Keeping productions in Los Angeles – and even in the country – has become a challenge, at a time when film and TV production has increasingly moved elsewhere.
Why it matters: According to FilmLA, which issues film permits, production still hasn't rebounded from the COVID-19 pandemic and delays triggered by the writers and actors' strikes in 2023. Studios and streamers also aren't ordering as many shows these days.
Why now: The issue came to national attention this month, when President Trump took to Truth Social to declare, "The movie industry in America is DYING a very fast death." He announced he would authorize a 100% tariff on movies made outside the U.S.
On a Hollywood backlot in Los Angeles, you can find a replica New York City street — complete with a diner, a newsstand, brownstones, a bodega and a subway entrance.
It's part of the Radford Studio Center, a sprawling production hub in Studio City. In 1928, silent film actor and director Mack Sennett built the studio on what was once a lettuce ranch. Classic TV shows Gunsmoke, Gilligan's Island and The Mary Tyler Moore Show were all made here. So was the hit 1990s TV show Seinfeld.
"This stage has a ton of positive juju," says Zach Sokoloff from Radford's soundstage nine, where Seinfeld taped. Sokoloff is senior vice president at Hackman Capital Partners, which manages Radford Studio Center and studios around the world.
Riding in a studio golf cart to the backlot, Sokoloff points out the spot where the show's famous episode "The Soup Nazi" was made.
The lot is full of recognizable Seinfeld spots: "Up there, you've got the balcony where Jerry threw the marbled rye," he says.
Sokoloff explains that the studio built this backlot for Seinfeld in 1994, after a massive 6.7 magnitude earthquake rocked Los Angeles and destroyed much of the set.
"There was trepidation about remaining in LA, so we decided to bring New York to the production, as opposed to having the production go to New York," he says.
Building a replica New York City is what it took to convince Seinfeld to stay in California, says Sokoloff. But keeping productions in the area – and even in the country – has become a challenge, at a time when film and TV production has increasingly moved elsewhere.
The issue came to national attention this month, when President Trump took to Truth Social to declare, "The movie industry in America is DYING a very fast death." He announced he would authorize a 100% tariff on movies made outside the U.S.
Trump's proclamation — prompted by a visit from one of his "special ambassadors" to Hollywood, Jon Voight – shocked and confused film industries around the world. But the president quickly paused to consider the idea, saying he'd meet with industry leaders because he wanted "to make them happy." In the days since, Voight, and fellow "ambassador" Sylvester Stallone teamed up with the Motion Picture Association and several industry unions to craft a letter urging the president to consider enacting federal tax incentives and adjusting certain tax provisions to increase film and TV production in the United States.
The entire episode opened a conversation about the decline of TV and movie-making — and what can be done about it.
A worldwide competition for production work
According to FilmLA, which issues film permits, production still hasn't rebounded from the COVID-19 pandemic and delays triggered by the writers and actors' strikes in 2023. Studios and streamers also aren't ordering as many shows these days.
"With less work to go around, the competition for what's left is intensified," says spokesman Philip Sokoloski.
Most states have some sort of financial incentive for productions. So do nearly 100 countries, including Canada, the U.K., Ireland and Australia.
"Even Thailand [has incentives]," says Joe Chianese, senior vice president of Entertainment Partners, a global production services company. "The recent season of The White Lotus was shot entirely in Thailand. With the number of incentives here in the U.S. and around the world, producers really have a lot of choices."
He says that productions can bring a lot of money to an area at once, "which is a real stimulus to the economy, creating jobs." The trend of what's known as "runaway production" began in the late 1990s, he says, when Canada introduced tax credits for film and TV production, and "you saw that rolling out in other countries."
Ever since, there's been global competition for entertainment jobs and bragging rights.
Even within the U.S., states are competing for production
Within the U.S., states are jockeying to get those show business jobs. Last week, New York passed its budget with an $100 million increase in funds dedicated to production incentives, setting aside a total of $800 million.
This week, thanks to New Jersey's tax credits, Netflix broke ground on new soundstages, a backlot, and post-production facilities on a former U.S. Army base at Fort Monmouth.
"Small fraction of the Texas budget surplus could turn this state into the new Hollywood," actor Woody Harrelson says in a recent video, teaming up with Matthew McConaughey, Billy Bob Thornton, Dennis Quaid and Renée Zellweger.
