Sponsored message
Logged in as
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
  • Listen Now Playing Listen

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • Changes and confusion coming in 2025
    Typical traffic on a Los Angeles freeway.
    A motorcycle officer weaves through traffic on a Los Angeles freeway during the evening rush hour on April 12, 2023 in Los Angeles.

    Topline:

    Starting Jan. 1, car buyers who purchase a faulty vehicle will have to navigate a new version of California’s “lemon law” that for five decades has given consumers the right to demand car companies fix or replace defective vehicles they sell.

    New version brings confusion: The confusion stems from a law Gov. Gavin Newsom reluctantly signed in late September that adds new timetables and rules for consumers seeking reimbursement or a replacement for a defective vehicle. Adding to the confusion, the California Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that the state’s lemon law doesn’t require manufacturers to honor a car’s warranty when it’s re-sold as a used vehicle, even if it's within the car's warranty timeframe.

    Lemon law cases in the courts: The number of such cases in California courts climbed from nearly 15,000 in 2022 to more than 22,000 last year. In Los Angeles County, nearly 10% of all civil filings are now lemon law cases.

    The year 2025 is shaping up to be a confusing one for Californians unlucky enough to buy a new or used car that turns out to be a clunker.

    Starting Jan. 1, car buyers who purchase a faulty vehicle will have to navigate a new version of California’s “lemon law” that for five decades has given consumers the right to demand car companies fix or replace defective vehicles they sell.

    That is, unless lawmakers quickly pass a law that allows some of the car companies to opt out of the new requirements.

    The confusion stems from a law Gov. Gavin Newsom reluctantly signed in late September, after the bill was hastily jammed through the Legislature in the waning days of the session following secret negotiations between lobbyists.
    Newsom said it was important to address the problem of California’s courts getting clogged with lemon law cases, even as critics said the bill significantly watered down consumer protections.

    But Newsom said he signed it only after lawmakers said they’d introduce legislation next year to make the reforms voluntary for automakers.

    Lawmakers have already introduced legislation that they say meets Newsom’s demands. It’s now anyone’s guess how long it will take the bill to make it through the Senate and the Assembly and get Newsom’s signature. Meanwhile, portions of the new lemon law take effect Jan. 1; others in April.

    Adding to the confusion, a month after Newsom signed the new lemon bill, Assembly Bill 1755, the California Supreme Court ruled that the state’s lemon law doesn’t require manufacturers to honor a car’s warranty when it’s re-sold as a used vehicle. Before the Supreme Court’s ruling, courts had interpreted the lemon law to require manufacturers to replace or repair a defective used car or truck if the clunker was sold within the window of its original new-vehicle warranty.

    The justices said that if Californians have a problem with how they’ve interpreted the statute, state lawmakers are welcome to write a new bill.

    “Those arguments are best directed to the Legislature, which remains free to amend the definition of ‘new motor vehicle’ to include used vehicles with a balance remaining on the manufacturer’s new car warranty,” the court wrote in its Oct. 31 opinion. At least one lawmaker has suggested to CalMatters he and his colleagues could take the court up on that suggestion.

    As the Legislature sorts this out, Rosemary Shahan of Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety said car buyers next year are going to have a tough time figuring out what to do if they drive a lemon off the lot.

    “It’s going to be really confusing for consumers,” she said.

    Lemon law cases clog California courts

    California’s lemon law defines a “lemon” vehicle as one that has serious warranty defects that the manufacturer can’t fix, even after multiple attempts. The lemon law applies only to disputes involving the manufacturer’s new vehicle warranty.

    If the manufacturer or dealer is unable to repair a serious warranty defect in a vehicle after what the law says is a “reasonable” number of attempts, the manufacturer must either replace it or refund its purchase price, whichever the customer prefers, according to the California Department of Consumer Affairs.

    Disputes can be resolved through arbitration or in court if a consumer sues. The new lemon law was a compromise between U.S. automakers, consumer attorneys and judges who came together to address a growing backlog of lemon law cases in the state’s courts.

