ReportWire

Tag: gavin newsom

  • Newsom signs bill allowing California rideshare drivers to form union, negotiate contract

    [ad_1]

    California rideshare drivers will have the ability to form a union and negotiate a contract, while still being classified as independent contractors.

    A new law signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday, Assembly Bill 1340, requires app-based transportation companies, like Lyft and Uber, to negotiate in good faith with a soon-to-be-formed drivers’ union.

    Driver Jason Munderloh said he’s optimistic about the bill, but there are some complications. He’s been driving for rideshare services since 2014, when he left his biomedical research job. 

    “The pay was pretty good, early on,” Munderloh said. 

    At first, he really enjoyed being a driver. 

    “The advantages were it’s an exciting job, potentially,” Munderloh said. “You get to see the city. You get to meet a lot of people, and the pay is good, and we have real support and dignity for drivers; it can be a great job. And it was at one point.”

    But things changed, especially during the pandemic, when fewer people were using the apps. Usage has picked up, but their pay is still lagging behind what it used to be for many rides. 

    Munderloh adds that Prop. 22, which was passed in 2020, has also made things more difficult. It classifies drivers as independent contractors. They don’t get full employee protections, like overtime, paid sick leave, or unemployment insurance.

    He hopes AB1340 can help, the bill giving drivers the right to create a first union contract and requiring the companies to negotiate in good faith over issues such as driver deactivation, paid leave and earnings.

    “A union potentially gives us the right to organize and bargain collectively, something we haven’t had before,” Munderloh detailed. “It’s every driver for themselves as it is now.”

    He admits the legislation signed by the governor isn’t perfect. 

    “The bill had some flaws, looking more into it,” Munderloh said. “My organization, Rideshare Drivers United, identified seven places that the bill should be changed to protect, for example, what our wages are during negotiations? What if we enter negotiations and the algorithm suddenly changes and they’re not paying us very well? Nobody has had to deal with algorithmic employment before in a union contract negotiation.”

    He explains that they’re in uncharted territory and there is no language in the bill that promises a living wage.

    “We are some of the first workers that are being impacted by AI,” Munderloh said. “The algorithm that they have will basically find the person who is willing to take the drive for the cheapest, maybe the most desperate person, undercutting everyone else. We’re really facing AI and Algorithmic discrimination in a way that no one has.”

    In a statement, the director of public policy at Lyft, Nick Johnson, was in support of the legislation. 

    “This deal is a major victory for both riders and drivers in California,” Johnson said. 

    As part of the agreement, Newsom also signed a second bill on Friday, which will drastically reduce insurance coverage requirements for the ride-hailing companies

    Despite all of this, Munderloh said there’s more work to be done. The drivers still need to come together to form the union and put the right people in place to negotiate for better working conditions. 

    “The future of rideshare really depends on drivers themselves, you know, and we know that the city doesn’t function without us,” Munderloh explained. “We know that we’re essential workers. It’s just a matter of us coming together and being organized and standing up for ourselves.”

    [ad_2]

    Amanda Hari

    Source link

  • Newsom signs bill giving Uber and Lyft drivers in California the right to unionize | TechCrunch

    [ad_1]

    Drivers for ride-hailing apps like Uber and Lyft will soon have the right to unionize in California as independent contractors, thanks to a bill signed Friday by Governor Gavin Newsom.

    This is part of a larger deal between lawmakers, unions, and ride-hailing companies, resulting in the passage of separate bills supporting lower insurance requirements for Uber and Lyft, along with union rights for their drivers. When the deal was first announced in August, Newsom described it as an “historic agreement between workers and business that only California could deliver.”

    The Associated Press reports that more than 800,000 drivers will gain the right to join a union and collectively bargain for better pay and benefits. Ramona Prieto, Uber’s head of public policy for California, told the AP in a statement that the two bills “represent a compromise that lowers costs for riders while creating stronger voices for drivers.”

    Massachusetts voters passed a ballot measure giving ride-hailing drivers unionization rights last fall.

    [ad_2]

    Anthony Ha

    Source link

  • California using back door to get federal funds for illegal immigrant healthcare, GOP says; Dems say nonsense

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    Democrats want to remove a provision of Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBA) before reopening the government, but Republicans argue the line item they want removed is allowing California to use a “loophole” to draw down funds from the federal government to help pay for the state’s ballooning cost of healthcare for illegal immigrants.

    The White House released a memo on Wednesday during the first day of the government shutdown fight indicating Democrats want to repeal Trump reforms in his “big, beautiful bill” that aimed to close this alleged backdoor tactic. However, California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office and left-leaning health policy experts insist claims that California is using this tactic are not true.

    “When Democrats say, as they keep saying, that there is no federal money or any taxpayer money going for illegal immigrant healthcare because it’s illegal and barred by federal law, it’s simply not true,” said Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host now running to replace Newsom as governor of California. 

    Hilton claimed that California has been using a complex Medicaid provision known as a “provider tax” to obtain matching federal dollars, which then gets pooled into the money used by the state to pay for its healthcare offered to undocumented immigrants.

    WHITE HOUSE MEMO SAYS DEMOCRATS’ PLAN COULD SPEND $200B ON HEALTHCARE FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS

    California is being accused of utilizing a Medicaid “loophole” to draw down federal funds to help pay for the ballooning cost of illegal immigrant healthcare.  (Getty/iStock)

    “If [federal dollars] are funding non-emergency healthcare for ineligible immigrants, the sole cause is provider taxes,” Michael Cannon, a health policy expert at the CATO Institute told Fox News Digital. 

    Cannon, however, suggested Republicans shot themselves in the foot by choosing only to limit the scope of eligibility around provider tax funds in the OBBBA, saying no more could go to states providing illegal immigrants healthcare, and they should have just quashed them altogether. 

    “What they did was that Republicans preserved the ability of states to use provider taxes to fund healthcare for undocumented immigrants using Medicaid,” he argued.

    However, Newsom’s office insisted to the Los Angeles Times that the claim California is utilizing a provider tax “loophole” to fund illegal immigrant healthcare is simply not true. It is effectively impossible to make a determination one way or the other because states do not keep records on how provider tax funds from the federal government are spent. 

    “This is false — CA does not do this,” Gardon said in a one-line email to the LA Times. Newsom’s office did not reply to Fox News Digital’s request for comment in time for publication.

    FED AUDIT, EMERGENCY MEDICAID UNDERCUT DEMS ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT HEALTH COVERAGE 

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom with two American flags in the background.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom during a bill signing event related to redrawing the state’s congressional maps Aug. 21, 2025, in Sacramento, Calif. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

    Other healthcare policy experts agree as well that this is not happening.

    “The so-called California loophole references a provision in the law that ends a waiver of the uniformity requirements for provider taxes. This provision has nothing to do with using federal funds to pay for care for undocumented immigrants,” Jennifer Tolbert, a healthcare expert at the nonprofit healthcare research organization KFF. 

    “But the White House makes the claim that California uses the money they get from the provider tax to pay for care for undocumented immigrants.” 

    Chris Pope, a health policy expert from the Manhattan Institute, argues California is also using emergency care claims to draw down even more funds to help pay for its ballooning cost of being the first state in the nation to offer comprehensive healthcare coverage for anyone regardless of their immigration status. 

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    Supporters of single-payer health care march to the Capitol, April 26, 2017, in Sacramento, Calif.

    Supporters of single-payer health care march in Sacramento, Calif. (Rich Pedroncelli, File/AP Photo)

    Federal law does not permit federal funds to be used for non-emergency medical care for illegal immigrants, but it does not prohibit them from being used for emergency care for these folks.  