"No shade to Texas, but I think people would rather film in California," says Steven Jaworski, vice president of production for A&E Studios.
Jaworski is in charge of budgeting for the Netflix series The Lincoln Lawyer, a legal drama produced at Los Angeles Center Studios, not far from City Hall and other downtown locations where the show often shoots.
"The reality is this show could be shot anywhere," he says from the set of The Lincoln Lawyer. "LA is a character to our story … but as costs increase, whether it's inflation or even the way that the economy may be going, there may be a mandate of 'you have to cut your costs,' and the only way to keep the show going would be to relocate. It would be heartbreaking if this show had to leave."
Long before Trump's announcement, Jaworski and others were sounding the alarm about productions leaving California.
"The situation's so dire," he says, "that if something is not done this summer, I truly believe California being the entertainment capital of the world and the production capital of the world — I think that will be a thing of the past."
California needs a comeback, studio executives and grassroots groups agree
It wasn't until 2009 that California began offering tax credits to film there – and by that time, production was already moving elsewhere to take advantage of lucrative credits. The California legislation was even nicknamed "The Ugly Betty Bill" – after the hit ABC series that moved its production from California to New York for the tax credits there.
But California's existing tax credit program badly needs updating, according to Casey Bloys, the chairman and CEO of HBO and Max Content.
"The talent is here, the infrastructure is here. We have a number of shows, including Hacks, that are shooting here," he said on a panel at the Milken Institute earlier this month. "But the issue becomes, when you try to plan, you have to get into a lottery, and you're not sure your show is going to get a tax break or not."
Ravi Ahuja, President and CEO of Sony Pictures Entertainment, speaks at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills in May.
(
Patrick T. Fallon
/
AFP via Getty Images
)
Sony Pictures Entertainment CEO and president Ravi Ahuja also made the case for helping out the state.
"While it's true a lot of production has left the United States, it's even worse for California," he said on a panel. He and other studio executives said they like filming in LA, but also want to be able to film and shoot on location around the world.
To solve the problem, California Gov. Gavin Newsom has already been pushing to more than double California's tax credit program, and two bills going through the state legislature would expand the types of productions that are eligible for credits.
After Trump introduced the idea of movie tariffs, he blamed Newsom for allowing the Hollywood jobs to leave. Newsom stood by the program in California and the incentive increases he's already proposed. He also volunteered to help the president craft a $7.5 billion dollar federal tax credit plan. "America continues to be a film powerhouse, and California is all in to bring more production here. Building on our successful state program, we're eager to partner with the Trump administration to further strengthen domestic production and Make America Film Again," he said in a statement.
Despite the recent attention on keeping production in the country, industry leaders in California still say the program there needs help. Boosting California's budget and revising its tax credit program would offer a reward for productions made in the state, not a punishing tariff for producing outside the U.S., says Pamala Buzick Kim, co-founder of a grassroots group called Stay in LA.
The group has been lobbying for enhanced incentives to keep production in California.
"A lot of people outside of LA think that when you say Hollywood, everyone's rich," Kim says. "I wish that that was the case. But 99% of us who are in production really are your everyday working class folks."
Kim says Trump's movie tariff idea "definitely sent a spiral of confusion through the industry and through the international market, but the fact that we are getting attention at a national level is great."
Kim says it's important to preserve LA's legacy and its biggest greatest export.
"We have generations of people who have been in this business who are in this area who are the best of the best. And we need to protect that."
Federal changes may cause drastic drop in coverage
Aaron Schrank
has been on the ground, reporting on homelessness and other issues in L.A. for more than a decade.
Published May 4, 2026 4:58 PM
County officials estimate that recent Medi-Cal changes could put coverage at risk for hundreds of thousands of residents.
(
Maya Sugarman
/
LAist
)
Topline:
The number of Californians without health insurance could double from 2 million today to 4 million by 2030, according to a report from the Legislative Analyst's Office. It’s the state budget office’s preliminary attempt to quantify how federal legislation known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill” will reshape healthcare access statewide.
Losing coverage: The One Big Beautiful Bill is driving nearly 90% of the projected coverage loss, according to the LAO report. It's mostly Medi-Cal enrollees who are expected to be dropped when new work requirements take effect in 2027. The remaining 10% are largely people leaving the state's health insurance marketplace, Covered California, after enhanced federal premium subsidies expired last year.
