Young Kim as the first Korean American women elected to Congress.Tran, a lawyer and worker rights advocate and the son of Vietnamese refugees, declared victory earlier this week. He said his win “is a testament to the spirit and resilience of our community. As the son of Vietnamese refugees, I understand firsthand the journey and sacrifices many families in our district have made for a better life.”The contest is one of the last to be decided this year, with Republicans now holding 220 seats in the House, with Democrats at 214. The Associated Press has not declared a winner in California’s 13th district, where Democrat Adam Gray was leading Republican John Duarte by a couple of hundred votes.Steel held an early edge after election day, but late-counted ballots pushed Tran over the top.Steel filed a statement of candidacy on Monday with federal regulators, which would allow her to continue raising funds. It wasn’t immediately clear if she planned to seek a return to Congress.In the campaign, Tran warned of Republican threats to abortion rights. Steel opposes abortion with exceptions for rape, incest or to save the life of the pregnant woman, while not going so far as to support a federal ban. Tran also warned that Donald Trump’s return to the White House would put democracy at risk.On Capitol Hill, Steel has been outspoken in resisting tax increases and says she stands strongly with Israel in its war with Hamas. “As our greatest ally in the Middle East, the United States must always stand with Israel,” she said. She advocates for more police funding and has spotlighted her efforts on domestic violence and sexual abuse.The largest demographic in the district, which is anchored in Orange county, south-east of Los Angeles, is Asian Americans, and it includes the nation’s biggest Vietnamese community. Democrats hold a four-point registration edge.Incomplete returns showed that Steel was winning in Orange county, the bulk of the district. Tran’s winning margin came from a small slice of the district in Los Angeles county, where Democrats outnumber Republicans by nearly two to one. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

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

      by

      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

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

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

      by

      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

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Portland’s first ranked-choice vote elects progressive outsider as mayor