    “The enormous and open-ended discretion Medicaid gives states to claim federal funding makes it hard for the feds to ensure that the program’s expenditures are reserved for its intended purposes,” Pope wrote in an Op-Ed for the New York Post Friday. “Until that changes, the Democratic claim that federal money isn’t being used on illegal immigrants is simply not true.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California Gov. Gavin Newsom signs first-in-nation AI transparency law

    [ad_1]




































    California Gov. Newsom signs nation’s first AI transparency law



    California Gov. Newsom signs nation’s first AI transparency law

    03:09

    Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a new bill into law in California that aims to regulate the artificial intelligence industry.

    Named SB 53, the law targets larger AI models and implements a number of transparency, reporting and safety obligations that developers will need to follow.

    Legislators crafted the bill using recommendations from a recent report on AI guardrails.

    Newsom hailed the law as a first of its kind in the U.S.

    “California has proven that we can establish regulations to protect our communities while also ensuring that the growing AI industry continues to thrive,” Newsom said in a statement after signing the bill Monday.

    Industry groups have voiced their concern over the guardrails as proposed, calling the law flawed.

    “For true AI safety, California should pursue standards based on empirical risk and measurable harm. Solutions should empower transparency and accountability without penalizing innovators,” wrote the Chamber of Progress tech industry trade group in a July critique of the bill.

    The law was authored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco).

    Newsom has until Oct. 12 to sign or veto bills passed by the California legislature during their most recent session. Some new laws already signed by Newsom this session include a series of bills aimed at expanding access to reproductive health care in the state.  

    Cecilio Padilla

    Cecilio Padilla is a digital producer for CBS Sacramento and a Sacramento-area native who has been covering Northern California for more than a decade.

    [ad_2]

    Cecilio Padilla

    Source link

  • California Governor Newsom signs landmark AI safety bill SB 53 | TechCrunch

    [ad_1]

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed SB 53, a first-in-the-nation bill that sets new transparency requirements on large AI companies.

    SB 53, which passed the state legislature two weeks ago, requires large AI labs — including OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, and Google DeepMind — to be transparent about safety protocols. It also ensures whistleblower protections for employees at those companies.  

    In addition, SB 53 creates a mechanism for AI companies and the public to report potential critical safety incidents to California’s Office of Emergency Services. Companies also have to report incidents related to crimes committed without human oversight, such as cyberattacks, and deceptive behavior by a model that isn’t required under the EU AI Act.  

    The bill has received mixed reactions from the AI industry. Tech firms have broadly argued that state-level AI policy risks creating a “patchwork of regulation” that would hinder innovation, although Anthropic endorsed the bill. Meta and OpenAI lobbied against it. OpenAI even wrote and published an open letter to Gov. Newsom that discouraged his signing of SB 53.

    The new bill comes as some of Silicon Valley’s tech elite have poured hundreds of millions into super PACs to back candidates that support a light-touch approach to AI regulation. Leaders at OpenAI and Meta have in recent weeks launched pro-AI super PACs that aim to back candidates and bills that are friendly to AI. 

    Still, other states might look to California for inspiration as they attempt to curb the potential harms caused by the unmitigated advancement of such a powerful emerging technology. In New York, a similar bill was passed by state lawmakers and is awaiting Gov. Kathy Hochul’s signature or veto.  

    “California has proven that we can establish regulations to protect our communities while also ensuring that the growing AI industry continues to thrive,” Newsom said in a statement. “This legislation strikes that balance. AI is the new frontier in innovation, and California is not only here for it — but stands strong as a national leader by enacting the first-in-the-nation frontier AI safety legislation that builds public trust as this emerging technology rapidly evolves.” 

    Techcrunch event

    San Francisco
    |
    October 27-29, 2025

    The governor is also weighing another bill — SB 243 — that passed both the State Assembly and Senate with bipartisan support this month. The bill would regulate AI companion chatbots, requiring operators to implement safety protocols, and hold them legally accountable if their bots fail to meet those standards.  

    SB 53 is Senator Scott Wiener’s second attempt at an AI safety bill after Newsom vetoed his more sweeping SB 1047 last year amid major pushback from AI companies. With this bill, Wiener reached out to major AI companies to attempt to help them understand the changes he made to the bill.  

    [ad_2]

    Rebecca Bellan

    Source link

  • California got this one right: ICE agents shouldn’t be allowed to wear masks

    [ad_1]

    Like all authoritarian movements, MAGA likes to display “shock and awe” to arouse its supporters and intimidate its opponents. Why else would, say, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem attend high-profile ICE raids—and then post videos of them on her social-media accounts?  It’s all for show.

    Likewise, responsible political movements are embarrassed by hypocrisy, but MAGA displays it as a loyalty test. Vice President J.D. Vance berated the Brits for detaining people over social media posts, then called on Americans to report people to their employers for negative posts about Charlie Kirk. And Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed to crack down on “hate speech,” even though Republicans have long viewed such laws as speech controls. They know what message this sends.

    The most iconic image of the administration, however, isn’t an official in SWAT gear or an oleaginous Vance espousing cancel culture. It’s not even the image of National Guard troops patrolling Washington, D.C. The clearest image is one of masked ICE agents emerging from unmarked cars, roughing up suspected illegal immigrants—and then “disappearing” them to an unknown location.

    “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—forever.” That’s how George Orwell put it, but it doesn’t have to be forever if more Americans start caring about their constitutional birthright. California’s Legislature isn’t a beacon of constitutional fealty, but one recent bill that’s on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk shows that some lawmakers are starting to get it.

    Senate Bill 627 “makes it a crime for a law enforcement officer, as defined, to wear a facial covering in the performance of the duties,” per the legislative analysis. It includes some exceptions, such as allowing officers to wear masks during certain undercover and tactical operations and for medical reasons, but it’s otherwise simple. Newsom last week signed the bill.

    Not surprisingly, police unions and sheriffs’ associations were opposed to it, as they typically oppose limits on their power. Almost as predictable, the key opposition came from Republicans—those politicians who endlessly prattle about the Constitution and express their concern about big government. Can you imagine anything less constitutional or reflective of big government than masked agents abducting people based on some unknown agent’s whims?

    Sen. Tony Strickland (R–Huntington Beach), who at least manages to be consistent in his myriad big-government positions, called the bill “a reckless anti-law enforcement proposal that puts law enforcement officers and their families at real risk, undermining the safety of the men and women who bravely protect our communities.”

    But author Sen. Scott Wiener (D–San Francisco) got it right: “The recent federal operations in California have created an environment of profound terror, with officers—or people who claim to be officers—wearing what are essentially ski masks, not identifying themselves, grabbing people, putting them in unmarked cars, and disappearing them. If we want the public to trust law enforcement, we cannot allow them to behave like secret police in an authoritarian state.”

    Rather than get owned by progressives on these basic issues, conservatives might want to re-read that Constitution that they often brag about keeping in their shirt pocket, or maybe glance at the Declaration of Independence. Our founders complained that the king “sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.”

    Practically speaking, there is no reason for law-enforcement agents to conceal their identities, wear face masks, and grab people off the street without identifying themselves. How is an ordinary person supposed to know whether their abductor is a legit government agent or kidnappers from a drug cartel? In the former, fighting back will land you in the morgue—in the latter, not fighting back will do so.

    Trump supporters claim the masks protect agents from doxing, but that’s just an after-the-fact excuse. This shouldn’t be news to conservatives, but the Constitution is meant to protect ordinary people from their government rather than the other way around. The first concern is to protect our liberties, not to ensure that armed agents have an easier time of it. Doxing is illegal and should be punished, but that’s no excuse to green-light police-state tactics.

    “The general public does not distinguish between federal agents and local law enforcement,” said my R Street Institute colleague Jillian Snider in a CNN interview. “So when federal agents go into local jurisdictions wearing masks and not making their identities known, that hinders the operations of local law enforcement because then that community fails to trust the local law enforcement that are trying to keep them safe.”