L.A. County impact: County officials estimate that recent Medi-Cal changes could put coverage at risk for hundreds of thousands of residents and cost the county’s health departments about $800 million a year. A U.C. Berkeley Labor Center analysis projected more than 1 million Medi-Cal enrollees could lose coverage by 2028.
Why it matters: More uninsured people means hospitals and clinics provide more services without getting paid. The LAO projects that uncompensated care costs at hospitals could grow by several billion dollars statewide by 2030. Clinics face steeper losses because they run on smaller budgets and depend more heavily on Medi-Cal revenue. The LAO also projects premiums on the individual health insurance market will rise as healthier people drop coverage.
What's being proposed: The LAO itself doesn’t recommend new spending and instead urges lawmakers to track what happens to hospitals, clinics and county programs before taking action. But both L.A. County and state officials are pushing tax efforts to combat federal cuts. LA County voters will decide June 2 onMeasure ER, a half-cent sales tax that would generate about $1 billion a year for hospitals and clinics. ANovember statewide ballot initiative would impose a one-time 5% tax on Californians worth over $1 billion and direct 90% of proceeds to Medi-Cal.
The number of Californians without health insurance could double from 2 million today to 4 million by 2030, according to a report from the state Legislative Analyst's Office. It’s the state budget office’s preliminary attempt to quantify how federal legislation known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill” will reshape healthcare access statewide.
The One Big Beautiful Bill is driving nearly 90% of the projected coverage loss, according to the LAO report. It's mostly Medi-Cal enrollees who are expected to be dropped when new work requirements take effect in 2027. The remaining 10% are largely people leaving the state's health insurance marketplace, Covered California, after enhanced federal premium subsidies expired last year.
What's the impact to coverage?
L.A. County officials estimate that recent Medi-Cal changes could put coverage at risk for hundreds of thousands of residents and cost the health departments about $800 million a year. A UC Berkeley Labor Center analysis projected more than 1 million Medi-Cal enrollees could lose coverage by 2028.
The LAO report also warns that county indigent health programs for uninsured residents will soon face a surge in demand they’re not prepared to meet. Those county programs had enrolled about 850,000 people statewide before the federal government expanded Medicaid coverage in 2014. Total enrollment is currently 10,000 statewide, but the trend is going to reverse, according to the report.
What's the impact to health-care providers?
More uninsured people means hospitals and clinics provide more services without getting paid. The LAO projects that uncompensated care costs at hospitals could grow by several billion dollars statewide by 2030. Clinics face steeper losses because they run on smaller budgets and depend more heavily on Medi-Cal revenue.
The LAO also projects premiums on the individual health insurance market will rise as healthier people drop coverage.
What are proposals to help?
The LAO itself doesn’t recommend new spending and instead urges lawmakers to track what happens to hospitals, clinics and county programs before taking action. But both L.A. County and state officials are pushing tax efforts to combat federal cuts.
L.A. County voters will decide June 2 on Measure ER, a half-cent sales tax that would generate about $1 billion a year for hospitals and clinics. ANovember statewide ballot initiative would impose a one-time 5% tax on Californians worth over $1 billion and direct 90% of proceeds to Medi-Cal.
California says insurer mishandled wildfire claims
Erin Stone
covers climate and environmental issues in Southern California.
Published May 4, 2026 4:40 PM
An insurance office burned by the Eaton Fire in Altadena.
(
Kevin Tidmarsh
/
LAist
)
Topline:
California regulators say State Farm has illegally delayed, underpaid and denied claims from policyholders affected by the 2025 L.A. fires — something fire survivors have said for months.
The investigation: The state analyzed 220 randomly selected claims filed in response to last year’s fires and found hundreds of violations by State Farm in more than half them — what state attorneys dubbed a “troubling pattern” in their filing.
The insurer's response: State Farm denied the allegations and called them politically motivated.
Read on ... for more on the state's action against its largest home insurer.
California regulators say State Farm has illegally delayed, underpaid and denied claims from policyholders affected by the 2025 L.A. fires — something fire survivors have said for months.