      by

      In 2022 it appeared the political winds in Portland, Oregon, one of the US’s most progressive cities, were beginning to shift. Residents who had grown frustrated over the city’s approach to homelessness rejected the incumbent, Jo Ann Hardesty – the first Black woman to serve on the city council – in favor of the “law-and-order” Democrat Rene Gonzalez, who pledged to back an expanded police force and “clean up” Portland.But this month, as swaths of the US electorate moved to the right, the Pacific north-west city took a markedly different approach. Residents elected the most diverse city council in Portland history, opting for more progressives, and rejected Gonzalez as mayoral candidate. Instead, they chose Keith Wilson, a businessperson who has never before held office and has promised to end unsheltered homelessness in a year.Wilson had large leads over his competitors in the election, the first in which the city used ranked-choice voting and in the latest results was leading the second place candidate 60% to 40%.The most conservative candidates for mayor and the county board, who took hardline stances, lost, Richard Clucas, a political science professor at Portland State University, pointed out.“Both were defeated significantly because Portland remains a very progressive city despite what people may have heard elsewhere,” Clucas said.The results came as the city was in the midst of what officials have described as a “once-in-a-generation” change to its government system and major voting reforms. This month, for the first time ever, Portland used ranked-choice voting to elect a mayor and a larger, more representative city council. The new officials will have different roles as Portland moves from a commission form of government to one overseen by a city administrator.Voters approved the overhaul two years ago – the same year Gonzalez won – as the city of 630,000 people grappled with a declining downtown, rising homelessness, a fentanyl crisis, growing public drug use and a sluggish recovery from the pandemic. Voters appeared to take out their dissatisfaction with crime, homelessness and drug use on Hardesty, the most progressive member of city council, said Ben Gaskins, a political science professor Lewis & Clark College in Portland.Some have speculated the city was beginning to recoil from its progressive values, particularly after voters in the county ousted the progressive district attorney for a challenger endorsed by police groups. That came shortly after Oregon moved to reintroduce criminal penalties for the possession of hard drugs, in effect scrapping the state’s groundbreaking drug decriminalization law.Claims the city is turning away from progressivism are significantly overstated, Gaskins said – instead, the shifts indicate an electorate that is more focused on tactical concerns rather than ideological ones.Gonzalez was widely considered a frontrunner in this year’s mayoral race. Calling it a “make-or-break election”, the commissioner said that as mayor he would add hundreds of officers to city streets and stop “enabling the humanitarian crisis on our streets by ending the distribution of tents and drug kits”.Wilson, who serves as the chief executive of a trucking company and founded a non-profit to expand shelter capacity and ultimately end homelessness, made the issue the center of his campaign, pledging to reform the city’s approach to alleviating the crisis. He insisted the issue could be addressed with “care and compassion”, the Oregonian reported, and said he would increase the number of night-time walk-in emergency shelters available in churches and community centers.That approach appealed to city voters, Clucas said, over harsher remedies. “They don’t simply want a crackdown, arrests and other things; they want to find some way to compassionately address it.”At a debate in October, Wilson said he would give city leaders an F for their efforts to address homelessness, according to the Oregonian. “Letting people suffer and die on our streets is unacceptable … I believe that every person in Portland deserves a bed every night,” he said.The progressive Carmen Rubio, a city council member, was also a frontrunner in the race. But she lost endorsements after reporting from the Oregonian revealed that she had received about 150 parking and traffic violations since 2004, many of which she failed to pay for months and years, and that she had her license suspended multiple times.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionGonzalez’s campaign was hurt by reporting from the Willamette Week that showed the “public safety champion” had also received seven speeding tickets between 1998 and 2013, and had his license suspended twice.Wilson was once considered a long-shot candidate, but he was probably bolstered by the city’s new ranked-choice voting system, experts said.His position as a businessperson coming from outside the political system allowed him to be a “compromise candidate”, Gaskins said. Wilson fit the gap of someone who is progressive but still represents a change to the status quo, he said.“I think the fact Keith Wilson was able to win shows Portland wants someone who is clearly on the left but who is focused on policy solutions and getting things done versus just being the most ideologically pure candidate in the race,” he said.“He is a candidate of this particular moment.”In an acceptance speech last week, Wilson pledged to build trust and take advantage of a “transformative opportunity”.“It’s time to end unsheltered homelessness and open drug use, and it’s time to restore public safety in Portland,” he said. “Voters aren’t interested in pointing fingers. They just want us to get things done.”Along with Wilson, residents also elected 12 city councillors, nearly half of whom are people of color, Oregon Public Broadcasting reported – a remarkable shift given that just seven years ago, only two people of color had ever been elected to city government. At least four of the new councillors identify as LGBTQ+, the outlet reported, and five received endorsements from the Democratic Socialists of America chapter in Portland. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Oakland mayor and county’s district attorney ousted in historic recall