    Then again, perhaps that’s MAGA’s point: to intimidate Americans into submission via a high-profile show of force. We should be shocked by this, but the right response is disgust rather than awe.

    This column was first published in The Orange County Register.

    [ad_2]

    Steven Greenhut

    Source link

  • Newsom lashes out at Trump’s immigration, political strategies

    [ad_1]

    Gov. Gavin Newsom is renewing his push against President Trump, accusing him of threatening democracy through his immigration and political strategies.

    During an appearance on “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” on Tuesday night, Newsom spoke out against Trump’s immigration policies and his attempt to influence the midterm elections.

    Newsom explained to a national audience why he is callng the Trump administration authoritarian.

    Kris Sanchez has the full report in the video above.

    [ad_2]

    NBC Bay Area staff

    Source link

  • Newsom signs California law forcing federal agents to unmask

    [ad_1]

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a new law prohibiting federal law enforcement officers, like ICE agents, from wearing masks when conducting arrests. Elise Preston reports.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California bans most law enforcement officers from wearing masks during operations

    [ad_1]

    California will be the first state to ban most law enforcement, including federal immigration agents, from covering their faces while conducting official business under a bill signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday.

    The ban is California’s direct response to a recent series of immigration raids in Los Angeles where federal agents wore masks while making mass arrests. The raids prompted a dayslong protest across the city and led President Donald Trump to deploy National Guard troops and Marines to the area.

    Newsom said California is unique – 27 percent of its residents are foreign born.

    “We celebrate that diversity. It’s what makes California great. It’s what makes America great. It is under assault,” he said at a press conference in Los Angeles. “This is the United States of America and I’m really proud of the state of California and our state of mind that we’re pushing back against these authoritarian tendencies and actions of this administration.”

    But it’s unclear how — or whether — the state can enforce the ban on the federal agents who have been carrying out those raids. A homeland security official called the legislation “despicable” in a statement this week, adding that the ban would only put officers in danger.

    Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, said that “students cannot learn if they live in fear of being deported. The California Safe Haven Schools Act is a clear message to Donald Trump: ‘keep ICE out of our schools.’”

    The Department of Homeland Security said it had sent letters Friday to the attorneys general in California, Illinois and New York reinforcing previous instructions that the Democrat-led states honor detainers from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for “criminal illegal aliens within their jurisdictions.” DHS said in a statement Saturday that if the states failed to comply, it would pursue “all appropriate measures to end their inadvisable and irresponsible obstruction.”

    Messages seeking comment from the DHS and ICE after the law was signed were not immediately returned.

    Newsom, a Democrat who has railed on federal agents’ use of masks during official business, said the measure will help California push back on federal overreach. He signed the bill in Los Angeles, flanked by state lawmakers and immigrant community members.

    The new law prohibits neck gaiters, ski masks and other facial coverings for local and federal officers, including immigration enforcement agents, while they conduct official business. It makes exceptions for undercover agents, medical masks such as N95 respirators or tactical gear. It doesn’t apply to state police.

    Trump administration officials have consistently defended the practice, saying that immigration agents have faced strident and increasing harassment in public and online as they have gone about their enforcement in service of Trump’s drive toward mass deportation, and hiding their identities is for their and their families’ safety.

    Federal agents are already instructed to identify themselves and wear vests with ICE or Homeland Security markers during operations, Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement this week.

    “The men and women at CBP, ICE, and all of our federal law enforcement agencies put their lives on the line every day to arrest violent criminal illegal aliens to protect and defend the lives of American citizens,” she said.

    Democrats in Congress and lawmakers in several states, including Tennessee, Michigan, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, have also introduced similar proposals calling for mask bans for law enforcement officers.

    Proponents said the mask ban is especially needed after the Supreme Court earlier this month ruled that the federal administration can resume the sweeping immigration operations in Los Angeles. The new law aims to boost public trust in law enforcement and stop people from impersonating officers to commit crimes, supporters said.

    Constitutional law expert Erwin Chemerinsky at the University of California, Berkeley, also defended the legislation. Federal employees still have to follow general state rules “unless doing so would significantly interfere with the performance of their duties. For example, while on the job, federal employees must stop at red lights,” he wrote in an opinion piece for the Sacramento Bee.

    The increase in high-profile immigration enforcement was already contentious between those opposed to the actions of Trump’s administration and those in support of them. The sight of masked agents carrying it out is creating a whole new level of conflict.

    The mask ban is among a number of measures approved by the Democratic-controlled Legislature in response to Trump’s immigration policies of mass deportation. Newsom on Saturday also signed legislation to prevent immigration agents from entering schools and health care facilities without a valid warrant or a judicial order and to require schools to notify parents and teachers when immigration agents are on campus.

    It’s part of state lawmakers’ efforts to safeguard progressive values in California. The Legislature earlier this year also authorized giving $50 million to California’s Department of Justice and other legal groups, which has resulted in more than 40 lawsuits against the administration.

    California Governor Gavin Newsom gave harsh criticism of the policies and tactics of the Trump Administration as members of the National Guard and Marines have been sent in to Los Angeles amid ICE raids and protests.

    [ad_2]

    Tran Nguyen and Martha Bellisle | The Associated Press

    Source link

  • California bans most law enforcement officers from wearing masks during operations

    [ad_1]

    California will be the first state to ban most law enforcement, including federal immigration agents, from covering their faces while conducting official business under a bill signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday.

    The ban is California’s direct response to a recent series of immigration raids in Los Angeles where federal agents wore masks while making mass arrests. The raids prompted a dayslong protest across the city and led President Donald Trump to deploy National Guard troops and Marines to the area.

    Newsom said California is unique – 27 percent of its residents are foreign born.

    “We celebrate that diversity. It’s what makes California great. It’s what makes America great. It is under assault,” he said at a press conference in Los Angeles. “This is the United States of America and I’m really proud of the state of California and our state of mind that we’re pushing back against these authoritarian tendencies and actions of this administration.”

    But it’s unclear how — or whether — the state can enforce the ban on the federal agents who have been carrying out those raids. A homeland security official called the legislation “despicable” in a statement this week, adding that the ban would only put officers in danger.

    Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, D-Torrance, said that “students cannot learn if they live in fear of being deported. The California Safe Haven Schools Act is a clear message to Donald Trump: ‘keep ICE out of our schools.’”

    The Department of Homeland Security said it had sent letters Friday to the attorneys general in California, Illinois and New York reinforcing previous instructions that the Democrat-led states honor detainers from the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement for “criminal illegal aliens within their jurisdictions.” DHS said in a statement Saturday that if the states failed to comply, it would pursue “all appropriate measures to end their inadvisable and irresponsible obstruction.”

    Messages seeking comment from the DHS and ICE after the law was signed were not immediately returned.

    Newsom, a Democrat who has railed on federal agents’ use of masks during official business, said the measure will help California push back on federal overreach. He signed the bill in Los Angeles, flanked by state lawmakers and immigrant community members.

    The new law prohibits neck gaiters, ski masks and other facial coverings for local and federal officers, including immigration enforcement agents, while they conduct official business. It makes exceptions for undercover agents, medical masks such as N95 respirators or tactical gear. It doesn’t apply to state police.

    Trump administration officials have consistently defended the practice, saying that immigration agents have faced strident and increasing harassment in public and online as they have gone about their enforcement in service of Trump’s drive toward mass deportation, and hiding their identities is for their and their families’ safety.

    Federal agents are already instructed to identify themselves and wear vests with ICE or Homeland Security markers during operations, Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement this week.

    “The men and women at CBP, ICE, and all of our federal law enforcement agencies put their lives on the line every day to arrest violent criminal illegal aliens to protect and defend the lives of American citizens,” she said.