The California Department of Insurance announced Monday that it has taken the first step in the process to bring the allegations to a public hearing before an administrative judge. That could result in the state’s largest home insurer paying up to about $4 million in penalties, and suspension of its license for up to a year, meaning it could not write new policies in California during that time.
“Our investigation found that State Farm delayed, underpaid, and buried policyholders in red tape at the worst moment of their lives,” state Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara said in a statement.
The state analyzed 220 randomly selected claims — out of more than 11,000 filed with State Farm in response to last year’s fires — and found hundreds of violations in more than half them. Attorneys for the state called it a “troubling pattern” in their filing.
State Farm denied the allegations and called the state’s move “politically motivated” in a lengthy statement posted to its website.
Every Fire Survivors Network, a coalition representing thousands of L.A. fire survivors, pressured the state for months to investigate State Farm’s handling of wildfire claims.
Joy Chen, who co-founded the group after her home was damaged in the Eaton Fire, said the state’s action is far from enough.
“It’s just very disappointing to see our regulator issue a report that shows his own failures over the last 16 months,” she told LAist.
Only a few dozen homes have been rebuilt so far in both Altadena and Pacific Palisades since the fires destroyed more than 16,000 buildings, mostly homes, in those communities and nearby areas.
A survey by the nonprofit Department of Angels last year found that nearly three-quarters of L.A. fire survivors reported delays, denials and low payouts of their claims across all insurers.
“What we need is for all State Farm contracts to be enforced so that Los Angeles families can have the money that we need to move forward with getting back home,” Chen said.
The state’s alleged violations carry a fine of up to $5,000, and up to $10,000 if the violations are found to be willful. The case will be heard by a state administrative law judge, who will provide a recommendation to Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara on a possible penalty.
The Insurance Department said people with homeowners policies from any insurer can report problems with their claims at insurance.ca.gov or by calling (800) 927-4357.
Keep up with LAist.
If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less.
Adolfo Guzman-Lopez
is an arts and general assignment reporter on LAist's Explore LA team.
Published May 4, 2026 3:15 PM
The FIFA World Cup trophy is displayed during the official draw ceremony held at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. on Dec. 5, 2025.
(
Pool
/
Getty Images North America
)
Topline:
Details are out for FIFA’s World Cup Fan Zone parties in LA County in June and July. Watch tournament matches at ten locations from Venice Beach to Pomona, from free to $$$ with food, drink, and big screens.
Why it matters: The FIFA Fan Zones offer people an opportunity to get a taste of the tournament while not breaking the bank to pay for tickets.
The locations: The Original Farmers Market in L.A., June 18-21; The City of Downey, June 20; LA Union Station, June 25-28; Hansen Dam Lake, July 2-5; Magic Johnson Park, July 4-5; Whittier Narrows, July 9-11; Venice Beach, July 11; The Fairplex, July 14-15, July 18-19; West Harbor, July 14-15, July 18-19; Downtown Burbank, July 18-19
Some are free: The Fan Zones in the city of Downey, Union Station L.A., “Magic” Johnson Park, and Whittier Narrows are free of charge.
Yes, you could put a screen in your backyard and call up your friends to watch a particularly compelling World Cup game after the tournament begins June 12.
But FIFA is turning each game into a public celebration, sponsoring 10 outdoor Fan Zone watch parties with large viewing screens across L.A. County through the final on July 19.
Details were released on Monday, including locations, dates and prices.
The Fan Zones open in a staggered schedule from one day to four days each, starting with the Original Farmers Market on June 18 - 21, and then popping up across the region until the glorious end on July 19 in downtown Burbank.
Fan Zones across L.A. County:
The Original Farmers Market in L.A., June 18-21 The City of Downey, June 20 LA Union Station, June 25-28 Hansen Dam Lake, July 2-5 "Magic" Johnson Park, July 4-5 Whittier Narrows, July 9-11 Venice Beach, July 11 The Fairplex, July 14-15, July 18-19 West Harbor, July 14-15, July 18-19 Downtown Burbank, July 18-19
Ticket prices range from free (City of Downey, Union Station L.A., “Magic” Johnson Park, Whittier Narrows) to over $300 for a VIP experience with a viewing lounge and a concert at the downtown Burbank Fan Zone on the day of the World Cup final match on July 19.