      by

      Voters have ousted Oakland’s mayor and the region’s progressive district attorney, in a major political shake-up for the northern California port city. It’s the first time in modern history that voters here have ousted leadership from either position.Sheng Thao, the mayor, and Pamela Price, the district attorney for Alameda county, were both the target of recall campaigns, launched amid discontent over the city’s challenges: a spiralling housing crisis, rising costs and the departure of the city’s last remaining major league sports team.But the recall campaigns particularly centered on residents’ enduring frustrations about the area’s crime rates. Like many cities in the US, Oakland experienced a surge in violent crime during the pandemic, one that took longer than elsewhere to subside. Statistics had shown both violent and non-violent crime finally trending down – before the election, the Oakland police announced a 30% drop in homicides this year compared to 2023. Non-fatal shootings were down 20% and robberies were down 24%. Still, many residents remained deeply frustrated.The overwhelming support for both recalls came amid a broader sentiment in the state that crime had become out of control. Californians also supported a tough-on-crime measure, Prop 36, to enact harsher penalties for retail theft, property crimes and drug offenses and undo some of the landmark criminal justice reforms from a decade ago. They also voted down Prop 6, a measure to ban forced prison labor. Foundational Oakland Unites, a committee set up to fund signature gathering before the mayoral recall, sent residents a “Common Sense Voter Guide” that encouraged a yes on 36 and no on 6.While the campaigns tapped into deep frustrations among residents, they were funded in large part by a handful of the region’s wealthy residents. Over the summer, the local news site the Oaklandside revealed that Philip Dreyfuss, a hedge-fund manager who lives in the wealthy enclave of Piedmont, had been the biggest funder to the effort to recall the mayor. Ron Conway, a billionaire tech investor, was another major funder.Thao, the mayor, came into office just two years ago, the first Hmong American to lead a major city. She faced opposition from the start of her tenure, including from the city’s police department – she fired the police chief early in her term – and her moderate opponent in the mayoral contest.“People are fed up with crime and homelessness,” Dan Lindheim, a former Oakland city administrator and now professor at UC Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy, told the Guardian in October. “And they want to hold somebody accountable. It was like: ‘We don’t like what they’re doing, so – symbolically – it’s off with their heads.’”Criticism intensified after the FBI raided Thao’s home in a sprawling corruption investigation. The agency has neither implicated the mayor in any wrongdoing, nor absolved her of involvement. Thao has maintained her innocence.“It was just piling one thing on top of another,” Lindheim said. “That was the seal of death for her mayoral position.”In a statement last week, Thao said she was proud of her administration’s accomplishments and was “committed to ensuring we stay on track by supporting a smooth transition”.Price, the district attorney for Alameda county, which includes Oakland, was also ousted in a recall campaign that began just months after she took office. She was the first Black woman to hold the job. A former civil rights attorney, Price had come into office promising to reform the justice system, stop “over-criminalizing” young people and hold law enforcement to better account.The Alameda county board of supervisors is expected to appoint an interim district attorney.Thao must vacate the office as soon as election results are certified on 5 December and the Oakland city council declares a vacancy at its next meeting, Nikki Fortunato Bas, the city council president, said in a statement.A special election for a new mayor will be held within 120 days, or roughly four months.Until then, Bas will serve as interim mayor, unless she wins a seat on the Alameda county board of supervisors. As of Monday, Bas was trailing in that race. More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      California’s attorney general readies the fight against Trump’s extreme agenda: ‘We’re prepared’