    The number of such cases in California courts climbed from nearly 15,000 in 2022 to more than 22,000 last year. In Los Angeles County, nearly 10% of all civil filings are now lemon law cases.

    Proponents argue the bill Newsom signed will speed up the process of getting consumers a working vehicle, while setting new procedural rules for the litigation process that will ease the burden on courts.

    A graph noting carmakers on a left hand column. Orange bars stretch to the right indicating how many cars sold by each carmaker was involved in a lemon law case.

    But Shahan and other critics argue the changes will primarily benefit U.S. car companies, since they’re the ones most commonly sued under the state’s lemon law at the expense of consumers. Foreign car companies largely opposed the measure.

    Shahan says the statistics on lemon law cases show why U.S automakers wanted the rule changed. U.S. car companies have a significantly higher number of lemon law cases in California than their foreign counterparts.

    It’s also why, if lawmakers pass the bill Newsom wants, the foreign companies are likely to choose to abide by the original version of the lemon law.

    In the meantime, until lawmakers pass the pending legislation, buyers who purchase any defective new vehicle will have less time to sue, and they’ll get less money from rebates, according to Shahan and other critics.

    The new rules also shrink the period they can use the lemon law to just six years instead of the entire life of a vehicle’s warranty, which can last longer, Shahan said.

    And because of the Supreme Court’s ruling that said new vehicle warranties do not cover the car once it’s resold used, plaintiffs such as Mariana Alvarado Rodriguez are now feeling the squeeze.

    Court ruling impacts used lemon vehicle disputes

    In 2021, Alvarado Rodriguez, a seasonal farmworker who lives in Tulare County, purchased a 2018 GMC Sierra 1500 with 40,002 miles from a Fresno County car dealer for $25,000, according to court records.

    Almost immediately after she drove it off the lot, she said the truck started having mechanical problems that she claims should have been covered under the vehicle’s warranties. But she said the car’s maker, General Motors, refused to honor them.

    “I kept making payments,” she said in Spanish. “Then … I finally decided to get an attorney and told the dealership, ‘That truck, it just doesn’t work.’ ”

    A Fresno County judge tossed her lawsuit a year later after the Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled in a separate case that warranties that would apply to new cars don’t carry over if the vehicle is sold again. The Supreme Court affirmed that judgment.

    Alvarado Rodriguez said she still doesn’t have reliable transportation for when she returns to work this spring in the fruit-packing sheds.

    “The process has been so long,” she said. “It’s really, really affected me.”

    Democratic Sen. Tom Umberg of Santa Ana is one of the authors of the new lemon law reforms slated to take effect next year. He also co-wrote the new legislation in December to address Newsom’s concerns. For now, it doesn’t address the Supreme Court’s ruling that impacted used vehicle warranty claims like Alvarado Rodriguez’s.

    He said lawmakers will likely take that issue up as well when they reconvene after the holidays.

    “I would expect that there would be further conversation,” he said. “At least it’s my point of view that you don’t want consumers to be hoodwinked.”

  • Homelessness agency blows federal deadline
    LAHSA-COMMISSION
    This April 2025 image shows an agency logo on a wall inside a LAHSA Commission meeting.

    Topline:
    The Los Angeles region’s homelessness agency missed a Tuesday deadline to submit a federally required annual audit of the agency’s financial records, which could jeopardize its federal funding.

    The agency's interim CEO blamed the blown deadline on leadership turnover and competing demands on the finance team.
    Why it matters: LAHSA manages hundreds of millions in federal dollars for homelessness services across L.A. County. Missing the audit deadline could put that funding at risk.

    LAHSA officials say the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development — or HUD — seems understanding. LAist reached out to HUD for comment but hasn't received any.

    How we got here: An outside auditor said LAHSA was supposed to turn over its financial statements around December but didn't submit them until March. The auditor's draft report also flags a "significant deficiency" in how LAHSA detects accounting errors — a finding LAHSA may contest.

    What's next: On Tuesday, LAHSA officials said the single audit would be filed within the next few weeks.