Fan Zone kick off
At the first Fan Zone, at The Original Farmers Market from June 18 for four days, entry will cost you $5 per day or $17 for all four days. Kids age 3 and under are free. (FIFA says the zones are family friendly).
You’ll be able to see four matches there each of the four days, including Mexico vs. South Korea on June 18 at 6 p.m. and USA vs. Australia on June 19 at noon.
FIFA World Cup 2026 scarves are displayed during the ribbon cutting for the LAX/Metro Transit Center rail and bus public transportation station at LAX on June 6, 2025.
(
Patrick T. Fallon
/
Getty Images
)
You won’t have to squint to find your favorite player or catch the goals. The Farmer’s Market will include a 30-foot viewing screen as well as a 15-foot secondary screen to watch the games. There will be beer gardens, and you can purchase food from the Market's dozens of establishments.
Other Fan Zones
The West Harbor L.A. Fan Zone will give people an opportunity to experience the newest major development along the San Pedro waterfront, a 42-acre waterfront district that’s been years in the making.
The Union Station L.A. Fan Zone on June 25 is free and includes match viewing, music, food, and immersive fan experiences, featuring live DJs.
The final Fan Zone opens July 18 and 19 in downtown Burbank for the World Cup’s last two matches. FIFA says it’ll include “an adjacent international street fair filled with global flavors and cultural experiences.” Tickets range from $25 to over $300
This of course, isn’t the only opportunity to watch World Cup matches with groups of people in SoCal. The city of L.A. will host its own watch parties.
Many college campuses either don’t track their populations of rural students.
(
Larry Gordon
/
EdSource
)
Topline:
Up against a massive court backlog that can drag their cases for years, asylum seekers face steep costs when pursuing their dreams of college in California.
Facing a double blow: Asylum-seeking students in California often face a double blow: they are charged higher tuition for nonresidents and excluded from most financial aid. For students and their families, this can mean thousands of dollars paid out of pocket and years of financial stress as their immigration cases remain unresolved. Before establishing residency, asylum-seeking students are charged non-resident rates, which are about three times what state residents pay for public universities and roughly eight to 13 times more for community colleges, depending on the district.
Policy changes stoke uncertainty: As of February 2026, a little over 2.3 million immigrants are awaiting asylum hearings nationwide, according to Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, which tracks federal activity. The most recent data shows California alone had about 169,000 pending asylum cases in its immigration courts by the end of 2023 — the second-largest backlog of any state. The average wait for an asylum hearing in California was 1,412 days at that time. The Trump administration paused asylum cases in November, creating even further delays. The administration has now allowed cases to resume for applicants from all but 40 countries.
Up against a massive court backlog that can drag their cases for years, asylum seekers face steep costs when pursuing their dreams of college in California.
Asylum-seeking students in California often face a double blow: they are charged higher tuition for nonresidents and excluded from most financial aid. For students and their families, this can mean thousands of dollars paid out of pocket and years of financial stress as their immigration cases remain unresolved.
Before establishing residency, asylum-seeking students are charged non-resident rates, which are about three times what state residents pay for public universities and roughly eight to 13 times more for community colleges, depending on the district.
All asylum seekers are disqualified from federal financial aid. The few who qualify for California’s state aid may never know their options, or face hurdles in obtaining it due to a patchwork of financial aid processes.
The state’s higher education systems are not mandated to track asylum seekers, making state budget impacts nearly unquantifiable during legislative attempts to expand financial aid eligibility.
“I only see them struggling,” said Eric Cline, social services program director at OASIS Legal Services, which supports LGBTQ+ asylum seekers across the Bay Area and Central Valley. “I’m always surprised (when) a few clients tell me 'I just graduated from college.’ I think, ‘Wow, how did that happen?’”
Policy changes stoke uncertainty for asylum seekers
Asylum seeking is one of the least-protected immigration statuses in the U.S. Asylum seekers, who’ve fled their home countries fearing persecution and are asking the U.S. for protection, differ from refugees, whose status is granted before they enter the country. Asylum seekers apply upon arriving in the U.S.
Applicants can stay as their cases remain pending for years, though experts say the Trump administration is expediting deportations for numerous asylum seekers and ending cases before they can receive a full hearing.
As of February 2026, a little over 2.3 million immigrants are awaiting asylum hearings nationwide, according to Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, which tracks federal activity. The most recent data shows California alone had about 169,000 pending asylum cases in its immigration courts by the end of 2023 — the second-largest backlog of any state. The average wait for an asylum hearing in California was 1,412 days at that time.