      by

      California was considered a leader in fighting the most extreme policies of Donald Trump’s first administration, and after the Republican’s decisive win this week, officials in the Golden state say they are more prepared to resist Trump’s expected agenda for his second term.Rob Bonta, California’s attorney general, will be a crucial figure in that effort, tasked with spearheading litigation and defending vulnerable Californians’ rights in the courtroom. It’s a tall order as the president-elect has promised policies that could threaten the state’s immigrant population, LGBTQ+ residents, climate initiatives, gun safety measures, healthcare programs and abortion rights.But Bonta, in an interview with the Guardian on Thursday, said his office was ready on every front.“I know a lot of people are anxious and worried, concerned, fearful, angry, sad,” said the Democrat, who now occupies the seat previously held by Kamala Harris. “I’m not happy with the results, but I’m energized and ready to fight … I’m ready to do my job and lean in hard and punch back and push back and fight back against any attacks from the Trump administration on California’s ongoing progress.”Bonta’s efforts could have a significant impact in the most populous and diverse state in the US, home to the fifth largest economy in the world and considered a leader on progressive policies.In Trump’s first term, Bonta recalled, California successfully fought Trump’s “public charge” rule, which sought to block green cards for immigrants who accessed certain benefits, such as food stamps. The state also sued to prevent Trump from denying funds to sanctuary cities, and helped stop the former president’s effort to end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (Daca), a program that protects immigrants who entered the US unauthorized as children.“Trump has a very difficult time resisting the temptation to violate the law,” said Bonta, saying he expected the president-elect to once again use executive action to make changes that require congressional action. “If he wanted to take a blowtorch to the Affordable Care Act and end it on day one by executive order … he can’t do it.” Trump recently said he had “concepts of a plan” to replace the popular Obama-era program that expanded healthcare coverage, and his victory has raised alarms among public health advocates.Bonta said he had been in discussion with attorneys general across the US – sharing briefs, memos and knowledge from their fights during Trump’s first term – and they were primed to coordinate lawsuits as needed: “It’s all hands on deck, use every tool that you have. Litigation will certainly be one of the most potent and powerful ones.“We’ve been preparing for months, in some cases years,” he continued. After Roe v Wade was overturned in 2022, his staff wrote a legal brief to challenge a national abortion ban, a draft he has ready, if necessary. His staff has also monitored comments by Trump’s inner circle and reviewed Project 2025, the rightwing blueprint for his second term drafted by Trump’s allies.“We’ve got a lot in our back pocket ready to drop,” he said. “In some [cases], the whole strategy is thought through – the court we file in, when we file it, based on what action the Trump administration takes. We’ve just gotta dot the Is and cross the Ts and press print. But we are very far along, very advanced in our preparation.”Trump has threatened unprecedented mass deportations, an agenda that was partially thwarted in his first term by California and other blue states that passed sanctuary laws limiting local law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration agents. California Democrats will face pressure from immigrant rights’ groups to expand those sanctuary policies, which advocates say are not currently the strongest in the nation. California prisons, for example, continue to coordinate with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice), which helps drive deportations, but Gavin Newsom, the state governor, has previously vetoed efforts to prevent cooperation with Ice.Bonta said officials should be exploring ways to “reinforce and strengthen” the existing sanctuary law, though he didn’t offer specifics.Newsom has called a special legislative session in December for lawmakers to discuss ways to “Trump-proof” state laws, and immigration will probably be a priority.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“The federal government can’t conscript or commandeer state or local resources or law enforcement agencies to do their job [of immigration enforcement],” Bonta said, describing the current sanctuary policies. “There could be some additions that could help make that stronger.”He said he would be looking for ways to ensure the sanctuary law is properly followed and implemented across the state. Advocates are also bracing for rightwing pro-Trump sheriffs in conservative counties to potentially violate California’s sanctuary rules. Bonta said he would respond if that happens: “They are law enforcement officers. They need to enforce the law. They can’t pick and choose the laws they want to enforce … if they’re going to politicize it and break the law, then we’ll be there to hold them accountable.”Trump has also promised a major rollback of LGBTQ+ rights and some of his campaign ads have spread significant misinformation about the rights of transgender Americans, particularly around healthcare and sports. He has pledged to revoke funding from hospitals that provide gender-affirming care to youth, punish schools that affirm trans youth and push a law stating the government doesn’t legally recognize trans people.California was the first state in 2022 to establish itself as a sanctuary for trans kids seeking healthcare, and Bonta’s office successfully sued a local school district over its policy that would have required schools to out trans and gender non-conforming students to their parents.“We’ve been fighting on so many fronts against the attacks on our transgender kids, whether fighting for them to be able to play sports … or use the bathroom consistent with their gender identity, or be able to go to a doctor’s office and have gender-affirming care,” he said. “We will continue … The courts are a good place to find relief when you target and single out someone based on their protected class.”Bonta advocated for Harris during the election and was hoping he would not need to stand up to the federal government. “I didn’t want this outcome,” he said. “I was working to have a different outcome, but I couldn’t guarantee [it] … so we needed to be prepared for the possibility of [Trump]. Unfortunately, this outcome is here. Fortunately, though, we’re ready for it, because we prepared.”Read more of the Guardian’s 2024 US election coverage

      A masculinity researcher on the Democrats’ ‘fatal miscalculation’

      Election deniers use Trump victory to sow more doubt over 2020 result

      What a second Trump presidency means for big US tech firms More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Levi Strauss heir Daniel Lurie elected mayor of San Francisco