    LAHSA also said it has tapped accounting firm KPMG to overhaul its financial systems. The agency's interim CEO acknowledged that the current system "is not working at all."

    The Los Angeles region’s homelessness agency will miss a Tuesday deadline for submitting its federally required annual audit of the agency’s financial records, which could jeopardize its federal funding.

    LAHSA executives blamed the delay on a “perfect storm” of leadership changes and competing priorities within LAHSA’s finance department, including an L.A. County review of LAHSA’s delayed payments to contractors.

    “Our staff made a good-faith effort to meet the deadline,” interim CEO Gita O’Neill said at a LAHSA Commission meeting Tuesday. “However, over the past year, we've experienced several transitions. As a result, we could not get all the required materials to the auditors as quickly as needed.”

    Each year, LAHSA, like all non-federal agencies and organizations that get substantial federal dollars, is required to hire an outside auditor to determine whether it’s properly tracking and reporting the taxpayer funds it manages.

    LAHSA’s single audit report for last fiscal year was due March 31, nine months after fiscal year 2024-2025 ended. Earlier this month, LAHSA officials said they were on track to meet the March 31 deadline.

    Justin Measley, lead auditor for the firm CliftonLarsonAllen, had warned that LAHSA was months behind schedule turning over records.

    At a meeting Tuesday, Measley explained that because of LAHSA’s earlier delays, the firm would need at least an additional week to complete a quality-control review process.

    “We’re moving at the fastest pace we possibly can,” Measley said.

    On Tuesday, LAHSA officials said the single audit will be filed “at the earliest possible opportunity,” within the next few weeks.

    Federal funds at risk

    LAHSA manages hundreds of millions of federal dollars each year, through grants from the U.S. Office of Housing and Urban Development, or HUD.

    O’Neill said the agency has been communicating with HUD officials regularly about the missed audit deadline and is “hoping for understanding.”

    Janine Lim, LAHSA’s deputy chief financial officer, said she’s also been talking with HUD.

    “They seem amenable to our situation and to our stated timelines,” Lim said. “So, we are hopeful that this will be a good outcome, despite having missed the deadline.”

    HUD did not immediately respond to LAist’s request for comment Tuesday.

    What went wrong 

    Measley said LAHSA’s financial statements should have been turned over around last December, but LAHSA only submitted them this month, after blowing through multiple extended deadlines.

    Measley said he contacted LAHSA’s governing commission about the overdue documents March 3.

    He said he also previewed his firm’s findings, noting one “significant deficiency” in its draft report, related to LAHSA’s timeliness in detecting accounting errors.

    LAHSA could contest those findings, officials said. That would add additional back-and-forth between the homelessness agency and accounting firm before the audit report is ready to file.

    Justin Szlasa, a LAHSA commissioner who chairs the audit subcommittee, told LAHSA’s CEO he’s concerned that there was no time provided for LAHSA’s governing body to review the audit report.

    “Next year, we will absolutely do that,” O’Neill responded. “I think this year, we were under the gun, and so we felt it was the most important thing was to get it uploaded on time.”

    O’Neill said the agency hired accounting firm KPMG to help modernize LAHSA’s financial systems, with a focus on its contractor payments.

    “We have an outside, trusted voice to help us create a system that works going forward because the system we have is not working at all, in finance,” O’Neill said.

  • Sponsored message
  • Trump wants lists of eligible voters from states

    Topline:

    President Donald Trump has escalated his efforts to influence American elections, signing an executive order that the White House says seeks to create a list of confirmed U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in each state and use the U.S. Postal Service to "verify" mail ballots are for voters.

    Why it matters: Trump has long railed — baselessly — about widespread illegal voting by noncitizens and mail voting fraud. The executive order comes as Trump's Justice Department is seeking sensitive voter data from states, and is engaged in more than two dozen lawsuits for that data. The administration claims it needs the data to enforce states' voter list maintenance. The order also comes as Trump pressures Republicans in Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, a sweeping election overhaul that would impose new voter identification and documentation requirements. That bill is stalled in the Senate due to Democratic opposition and the legislative filibuster.