The Trump administration paused asylum cases in November, creating even further delays. The administration has now allowed cases to resume for applicants from all but 40 countries. In the San Francisco immigration court system, which is popular among asylum seekers due to higher acceptance rates, a combination of firings by the Trump administration, retirements and relocations whittled the 21 immigration judges to two, according to reporting in Mission Local. Left behind is a caseload of nearly 119,000 immigration cases, the highest of any immigration court in California.
President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” also established new fees for asylum seekers, placing additional pressure on an already low-income population. Applicants must now pay an initial $100 application fee plus $100 per year while their case is pending, $550 for a work permit, and $745 each year to renew the permit. In addition, a new rule proposed by the Department of Homeland Security would effectively end the ability of asylum seekers to obtain work permits at all.
Royce Hall on the UCLA campus
(
Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times via Getty Imag
/
Los Angeles Times
)
As they await a decision, asylum seekers are excluded from federal aid and some state financial aid programs, including Cal Grants under California law.
For one asylum seeker, Carol, being ineligible for financial aid meant she had to take time off from school to work to make ends meet. CalMatters is not using her full name because she fears speaking publicly may jeopardize her asylum case.
Carol did speak before the Assembly Higher Education Committee in 2023 urging lawmakers to pass AB 888, which would have expanded Cal Grant eligibility to certain asylum seekers. The bill ultimately did not pass.
She said she arrived in the United States at 17 and had spent more than six years waiting for her case to move through immigration courts, a period during which she said she was ineligible for financial aid.
“I’ve had to delay my educational journey several times, including going part-time and even taking a semester off from school to work,” Carol told lawmakers.
Without access to aid, she said she experienced homelessness, couch surfing and at one point slept on a mattress topper on a hardwood floor because she could not afford a bed. She worked multiple jobs at a time, skipped meals and attended class without the required course materials.
Her story, she said, was not new. Carol told the committee that four years earlier her brother had testified with a nearly identical experience on behalf of a previous bill that was ultimately vetoed, a cycle she argued could have been prevented.
“Had California taken action then, I wouldn’t have had to face the harrowing experiences that I shared with you today,” she said.
Despite the barriers, Carol graduated from Cal State Long Beach and worked as a caseworker with the International Rescue Committee, helping resettle refugees and asylum seekers. She told lawmakers she hopes to pursue a law degree and become an international human rights attorney.
The narrow path to college aid for asylum-seeking students
Many asylum seekers arrive eager to continue studies they began abroad, but quickly run into what Cline calls “a brick wall."
“All of our clients are low-income … they’re almost never eligible for generalized financial aid,” he said. “When you take away the financial aid aspect, it makes (college) pretty inaccessible.”
For California residents, annual undergraduate tuition is $15,588 at the University of California, $6,838 at the California State University and about $1,380 for 30 units at a community college. Students classified as non-residents — including some asylum seekers before establishing residency — can pay $54,858 at a University of California, about $20,968 at a Cal State before campus-based fees, and roughly $10,140 to $13,560 for 30 units at a community college, depending on the district. These figures do not include campus-based fees, housing or living expenses.
Even when students do manage to establish residency, the cost is still steep. For the many asylum seekers who arrive in the United States as adults, they may not have attended a California school previously, barring them from qualifying for state financial aid.
AB 540, the 2001 law that exempts undocumented students from paying non-resident tuition, only applies if the student attended a California high school or community college for three years.
Those who qualify through AB 540 can fill out the California Dream Act Application for state financial aid, such as Cal Grants, university system-specific grants, state loans, and the state’s middle class scholarship.
The application process can still be confusing for asylum seekers whose status is not fully accounted for in the design of the application. For example, asylum seekers often have Social Security numbers for work authorization, but affirming so while answering the financial aid pre-screening questions leads to undetermined eligibility because the questions don’t take into account the nuances of applying as an asylum seeker.
Stickers and flyers on a table in the Undocumented Community Center at the College of San Mateo in San Mateo, on Nov. 28, 2023. At this center, undocumented students can access financial and legal aid as well as guidance in navigating grant applications.