    Democrats in Congress and lawmakers in several states, including Tennessee, Michigan, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, have also introduced similar proposals calling for mask bans for law enforcement officers.

    Proponents said the mask ban is especially needed after the Supreme Court earlier this month ruled that the federal administration can resume the sweeping immigration operations in Los Angeles. The new law aims to boost public trust in law enforcement and stop people from impersonating officers to commit crimes, supporters said.

    Constitutional law expert Erwin Chemerinsky at the University of California, Berkeley, also defended the legislation. Federal employees still have to follow general state rules “unless doing so would significantly interfere with the performance of their duties. For example, while on the job, federal employees must stop at red lights,” he wrote in an opinion piece for the Sacramento Bee.

    The increase in high-profile immigration enforcement was already contentious between those opposed to the actions of Trump’s administration and those in support of them. The sight of masked agents carrying it out is creating a whole new level of conflict.

    The mask ban is among a number of measures approved by the Democratic-controlled Legislature in response to Trump’s immigration policies of mass deportation. Newsom on Saturday also signed legislation to prevent immigration agents from entering schools and health care facilities without a valid warrant or a judicial order and to require schools to notify parents and teachers when immigration agents are on campus.

    It’s part of state lawmakers’ efforts to safeguard progressive values in California. The Legislature earlier this year also authorized giving $50 million to California’s Department of Justice and other legal groups, which has resulted in more than 40 lawsuits against the administration.

    California Governor Gavin Newsom gave harsh criticism of the policies and tactics of the Trump Administration as members of the National Guard and Marines have been sent in to Los Angeles amid ICE raids and protests.

    [ad_2]

    Tran Nguyen and Martha Bellisle | The Associated Press

    Source link

  • California moves to distance itself from CDC on vaccines, considers creating its own agency

    [ad_1]

    UPDATES AS THEY COME IN. OTHER NEWS, RIGHT NOW, HEALTH OFFICIALS ARE FOCUSING ON VACCINE DEADLINES. THIS WEEK, A CDC COMMITTEE WILL CONSIDER POSSIBLE CHANGES TO RECOMMENDATIONS TOMORROW. AND NOW THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IS CONSIDERING DISTANCING ITSELF FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT’S GUIDELINES. THE POTENTIAL CHANGE IN GUIDANCE COMES AS THE RECENTLY FIRED CDC DIRECTOR WARNS THOSE CHANGES MAY NOT BE BASED ON SCIENCE. WE HAVE TEAM COVERAGE FOR YOU OF WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW. ASHLEY ZAVALA HAS THE CHANGE IN STATE VACCINATION GUIDELINES, BUT WE START WITH JACKIE DEFUSCO LIVE ON CAPITOL HILL FOR US WITH A MESSAGE FROM THE FORMER CDC DIRECTOR. YEAH. HEY THERE, ANDREA CURTIS ON CAPITOL HILL TODAY, THE FORMER CDC DIRECTOR, SUSAN MONAREZ, CLAIMED THAT SHE WAS FIRED IN PART FOR ESSENTIALLY REFUSING TO PRE-APPROVE VACCINE RECOMMENDATIONS WITHOUT SEEING THE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FIRST. SHE TOLD SENATORS THAT SHE IS NERVOUS ABOUT WHAT’S TO COME. TAKE A LISTEN. BASED ON WHAT I OBSERVED DURING MY TENURE, THERE IS A REAL RISK THAT RECOMMENDATIONS COULD BE MADE RESTRICTING ACCESS TO VACCINES FOR CHILDREN AND OTHERS IN NEED WITHOUT RIGOROUS SCIENTIFIC REVIEW, WITH NO PERMANENT CDC DIRECTOR IN PLACE, THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS COULD BE ADOPTED. HEALTH SECRETARY ROBERT F KENNEDY JR HAS DENIED THAT HE ORDERED MONAREZ TO RUBBER STAMP VACCINE RECOMMENDATIONS. BUT THE DISPUTE COMES AS THE CDC’S INFLUENTIAL ADVISORY PANEL, WHOSE MEMBERS WERE RECENTLY REPLACED BY KENNEDY, IS SET TO CONVENE TOMORROW TO CONSIDER POSSIBLE CHANGES TO GUIDANCE ON COVID 19, CHICKENPOX AND HEPATITIS B SHOTS. TELLING LAWMAKERS THAT SHE HAS NOT SEEN ANY DATA AT THIS POINT TO SUPPORT CHANGING ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA. FORMER CDC CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER DEBORAH OURY, WHO RECENTLY RESIGNED, ALSO TESTIFIED TODAY. AND SHE SAID THAT ONE OF KENNEDY’S POLITICAL ADVISERS TOLD HER NOT TO INCLUDE INFORMATION THAT COULD SUPPORT MAINTAINING HEPATITIS B SHOTS FOR NEWBORNS TO PREVENT THE DEADLY DISEASE FROM SPREADING FROM THE MOTHER. YOU’RE SUGGESTING THAT THEY WANTED TO MOVE AWAY FROM THE BIRTH DOSE, BUT THEY WERE AFRAID THAT YOUR DATA WOULD SAY THAT THEY SHOULD RETAIN IT. IT. WHAT DO WE DO NOW? IT’S STILL UNCLEAR AT THIS POINT HOW EXACTLY THE ADVISORY PANEL WILL VOTE LATER THIS WEEK, BUT SOME MEMBERS IN THE PAST HAVE QUESTIONED THE NECESSITY OF THE HEPATITIS B SHOT FOR NEWBORNS, AND HAVE ALSO SUGGESTED THAT THERE SHOULD BE A MORE CONSERVATIVE SET OF VACCINE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE COVID 19 SHOT, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THAT PANEL RECOMMENDS. ULTIMATELY, THE ACTING CDC DIRECTOR, JIM O’NEILL, WILL NEED TO SIGN OFF BEFORE THEY BECOME OFFICIAL LIVE ON CAPITOL HILL. I’M JACKIE DEFUSCO, KCRA THREE NEWS. JACKIE, THANK YOU. AND CLOSER TO HOME, CALIFORNIA LEADERS TODAY CONTINUE TO DISTANCE THE STATE FROM THE CDC WITH A SERIES OF ANNOUNCEMENTS. KCRA THREE POLITICAL DIRECTOR ASHLEY ZAVALA EXPLAINS THE ACTION GOVERNOR GAVIN NEWSOM TOOK TODAY. WELL, THIS COMES AS THE STATE CONTINUES TO CLASH WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OVER VACCINES AND SCIENCE. OVERALL. TODAY, NEWSOM, ALONGSIDE THE GOVERNORS OF OREGON, WASHINGTON AND HAWAII, ROLLED OUT THEIR OWN VACCINE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE WINTER. THE GROUP IS ALSO NOW KNOWN AS THE WEST COAST HEALTH ALLIANCE. AS OF A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, THE RECOMMENDED SHOTS INCLUDE THE COVID 19 SHOT, FLU AND RSV SHOTS. THE GOVERNOR TODAY ALSO SIGNED A NEW STATE LAW THAT ALLOWS CALIFORNIA TO TAKE VACCINE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM MEDICAL GROUPS OUTSIDE OF THE CDC. THIS COMES AFTER ROBERT F KENNEDY JR FIRED ALL 17 MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON IMMUNIZATION PRACTICES AND REPLACE THEM WITH VACCINE SKEPTICS. THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION LOOSENED RECOMMENDATIONS AROUND THE COVID 19 VACCINE. ALSO IN A STATEMENT, THE WEST COAST GOVERNOR SAID, OUR STATES ARE UNITED IN PUTTING SCIENCE, SAFETY AND TRANSPARENCY FIRST AND IN PROTECTING FAMILIES WITH CLEAR, CREDIBLE VACCINE GUIDANCE. THE WEST COAST HEALTH ALLIANCE STANDS UNITED IN PROTECTING PUBLIC HEALTH AND ALWAYS PUTTING SAFETY BEFORE POLITICS. MEANWHILE, A SPOKESPERSON FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SAID DEMOCRAT RUN STATES THAT PUSHED UNSCIENTIFIC SCHOOL LOCKDOWNS, TODDLER MASK MANDATES AND DRACONIAN VACCINE PASSPORTS DURING THE COVID ERA COMPLETELY ERODED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE’S TRUST IN PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCIES. ACIP REMAINS THE SCIENTIFIC BODY GUIDING IMMUNIZATION RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS COUNTRY. AND HHS WILL ENSURE POLICY IS BASED ON RIGOROUS EVIDENCE AND GOLD STANDARD SCIENCE, NOT THE FAILED POLITICS OF THE PANDEMIC. END QUOTE. NOW, SEPARATELY FROM THE GOVERNOR’S ANNOUNCEMENT TODAY, SOME DEMOCRATIC STATE LAWMAKERS AND LABOR GROUPS LAUNCHED AN EFFORT THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY CREATE CALIFORNIA’S OWN CDC AND FOUNDATION FOUNDATION TO FUND MEDICAL RESEARCH. THIS WOULD FIRST NEED TO PASS AT THE STATE CAPITOL, THOUGH, BEFORE GOING TO VOTERS IN A BALLOT MEASURE IN NOVEMBER OF 2026. SO HOW MUCH MONEY ARE THEY EXPECTING TO SPEND ON THIS PROPOSAL? YEAH, ESSENTIALLY THEY’RE GOING TO ASK CALIFORNIA VOTERS TO APPROVE A MEASURE THAT WOULD INVOLVE BORROWING $23 BILLION IN BONDS. WE WILL HAVE A LOT MORE ON THIS AT FIVE. A LOT OF QUESTIONS AROUND THA