      by

      After years of negative headlines and post-pandemic economic struggle, San Francisco has picked a wealthy Democratic outsider with no government experience to serve as the city’s new mayor.Daniel Lurie, 47, is one of the heirs to the Levi Strauss jeans company fortune, and previously spent 15 years as the executive of a San Francisco non-profit he founded. He defeated several Democratic challengers, including the current mayor, London Breed, in an election that was expected to break local campaign spending records.“I’m deeply grateful to my incredible family, campaign team and every San Franciscan who voted for accountability, service and change,” Lurie said in a statement. “No matter who you supported in this election, we stand united in the fight for San Francisco’s future and a safer and more affordable city for all.”Lurie poured more than $8m of his own money into his campaign, while his billionaire mother, Mimi Haas, backed him with another $1m. He will be the first San Francisco mayor since 1911 to win office without previously serving in government, making him the city’s “least experienced mayor in a long time”, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.But the Chronicle also ended up endorsing Lurie, praising the “balance of compassion and toughness” in his planned approach to dealing with the people in San Francisco struggling with homelessness, and saying the city needed a change in leadership, making Lurie’s inexperience potentially worth the risk.Lurie had touted his experience funding and building affordable housing at the Tipping Point Foundation as evidence that he could lead San Francisco in the right direction.San Francisco is dominated by Democrats, and so the choice was effectively between moderates and progressives, with voters focusing on pragmatic centrists. Lurie beat and will replace Breed, the city’s first Black female mayor, who has led the city since 2018.Breed, who was raised by her grandmother in public housing, conceded the race on Thursday when it became clear she could not overcome deep voter discontent and was trailing Lurie, a philanthropist and anti-poverty non-profit founder.“At the end of the day, this job is bigger than any one person and what matters is that we keep moving this city forward,” Breed said, adding that she had called Lurie to congratulate him. “I know we are both committed to improving this city we love.”The northern California city has come to represent the challenges faced by many large US cities that have struggled with an uneven economic recovery and rising cost of living since the Covid-19 pandemic. Standout issues across all candidates’ campaigns were housing and crime, even with crime down 32%.San Francisco has the highest median household income among major US cities, but homelessness remains intractable. Since a June supreme court ruling, Breed’s administration has been actively sweeping unhoused encampments.Her critics pointed out that sweeps are temporary fixes and the city has not done enough to offer shelter to its unhoused population.In an interview with Reuters, Lurie said sweeps were a tool for the city to combat homelessness and promised to stand up 1,500 emergency shelter beds in his first six months in office.Lurie is an heir to the Levi Strauss & Co fortune through his mother, Mimi, who wed Peter Haas when Lurie was a child. Peter Haas, a great-grandnephew of Levi Strauss, was a longtime CEO of the iconic clothing company who died in 2005.Both the Levi’s name and Haas family philanthropic foundations are deeply embedded in San Francisco’s history and identity.Lurie’s father, Brian Lurie, is a rabbi and longtime former executive director of the San Francisco-based Jewish Community Federation. More

    • 113 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      How California has been ‘Trump-proofing’ itself against federal reprisal

      by

      California prided itself on its resistance to Donald Trump during his first term as president and will hardly have to scramble to assume the same role a second time around.Indeed, as a bastion of Democratic party strength in a country moving sharply to the right, it has been preparing for this moment for a long time.“California will continue to be at the forefront of progress, the fulcrum of democracy, the champion of innovation, and the protector of our rights and freedoms,” Adam Schiff, the state’s newly elected senator and a frequent target of Trump’s wrath, promised supporters on election night.On Thursday, Gavin Newsom announced a special session of the California legislature to ensure the attorney general’s office and other state agencies have the funding they need. “We won’t sit idle,” the governor said. “California has faced this challenge before, and we know how to respond.”Even with Trump out of power since 2021, California has been setting up guardrails to protect its resident’s rights under an adversarial federal government. The state has enshrined abortion rights in its constitution, passed a ballot initiative explicitly defending the right of same-sex couples to marry and pushed for tougher gun laws that still adhere to the supreme court’s narrow interpretation of the right to bear arms.It has even considered establishing state funding to meet the cost of wildfires, earthquakes and other natural disasters in case the Trump administration decides to withhold emergency funds from states it deems to be politically hostile, as it sometimes did during its 2017-21 term.View image in fullscreen“We’ve been Trump-proofing the place,” said Elizabeth Ashford, a political consultant who has worked for governors on both sides of the aisle and was Kamala Harris’s chief of staff when she was California’s attorney general. “The work … has been to put measures in place that can withstand shifts in Washington and on the supreme court. These projects have been going on for years.”Asked how ready she thought California was for the new administration, Ashford said: “On a scale from one to 100, we’re starting at about 90.”California is both the most populous US state and its most powerful economy, making it an unusual counterweight to the power of the federal government. It has, for example, negotiated directly with car manufacturers over tailpipe emission standards, thus circumventing the avowed desire of Trump’s allies to end a long-established rule that allows the state to set its own standards.Read more of the Guardian’s 2024 US election coverage

      Trump wins the presidency – how did it happen?