(
Amaya Edwards
/
CalMatters
)
Asylum seekers often require extra help from financial aid counselors, but even counselors may not know how to help navigate eligibility rules. Students often wind up seeking help from undocumented student resource centers on public campuses, which are designed to help students who lack legal residency and those from mixed-status families find aid and academic support.
Kaveena Singh, the director of immigration legal services at the East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, which provides legal services to low-income immigrants, noted that she herself has written letters to financial aid offices to help explain the in-between nature of the few asylum-seeking students she has served.
As an asylum-seeking student in his mid-20s, L. ended up qualifying for state financial aid through AB 540. However, he misunderstood for six years exactly what aid he qualified for. L. wished to withhold his name and the names of the institutions he’s attended for fear of negative impacts on his pending asylum case.
Initially, community college didn’t cost him anything — but when he transferred to a large four-year university, the cost of college soared. He went to his university's financial aid office for help so often that all the staff there knew his name. It was a "big relief” when he was finally able to successfully fill out the California Dream Act Application, and obtain financial aid for his summer and fall quarters.
L.'s asylum case has been pending for nine years. He, his dad, mom and younger brother arrived in the United States in the winter of 2016, claiming asylum under fear of political retribution. His father organized political assemblies in China, and his mother was forced to have an abortion under the one-child policy.
“I just wish I could go home and visit family and friends and catch up for a good few weeks in the summer here and there to reconnect with my past,” L. said. “It's like there's two separate lives, like two entities being artificially cut.”
L. worked throughout high school and college, and worried about affording school.
Most days, the combination of family trauma and the limbo of waiting for his case means L. survives through “constant compartmentalization.”
In the meantime, he tries to carry on — he studies politics, and is interested in international relations and human rights.
"As rough as all that's happened, the silver lining is that one day hopefully I get a passport and a green card," L. said. "To help other people avoid such a hassle will be just as fulfilling for me."
Previous legislative efforts have failed
Legislative bills to extend state financial aid eligibility to asylum-seeking students have been introduced at least twice in recent years but have failed.
One attempt came in 2019, when Sen. Ben Allen, a Democrat from El Segundo, introduced SB 296, a bill that would have extended Cal Grant eligibility to students with pending asylum applications. The measure passed the Legislature with some bipartisan support, but was vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said that it would "impose costs on the General Fund that must be weighed in the annual budget process."
“That was frustrating, but I understood it,” Allen told CalMatters. “The real issue is that we don’t have good data. Our schools don’t track asylum seekers, so we can’t easily calculate the cost.”
UC data on asylum-seeking students is protected due to privacy policies, according to Stett Holbrook, a UC spokesperson. The Cal State system reports it has less than 500 students with "asylum status," which includes both those who have an asylum granted and asylum seekers, according to Cal State spokesperson Amy Bentley-Smith. The numbers are self-reported during the admissions process.
In spring 2025, 13,507 students self-identified as “refugee/asylee” across the California Community Colleges — up from 11,537 the prior semester — per the CCC DataMart. The data does not include a category for just asylum seekers. Students can self-identify their immigration status while applying, but asylum seekers are not specifically tracked, according to the college system’s spokesperson Melissa Villarin.
Four years after SB 296 failed, Democrat Sabrina Cervantes — then representing Riverside in the Assembly and now as a state senator — revived the proposal through AB 888, introduced in 2023. Like Allen’s earlier bill, AB 888 sought to make Cal Grants accessible to students with pending asylum applications by creating a direct eligibility pathway outside the AB 540 residency requirements. The bill passed the Assembly unanimously but was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee last September, effectively ending its chances for the year.
Cervantes declined an interview with CalMatters. “My Assembly Bill 888 would have created a new pathway for pending asylum seekers in California to apply for Cal Grant financial aid in pursuit of their higher education,” Cervantes wrote in a statement.
Newsom’s office declined to say whether he would support a future version of the proposal, pointing instead to his brief 2019 veto message.
“There’s nervousness around anything that involves new expenses," Allen said. “... We’re going to have to spend some time seeing what information we can get with regards to better data to get better estimated costs. I think that will help to better inform the conversation."
Andrea Baltodano and Chrissa Olson are contributors with the College Journalism Network, a collaboration between CalMatters and student journalists from across California. CalMatters higher education coverage is supported by a grant from the College Futures Foundation.