    California’s Democratic leaders on Wednesday announced a series of efforts to distance the state from President Donald Trump’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as the state and federal government continue to clash over vaccines and science. Gov. Gavin Newsom on Wednesday signed legislation that allows the state to set future immunization guidance on credible, independent medical organizations instead of the CDC. Those organizations could include but are not limited to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Also on Wednesday, the governor and the California Department of Public Health, along with other West Coast governors, rolled out vaccine recommendations for the upcoming winter, countering advice from the CDC. The recommendations include the COVID-19 shot, flu shot, and RSV vaccine. It comes two weeks after the leaders of California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii established the West Coast Health Alliance to rebuke the Trump administration’s policies. States typically follow guidance from the CDC, but the Democratic leaders established the alliance after U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired all 17 members of the federal panel that advises on immunization practices and replaced them with vaccine skeptics. “Our states are united in putting science, safety, and transparency first — and in protecting families with clear, credible vaccine guidance. The West Coast Health Alliance stands united in protecting public health and always putting safety before politics,” the governors said in a joint statement. Separately from Newsom’s announcement Wednesday, labor groups and some California lawmakers announced an effort to try to establish their own CDC and foundation to fund medical research. The proposal specifically would involve borrowing $23 billion in bonds. The legislation, known as Senate Bill 607, would first need to pass the state Legislature before giving voters the final say on the November ballot in 2026. “In communities across California, families are counting on science to deliver cures, protect our health, and prepare us for the challenges of the future,” said Assemblymember José Luis Solache, D-Lynwood. “Donald Trump’s cuts threaten not just research, but the lives of our loved ones. This measure makes clear that Californians will take control of our future and invest in life-saving research – because our families, our health, and our economy are too important to leave in the hands of Washington politicians playing games with people’s lives.””Democrat-run states that pushed unscientific school lockdowns, toddler mask mandates, and draconian vaccine passports during the COVID era completely eroded the American people’s trust in public health agencies,” a statement from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services read. “ACIP remains the scientific body guiding immunization recommendations in this country, and HHS will ensure policy is based on rigorous evidence and Gold Standard Science, not the failed politics of the pandemic.” See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. —

    California’s Democratic leaders on Wednesday announced a series of efforts to distance the state from President Donald Trump’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as the state and federal government continue to clash over vaccines and science.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom on Wednesday signed legislation that allows the state to set future immunization guidance on credible, independent medical organizations instead of the CDC. Those organizations could include but are not limited to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American Academy of Family Physicians.

    Also on Wednesday, the governor and the California Department of Public Health, along with other West Coast governors, rolled out vaccine recommendations for the upcoming winter, countering advice from the CDC. The recommendations include the COVID-19 shot, flu shot, and RSV vaccine.

    It comes two weeks after the leaders of California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii established the West Coast Health Alliance to rebuke the Trump administration’s policies. States typically follow guidance from the CDC, but the Democratic leaders established the alliance after U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired all 17 members of the federal panel that advises on immunization practices and replaced them with vaccine skeptics.

    “Our states are united in putting science, safety, and transparency first — and in protecting families with clear, credible vaccine guidance. The West Coast Health Alliance stands united in protecting public health and always putting safety before politics,” the governors said in a joint statement.

    Separately from Newsom’s announcement Wednesday, labor groups and some California lawmakers announced an effort to try to establish their own CDC and foundation to fund medical research. The proposal specifically would involve borrowing $23 billion in bonds.

    The legislation, known as Senate Bill 607, would first need to pass the state Legislature before giving voters the final say on the November ballot in 2026.

    “In communities across California, families are counting on science to deliver cures, protect our health, and prepare us for the challenges of the future,” said Assemblymember José Luis Solache, D-Lynwood. “Donald Trump’s cuts threaten not just research, but the lives of our loved ones. This measure makes clear that Californians will take control of our future and invest in life-saving research – because our families, our health, and our economy are too important to leave in the hands of Washington politicians playing games with people’s lives.”

    “Democrat-run states that pushed unscientific school lockdowns, toddler mask mandates, and draconian vaccine passports during the COVID era completely eroded the American people’s trust in public health agencies,” a statement from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services read. “ACIP remains the scientific body guiding immunization recommendations in this country, and HHS will ensure policy is based on rigorous evidence and Gold Standard Science, not the failed politics of the pandemic.”

    See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • After backpedaling on threatening rhetoric, Newsom says his political strategy is unchanged

    [ad_1]

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom told reporters Charlie Kirk’s assassination has not changed the way he plans to approach campaigning, even after dropping a threatening name for an upcoming anti-Trump campaign. 

    The rally was originally called the “FAFO50” campaign, a reference to the phrase “F— around and find out,” which is a slang warning meaning “if you keep doing something, you’ll regret it.”

    “DONALD TRUMP IS F—— AROUND. NOW HE’LL FIND OUT,” the campaign’s marketing materials read before they were changed, according to archived images of the campaign’s website, as well as screenshots from the campaign’s official X account. The website for the campaign, which is aimed at passing an anti-gerrymandering ballot measure called Proposition 50, was ultimately changed from “FAFO50.com” to “YesOn50Live.com.” 

    “FAFO” messaging on the campaign’s website and social media account was also removed, and a related event was subsequently referred to as a “Voter Registration Day Rally” on the campaign’s social media. 

    LAWMAKERS SHARE VIEWS ON POLITICAL DISCOURSE IN US FOLLOWING CHARLIE KIRK ASSASSINATION

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom (left) said the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk (right) has not swayed his political strategy going forward amid concerns about the societal impact of inflammatory political rhetoric.  (Getty Images)

    During an event promoting a new initiative to improve the well-being of young men and boys on Tuesday, Newsom was asked whether the rebrand was part of a changing calculus for the governor on how he intends to approach campaigning going forward.