      With Trump re-elected, this is what’s at stake

      Abortion ballot measure results by state
      Where it cannot work around the federal government, it can seek to challenge any hint of government overreach in the courts, as it did more than 130 times during the first Trump administration. Rob Bonta, the state attorney general, told the policy news outlet CalMatters last week that his team had prepared briefs and tested arguments on a range of issues – everything from limits on abortion medication to gun laws and upholding the civil rights of transgender young people.“The best way to protect California, its values, the rights of our people, is to be prepared,” Bonta told CalMatters. “Unfortunately, it’s a long list.”In a statement on Wednesday, Bonta said California will “continue to move forward driven by our values and the ongoing pursuit of progress”. He added: “I’ll use the full force of the law and the full authority of my office to ensure it.”It is unlikely to take long for California and the new administration to butt heads. Newsom has a long record as a Trump antagonist and spent much of the election campaign traveling the country to promote Democratic candidates – all of which makes him a likely lightning rod for Trump’s ire.View image in fullscreenTrump has called Newsom “one of the worst governors in the country” and nicknamed him “New-scum”. Their rivalry is also personal, since Newsom’s ex-wife, Kimberly Guilfoyle, is engaged to Donald Trump Jr.Trump’s former staffers have made little secret of their wish to disrupt the Democratic party’s stranglehold over California politics and have spelled out their intentions in documents like the Project 2025 blueprint that became a lightning rod during the election campaign. Despite Trump’s attempts to distance himself from it, California officials have studied Project 2025 carefully and are assuming it will form the policy backbone of the new administration. One California congressman, Jared Huffman, has described it as a “dystopian nightmare”.There are several ways in which the state can try to disrupt that nightmare. During Trump’s first presidency, for example, state agencies including the California highway patrol refused to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal agency tasked with aggressive round-ups of immigrants without papers. Police in so-called “sanctuary cities” were similarly protective of their immigrant populations.For all the preparation, though, state officials fear that the new Trump administration will be more organized and more radical than the old one, and that it will have more of a political mandate since a groundswell of California voters – many more than in 2020 or in 2016 – have indicated they are sympathetic to parts of the Trump agenda.Newsom said last week he was particularly concerned about the prospect of widespread raids on immigrants, which could prove devastating to the immigrant-dependent California economy including the vast agricultural concerns based largely in the inland Central valley.There may be other parts of the Trump agenda which, if enacted, could prove difficult to reverse – a national abortion ban passed by Congress, say, or a repeal of the Obama-era Affordable Care Act. And that has many advocacy groups deeply worried about the vulnerable populations they serve.“Our community is feeling very anxious and uncertain,” said Terra Russell-Slavin, a lawyer with the Los Angeles LGBT Center, “particularly given the number of attacks that Trump has explosively targeted toward the LGBTQ community and specifically the trans community”.In response, Russell-Slavin said her organization was working with state and local governments to find alternative funding streams should the federal government cut back on gender-affirming healthcare or homelessness services or senior services. “We’re very fortunate that our lawmakers are overwhelmingly supportive,” she said. “We are very confident they will fight for protections for us.”Will that be enough? For now, California officials are showing their teeth and vowing to fight. But Newsom, for one, is under no illusions about how much is at stake. “No state,” he said last week, “has more to lose or more to gain in this election.”Read more of the Guardian’s 2024 US election coverage

      Democrats ask: ‘How do you spend $1bn and not win?’

      How Trump won the presidency – in maps

      ‘Goodbye, America’: celebrities react to Trump win

      Jon Stewart: ‘This is not the end’

      With Trump re-elected, this is what’s at stake More