    What's next: Trump said he believes the order is "foolproof." But election experts have already said the order — which was first reported by The Daily Caller — would face immediate legal challenges.

    Updated March 31, 2026 at 20:44 PM ET

    President Trump on Tuesday escalated his efforts to reshape American elections, signing an executive order that seeks to create lists of U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote in each state, and instructing the U.S. Postal Service to send mail ballots only to verified voters.

    Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that he believes the order is legally "foolproof." But election experts said the order was unconstitutional, and voting rights advocates and Democratic state officials quickly pledged to sue to block the order from going into effect.

    A previous executive order on elections, signed about a year ago, has been blocked by federal judges who said the president lacked the constitutional authority to set voting policy.

    The Constitution says the "Times, Places and Manner" of federal elections are determined by individual states, with Congress able to enact changes.

    "This Executive Order is a disgusting overreach from the federal government and shows how little the Trump Administration understands about election administration," Adrian Fontes, the Democratic secretary of state of Arizona, said in a statement Tuesday. "We will not let this order stand without a fight and will meet the federal government in court," he added.

    Arizona is among more than two dozen states Trump's Department of Justice has sued over access to sensitive voter data.

    The Trump administration claims it needs the data to enforce states' voter list maintenance. Federal judges in three states have dismissed the Justice Department's lawsuits in those states.

    In another case, a DOJ official admitted in court last week that the department plans to share that voter data with the Department of Homeland Security, to run it through the so-called SAVE system to search for noncitizens.

    NPR has reported that some U.S. citizens have also been inaccurately flagged by SAVE.

    How the executive order seeks to change voting

    Trump has long railed — baselessly — about widespread illegal voting by noncitizens and fraud associated with mail ballots.

    The new executive order — which was first reported by The Daily Caller — takes aim at both.

    It instructs the Department of Homeland Security, working in conjunction with the Social Security Administration, to "compile and transmit to the chief election official of each State a list of individuals confirmed to be United States citizens who will be above the age of 18 at the time of an upcoming Federal election and who maintain a residence in the subject State."

    The order then "requires the USPS to transmit ballots only to individuals enrolled on a State-specific Mail-in and Absentee Participation List, ensuring that only eligible absentee or mail-in voters receive absentee or mail-in ballots," according to a White House fact sheet.

    Trump's executive order claims that "additional measures are necessary" to secure voting by mail, a form of voting he has used himself — including last week — but also falsely maligned for years. In the 2024 general election, nearly a third of all voters cast mail ballots.

    The Postal Service should also review the design of mail ballot envelopes to protect "the integrity of Federal elections," the order says.

    Collectively, the provisions would be a significant change to how mail ballot programs are currently administered in American elections, which are largely carried out by state and local officials.

    "Our government's citizenship lists are incomplete and inaccurate. The United States Postal Service is overburdened and inadequate. This combines a car crash with a train wreck," the Brennan Center for Justice, which advocates for expanded voting access and sued to block Trump's 2025 election executive order, said in a statement.

    Rick Hasen, an election law expert at UCLA, wrote on his blog that the order is likely unconstitutional. And regardless, he added, "the timing here makes this virtually impossible to implement in time for November's elections. … It seems highly unlikely any of this could be implemented for 2026, even if it were not blocked by courts."

    The order comes as Trump pressures Republicans in Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, a sweeping election overhaul that would impose new voter identification and documentation requirements.

    That bill is stalled in the Senate due to Democratic opposition and the legislative filibuster.

    The Supreme Court is also expected to rule this year on whether Mississippi should be allowed to count mail ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but received by election officials after Election Day.

    The legal challenge, which could have sweeping implications for mail voting nationwide, was filed by the Republican National Committee and Trump's 2024 presidential campaign.

    With reporting by Ben Swasey

    Copyright 2026 NPR

  • Majority in 2025 had no criminal records
    A federal agents guard is out of focus and stands in front of a stone building and an American flag.
    Federal agents stand guard outside of a federal building and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center in downtown Los Angeles during a demonstration in June.