    “No,” Newsom insisted. “Because I’m the same guy that walked on the tarmac with Donald Trump. I’m the same guy that would pick up his phone call. I’m the same person that sat down not just with Charlie Kirk, but with Steve Bannon, with the guy who created this space, you know, ‘Language, Borders and Culture,’ Michael Savage, back in the 90s, you know, was the dominant voice on talk radio. The person that sat down with Newt Gingrich, who was one of the leaders of my recall. I’m that same person.”

    Newsom’s response followed a different question about the California governor’s new initiative supporting young men and boys. The governor was asked whether Kirk’s death played any role, or inspired the governor, in shaping the newly announced initiative, which builds on efforts Newsom initiated through a statewide executive order he signed earlier this summer.  

    “I appreciate the question. I mean, I believe in civility. I believe in an open hand, not a closed fist,” Newsom responded. “I just think, at the end of the day — I said it inside a moment ago — divorce is not an option, period. Full stop. We’ve got to live together, across our differences, and there are a lot of differences in this state, this nation, for that matter, the world we’re trying to build.”

    Charlie Kirk memorial in Berlin

    Memorials honoring Charlie Kirk have been held across the country and overseas, including in Berlin. Kirk was assassinated on Sept. 10, 2025. ( Ilkin Eskipehlivan /Anadolu via Getty Images)

    The nature of political discourse in the United States has become a major point of debate following Kirk’s assassination that occurred last week. Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have called on others to “turn down the heat” in the wake of Kirk’s assassination. 

    NEWSOM WARNS AMERICANS ‘YOU WILL LOSE YOUR COUNTRY’ UNDER TRUMP AT CALIFORNIA SUMMIT

    The Trump administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) put out a call for “the media, leftist groups, and sanctuary politicians” on Wednesday to tone down the “hateful rhetoric” targeting immigration enforcement officers, arguing it has contributed to “political violence in our country and a more than 1000% increase in assaults against our brave ICE law enforcement.” 

    “This demonization is inspiring violence across the country,” Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin warned. “We have to turn down the temperature before someone else is killed.”

    One example cited by DHS were comments by Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, a member of the cohort of progressive lawmakers on Capitol Hill known as “the squad.” During an interview with MSNBC on Sunday, Crockett likened ICE officers to slave catchers. “As someone who understands history, when I see ICE, I see slave patrols,” Crockett said.

    Prairieland Detention Center "ICE pig" graffiti

    An image of anti-ICE vandalism was shared with Fox News by the Justice Department after ten individuals were charged for their roles in the shooting of a Texas police officer near a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility.  (Justice Department)

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    Meanwhile, rhetoric from Newsom’s “Voter Registration Day Rally” similarly likened Republican-led redistricting efforts to “pre-Jim Crow” era policies. 

    “It’s about knowing that you can walk outside your home and not be detained and deported, not be lynched, because of the color of your skin,” California state legislator, Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove, said during the Tuesday night virtual rally promoting her state’s Proposition 50. “[Republicans] are doing every single thing that they can to take us back to pre-Jim Crow. And I am not being hyperbolic.”

    Fox News Digital did not receive a response after reaching out to Newsom’s office and campaign team to see if the governor, or any of his representatives, wanted to comment further about the decision to rebrand Tuesday night’s event promoting Proposition 50 and the broader issue of inflammatory political rhetoric following Kirk’s assassination.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • “Running out of excuses”: Gov Newsom, AG Bonta claim housing wins

    [ad_1]

    The lecturing came hot and heavy this week.  

    Government leaders took Huntington Beach and Artesia to task as the state cracks down on jurisdictions that can’t — some might say won’t — get in compliance with housing laws.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta claimed victory on Friday, when a California court of appeals ruled in their favor, forcing Huntington Beach to get a compliant housing element done in 120 days.

    The Orange County city locked horns with the state a few years ago after failing to approve plans that outline how it will address housing needs in the long term across income levels in what’s known as a housing element.

    “Today’s win is an important development,” Bonta said of the court’s decision. “Huntington Beach is running out of excuses, and the consequences for failing to plan for its fair share of housing are becoming clearer and more serious.”

    The lecturing followed Artesia’s settlement with the state on Tuesday. After falling out of compliance by not having a housing element completed in 2023, the city now has until January to figure out how it’ll accommodate 1,069 more housing units.

    Newsom accused Artesia of “wasted time and money,” while California Department of Housing and Community Development Director Gustavo Velasquez brought up cities’ “moral responsibility” when it comes to housing in the Huntington Beach ruling. 

    Some local jurisdictions say they are struggling to meet the housing targets while balancing local and state regulations around development.

    Morality and legal compliance. They’re two different conversations happening in the context of a single subject. As is so often the case, that leaves little room for common ground.

    … and cue builder’s remedy

    A builder’s remedy project in La Cañada Flintridge resulted in several years of litigation, but the city backed down from its fight in March, after a judge ordered the town to post a $14 million bond if it wanted to continue fighting against Cedar Street Partners’ mixed-use project at 600 Foothill Boulevard.

    Plans call for about 7,200 square feet of office and 80 dwelling units, of which eight would be affordable and 16 for hospitality. The firm is seeking development entitlements at city hall as well as $6 million in legal costs in court.

    Cedar Street managing member Jonathan Curtis called the city’s development pushback “bewildering.” Whether the project is now on a fast track to getting approvals remains to be seen. It’s set to go before the planning commission on Sept. 18 and city council Oct. 2.

    Bond Street’s shakeup

    David Parnes and James Harris, founders of the Bond Street Partners team at Carolwood Estates, are splitting as business partners.

    Details on what will happen with the nine other agents on their team or if the Bond Street name will be dissolved are not yet known. The two declined to say anything beyond their prepared Instagram message.

    The announcement, they said, marks the “next chapter” for their business, one that’s swelled in recent years to make Bond Street RealTrends’ No. 1-ranked medium team in the U.S. with $940 million in volume.

    Luka snags Sharapova’s pad

    Oceanfront neighborhood The Strand gets all the attention, but how about that Hill Section? That’s where Los Angeles Lakers point guard Luka Dončić paid $25 million for tennis star Maria Sharapova’s custom build.

    Carolwood Estate’s Susân Perryman was the listing agent, and it appears the property traded off market.

    The purchase price pushed past 1800 The Strand to be Manhattan Beach’s most expensive home sale ever. The Strand property claimed the record last July when the beachfront property sold for $24.5 million.

    Brad Pitt retools property portfolio, again

    Two-time Oscar winner Brad Pitt shuffled the deck on his real estate holdings yet again.

    The actor sold his Los Feliz home, known locally as The Steel House, in an off-market deal on Friday. Sources told TRD the asking price was $5.5 million. What the home actually closed at is not yet known. If the purchase price was less than $5.3 million, Pitt will have managed to bypass paying the contentious Measure ULA two-tier tax on real estate deals.

    Pitt’s agents Jonathan Mogharrabi and Marci Kays of Carolwood Estates represented the A-lister in his latest trade.

    Read more

    Q&A: La Cañada Flintridge a poster child for builder’s remedy


    Carolwood’s Parnes & Harris split, head for “next chapter”


    Luka Dončić Buys Manhattan Beach Home from Maria Sharapova

    Lakers’ Luka Dončić Snaps Up Manhattan Beach home of Maria Sharapova for $25M


    [ad_2]

    Kari Hamanaka

    Source link

  • California’s age verification bill for app stores and operating systems takes another step forward

    [ad_1]

    A California bill that would require operating system and app store providers to verify users’ ages before they can download apps has cleared the Assembly 58-0, and will now move on to Gov. Gavin Newsom, reports. The Digital Age Assurance Act (AB 1043), introduced by Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, does not require photo identification for verification, but puts the onus on the platforms to provide tools for parents to indicate the user’s age during a device’s setup, and use this information steer kids toward age-appropriate content and screen time.

    It comes after and both adopted app store age verification laws earlier this year that have been criticized as posing potential privacy risks, and faced opposition from the likes of Google and Apple. The California bill has been received more positively by Big Tech, with Google, Meta and others putting out in support of it in the leadup to a Senate vote on Friday. Kareem Ghanem, Google’s Senior Director of Government Affairs & Public Policy, called the bill “one of the most thoughtful approaches we’ve seen thus far to the challenges of keeping kids safe, recognizing that it’s a shared responsibility across the ecosystem.” Gov. Newsom now has until October 13 to sign or veto the bill, according to Politico.

    [ad_2]

    Cheyenne MacDonald

    Source link

  • California Lawmakers Once Again Challenge Newsom’s Tech Ties with AI Bill

    [ad_1]

    Last year, California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a wildly popular (among the public) and wildly controversial (among tech companies) bill that would have established robust safety guidelines for the development and operation of artificial intelligence models. Now he’ll have a second shot—this time with at least part of the tech industry giving him the green light. On Saturday, California lawmakers passed Senate Bill 53, a landmark piece of legislation that would require AI companies to submit to new safety tests.

    Senate Bill 53, which now awaits the governor’s signature to become law in the state, would require companies building “frontier” AI models—systems that require massive amounts of data and computing power to operate—to provide more transparency into their processes. That would include disclosing safety incidents involving dangerous or deceptive behavior by autonomous AI systems, providing more clarity into safety and security protocols and risk evaluations, and providing protections for whistleblowers who are concerned about the potential harms that may come from models they are working on.

    The bill—which would apply to the work of companies like OpenAI, Google, xAI, Anthropic, and others—has certainly been dulled from previous attempts to set up a broad safety framework for the AI industry. The bill that Newsom vetoed last year, for instance, would have established a mandatory “kill switch” for models to address the potential of them going rogue. That’s nowhere to be found here. An earlier version of SB 53 also applied the safety requirements to smaller companies, but that has changed. In the version that passed the Senate and Assembly, companies bringing in less than $500 million in annual revenue only have to disclose high-level safety details rather than more granular information, per Politico—a change made in part at the behest of the tech industry.

    Whether that’s enough to satisfy Newsom (or more specifically, satisfy the tech companies from whom he would like to continue receiving campaign contributions) is yet to be seen. Anthropic recently softened on the legislation, opting to throw its support behind it just days before it officially passed. But trade groups like the Consumer Technology Association (CTA) and Chamber for Progress, which count among its members companies like Amazon, Google, and Meta, have come out in opposition to the bill. OpenAI also signaled its opposition to regulations California has been pursuing without specifically naming SB 53.

    After the Trump administration tried and failed to implement a 10-year moratorium on states implementing regulations on AI, California has the opportunity to lead on the issue—which makes sense, given most of the companies at the forefront of the space are operating within its borders. But that fact also seems to be part of the reason Newsom is so shy to pull the trigger on regulations despite all his bluster on many other issues. His political ambitions require money to run, and those companies have a whole lot of it to offer.

    [ad_2]

    AJ Dellinger

    Source link

  • California lawmakers pass AI safety bill SB 53 — but Newsom could still veto | TechCrunch

    [ad_1]

    California’s state senate gave final approval early on Saturday morning to a major AI safety bill setting new transparency requirements on large companies.

    As described by its author, state senator Scott Wiener, SB 53 “requires large AI labs to be transparent about their safety protocols, creates whistleblower protections for [employees] at AI labs & creates a public cloud to expand compute access (CalCompute).”

    The bill now goes to California Governor Gavin Newsom to sign or veto. He has not commented publicly on SB 53, but last year, he vetoed a more expansive safety bill also authored by Wiener, while signing narrower legislation targeting issues like deepfakes.

    At the time, Newsom acknowledged the importance of “protecting the public from real threats posed by this technology,” but criticized Wiener’s previous bill for applying “stringent standards” to large models regardless of whether they were “deployed in high-risk environments, [involved] critical decision-making or the use of sensitive data.”

    Wiener said the new bill was influenced by recommendations from a policy panel of AI experts that Newsom convened after his veto.

    Politico also reports that SB 53 was recently amended so that companies developing “frontier” AI models while bringing in less than $500 million in annual revenue will only need to disclose high level safety details, while companies making more than that will need to provide more detailed reports.

    The bill has been opposed by a number of Silicon Valley companies, VC firms, and lobbying groups. In a recent letter to Newsom, OpenAI did not mention SB 53 specifically but argued that to avoid “duplication and inconsistencies,” companies should be considered compliant with statewide safety rules as long as they meet federal or European standards.

    Techcrunch event

    San Francisco
    |
    October 27-29, 2025

    And Andreessen Horowitz’s head of AI policy and chief legal officer recently claimed that ”many of today’s state AI bills — like proposals in California and New York — risk” crossing a line by violating constitutional limits on how states can regulate interstate commerce.

    a16z’s co-founders had previously pointed to tech regulation as one of the factors leading them to back Donald Trump’s bid for a second term. The Trump administration and its allies subsequently called for a 10-year ban on state AI regulation.

    Anthropic, meanwhile, has come out in favor of SB 53.

    “We have long said we would prefer a federal standard,” said Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark in a post. “But in the absence of that this creates a solid blueprint for AI governance that cannot be ignored.”

    [ad_2]

    Anthony Ha

    Source link

  • Bay Area voters could see sales tax measure for regional transit on 2026 ballot

    [ad_1]

    The California Legislature passed a bill that would give Bay Area voters in 2026 the power to pass a sales tax, which would fund regional transit, Sen. Scott Wiener announced Saturday.

    Senate Bill 63, named the Connect Bay Area Act, allows for a regional funding measure to be placed on the November 2026 ballot. The sales tax would be .5% with the possibility for San Francisco to increase it to 1% to help fund Muni, according to Wiener and Sen. Jesse Arreguin’s bill.

    Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Mateo and San Francisco counties would be included in the measure. And it would help fund AC Transit, BART, Caltrain, Muni, San Francisco Bay Ferry, Alameda and Contra Costa small bus operators and Golden Gate Transit.

    The bill still needs to go to Gov. Gavin Newsom, and he has until Oct. 12 to either sign or veto the bill. If voters pass the measure in 2026, it would be in place for 14 years.   

    “Keeping our trains and buses running frequently and reliably is essential for the future of the Bay Area,” said Wiener. “The risks to our essential transit systems are real, and we have a long road ahead to securing this long-term funding and stabilizing our transit systems. I’m confident that in spite of these challenges, with partnership from leaders across the region we can ensure our public transportation systems remain vibrant and reliable.”

    According to Wiener, the bill requires transit agencies to improve their financial efficiency in order to get the funding.

    The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency released a statement on lawmakers passing the bill.

    “Transit is a public necessity, connecting people to jobs, students to schools, healthcare professionals to hospitals, and all of us to the places we love most in our neighborhoods. In San Francisco, the passage of SB 63 is a step towards protecting essential Muni service and will equip us with resources to continue investing in our infrastructure, safety, and accessibility, all of which are critical to meeting the growing needs of San Francisco.  

    The SFMTA faces a significant budget deficit of $307 million beginning in 2026, despite recovering ridership. We are tackling this fiscal crisis from every angle and taking action, bringing our deficit down from over $440 million. Our work to find savings internally and becoming more financially efficient has resulted in $130 million in savings. We know more is needed to keep Muni service and programs, and move boldly towards a faster, cleaner, and more connected transit system that our customers count on.”

    BART also released a statement on SB63’s passing.

    “Senate Bill (SB) 63 is a historic opportunity to allow voters in five counties of the Bay Area to consider a 14-year sales tax measure in November 2026 to preserve and improve transit. BART, and the entire transit network that keeps the Bay Area moving, stand to benefit from this bill. 

    The legislation is needed because remote work has caused a decline in operating revenue for various operators and deficits are too large to solve through cuts alone.  Since the COVID-19 pandemic, it has been clear that BART’s outdated funding model no longer works. BART is facing annual operating deficits of $350-400 million once the emergency assistance we have been provided runs out at the end of Fiscal Year 2026.”

    As for funding in the meantime, Newsom has said he would work with the Bay Area to help secure funding for transit.

    Jose Fabian

    Jose Fabian is a web producer for CBS Bay Area where he reports on local crime, politics and breaking news. He studied political science and journalism at Sacramento State and was born and raised in Northern California.

    [ad_2]

    Jose Fabian

    Source link

  • California lawmakers pass bill to ban ‘ultraprocessed’ foods in school lunches

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO, California — A bill to ban “ultraprocessed” foods in school lunches is heading to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk, after drawing support not only from Democrats, but Republicans who linked the legislation to the MAHA movement.

    The proposal would define as ultraprocessed any food or beverage that includes flavor or color enhancers and that is high in saturated fats, sodium, or specific added sugars or sweeteners. Those foods would be phased fully out of schools by July 2032.

    The bill’s author, Democratic Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, called the moment “historic” and told POLITICO that he’s been working on these issues “before anyone had ever heard of MAHA,” or Make America Healthy Again.

    “You’ve seen a lot of folks in Washington D.C. talking about these issues, but we haven’t seen a lot of action,” he said. “We’re actually going to move the needle on protecting kids and protecting families in California.”

    How to define ultraprocessed has been hotly contested since the bill, AB 1264, was introduced in February. But Gabriel said in a committee hearing this week that he took more than 50 amendments on the bill, heeding the concerns of lawmakers and agricultural interests groups.

    The bill passed both houses with only a single “no” vote. It now goes to Newsom for a signature or veto.

    Last year, the governor signed legislation from Gabriel banning food containing certain dyes from being sold in schools by 2027.

    A coalition of industry groups, including the American Beverage Association, California Grocers Association and California Farm Bureau, remain opposed. They said in a letter on Monday that the bill ropes in too many unintended foods and would create an “unnecessary liability for schools serving these products, as well as manufacturers producing food subject to these arbitrary definitions.”

    Of those critics, Gabriel said, “every member of the state Senate disagrees with them.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California lawmakers approve bill to make it a crime for them to sign NDAs when negotiating state laws

    [ad_1]

    The California Legislature this week approved a bill that would ban state lawmakers from signing non-disclosure agreements when they decide how to use taxpayer dollars or create state laws. Non-disclosure agreements are legally binding contracts that force people to keep information secret. The California Assembly unanimously passed the measure in its final legislative vote Wednesday and sent it to Gov. Gavin Newsom to decide whether it becomes state law. The legislation is a direct result of KCRA 3’s reporting on how California’s government has either used them or allowed special interest groups to use them on a major public project and state laws.The bill, AB 1370, would make it a crime for California lawmakers to sign or force anyone to sign the secrecy agreements as they craft legislation. It would be enforced by local law enforcement and give prosecutors the power to charge lawmakers with either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the circumstances. “I think us as legislators and the governor should not be signing away the public’s right to know the deliberations of important things that will impact their lives,” said Assemblyman Joe Patterson, R-Rocklin, who wrote the proposal. “This is one step to bringing more transparency but more trust in the government, more trust in the work we do here in the legislature.” No Democratic lawmakers have spoken publicly about the proposal this year. KCRA 3 was the first to report the use of NDAs in the California Legislature’s construction of a new $1.1 billion office building for state lawmakers. The Legislature directed 2,000 people, including five state lawmakers and dozens of government workers, to sign NDAs to keep broad information about the project secret. Democratic leaders haven’t given an update on the project in years.KCRA 3 also first reported last year that state lawmakers were entirely left out of the negotiations of California’s fast-food minimum wage law, which raised pay to $20 an hour for fast-food workers across the state but provided a mysterious exemption for bakeries that sell and bake their own bread.Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office oversaw the negotiations and allowed NDAs to cover the secret talks at the insistence of a major labor organization, SEIU California. Newsom’s office has said neither the governor nor his staff signed them. Since then, no one has been able to explain the bakery exemption, but multiple sources have told KCRA 3 it was for one of the governor’s billionaire donors, who is also a Panera franchisee.Joseph Bryant, an SEIU official who is also a member of California’s Fast-Food Council, which is meant to set the wages and working conditions for the workers across the state, would not confirm or deny that he signed the NDA.Republican lawmakers twice last year tried to introduce legislation that would have broadly restricted the use of NDAs by lawmakers, staff, other government officials and lobbyists when crafting public policy. Democrats in the Assembly claimed the measure was too broad.California Attorney General Rob Bonta earlier this year would not confirm or deny if he would try to enforce the existing NDAs on the fast-food law and Capitol Annex project if anyone were to violate them. Gov. Newsom has until mid-October to sign or veto legislation. See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. —

    The California Legislature this week approved a bill that would ban state lawmakers from signing non-disclosure agreements when they decide how to use taxpayer dollars or create state laws.

    Non-disclosure agreements are legally binding contracts that force people to keep information secret.

    The California Assembly unanimously passed the measure in its final legislative vote Wednesday and sent it to Gov. Gavin Newsom to decide whether it becomes state law.

    The legislation is a direct result of KCRA 3’s reporting on how California’s government has either used them or allowed special interest groups to use them on a major public project and state laws.

    The bill, AB 1370, would make it a crime for California lawmakers to sign or force anyone to sign the secrecy agreements as they craft legislation. It would be enforced by local law enforcement and give prosecutors the power to charge lawmakers with either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the circumstances.

    “I think us as legislators and the governor should not be signing away the public’s right to know the deliberations of important things that will impact their lives,” said Assemblyman Joe Patterson, R-Rocklin, who wrote the proposal. “This is one step to bringing more transparency but more trust in the government, more trust in the work we do here in the legislature.”

    No Democratic lawmakers have spoken publicly about the proposal this year.

    KCRA 3 was the first to report the use of NDAs in the California Legislature’s construction of a new $1.1 billion office building for state lawmakers. The Legislature directed 2,000 people, including five state lawmakers and dozens of government workers, to sign NDAs to keep broad information about the project secret. Democratic leaders haven’t given an update on the project in years.

    KCRA 3 also first reported last year that state lawmakers were entirely left out of the negotiations of California’s fast-food minimum wage law, which raised pay to $20 an hour for fast-food workers across the state but provided a mysterious exemption for bakeries that sell and bake their own bread.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office oversaw the negotiations and allowed NDAs to cover the secret talks at the insistence of a major labor organization, SEIU California. Newsom’s office has said neither the governor nor his staff signed them. Since then, no one has been able to explain the bakery exemption, but multiple sources have told KCRA 3 it was for one of the governor’s billionaire donors, who is also a Panera franchisee.

    Joseph Bryant, an SEIU official who is also a member of California’s Fast-Food Council, which is meant to set the wages and working conditions for the workers across the state, would not confirm or deny that he signed the NDA.

    Republican lawmakers twice last year tried to introduce legislation that would have broadly restricted the use of NDAs by lawmakers, staff, other government officials and lobbyists when crafting public policy. Democrats in the Assembly claimed the measure was too broad.

    California Attorney General Rob Bonta earlier this year would not confirm or deny if he would try to enforce the existing NDAs on the fast-food law and Capitol Annex project if anyone were to violate them.

    Gov. Newsom has until mid-October to sign or veto legislation.

    See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

    [ad_2]

    Source link