    Topline:

    Federal immigration officials arrested more than 14,000 people in the greater Los Angeles area in 2025 — the majority of whom had no criminal record, according to an LAist analysis of new data from the Deportation Data Project.

    What’s new: In 2025, federal officials arrested 14,394 people, up from 4,681 the year prior. Forty-six percent of people arrested had criminal convictions, 15% had pending charges and 39% had no criminal charges or convictions.

    Why it matters: Federal officials have highlighted the arrests of the “worst of the worst” in the immigration raids that began in June, including "murderers, kidnappers, sexual predators and armed carjackers,” but haven’t published the details of the number of people who had criminal records.

    Federal immigration officials arrested more than 14,000 people in the greater Los Angeles area in 2025 — the majority of whom had no criminal record, according to an LAist analysis of new data from the Deportation Data Project.

    The data project, an initiative between UCLA and UC Berkeley, publishes federal data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

    In 2025, federal officials arrested 14,394 people, up from 4,681 the year prior. Forty-six percent of people arrested had criminal convictions, 15% had pending charges, and 39% had no criminal charges or convictions.

    In a December news release, the Department of Homeland Security said it had arrested more than 10,000 people in the L.A. area since immigration raids began in June of last year, including "murderers, kidnappers, sexual predators and armed carjackers,” but did not publish details of the number of people who had criminal records.

    The data from the Deportation Data Project shows that arrests in L.A. spiked in June, and about two-thirds of people arrested that month had no criminal convictions.

    More than 313,000 people were arrested by ICE nationwide in 2025, according to an LAist analysis.

    In a statement, a DHS spokesperson said the agency has not “verified the accuracy, methodology or analysis of the project and its results” and said “this only reveals how data is manipulated to peddle the false narrative that DHS is not targeting the worst of the worst.” The spokesperson said 61% of people ICE arrested across the country either had criminal convictions or pending charges.

    The agency has regularly published press releases identifying people they have arrested and who they have called “the worst of the worst,” including from the raids in L.A. in June. But an LAist investigation and reporting from other outlets has found that some of the people on those lists already has been in custody and were serving lengthy sentences.

  • Program in council district 1 offers up to $10K
    Food and miscellaneous flea market vendors set up on a sidewalk at the El Salvador Corridor along Vermont Ave. at 12th St. in the Pico Union neighborhoood
    Like many vendors along the El Salvador Corridor in Pico Union, Maria Godoy sells goods alongside others on the sidewalk of Vermont Avenue between 11th and 12th streets.

    Topline:

    Small businesses struggling financially in the neighborhoods of the neighborhoods of Koreatown, Pico Union, Westlake, MacArthur Park and Highland Park could qualify for to help pay the bills.

    About the grants: Individual brick-and-mortar businesses can qualify for grants ranging from $5,000 to $10,000, while street vendors can receive about $3,000, according to city officials. A total of $400,000 is available through the program, and applications are now open. Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez announced the program’s goal, describing it as a way to support locally owned businesses navigating rising operating costs, shifting customer patterns, and the impacts of recent wide-scale events, like the ongoing immigration raids, along with wildfires, and broader economic uncertainty.

    Who is eligible: To qualify, businesses must have a valid Los Angeles business license and have been operating in Council District 1 since December 2020, with some flexibility for street vendors. They also need to show they’ve been financially impacted by any largescale events, like the COVID pandemic, immigration enforcement, or the broader economy. Funding will be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis, with applications remaining open until funds run out.

    Read on . . . for information on how to apply.

    Small businesses struggling financially have another program they could qualify for to help pay the bills.

    The program is for businesses in Council District 1, which includes the neighborhoods of Koreatown, Pico Union, Westlake, MacArthur Park and Highland Park.

    Individual brick-and-mortar businesses can qualify for grants ranging from $5,000 to $10,000, while street vendors can receive about $3,000, according to city officials. A total of $400,000 is available through the program, and applications are now open. 

    Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez announced the program’s goal, describing it as a way to support locally owned businesses navigating rising operating costs, shifting customer patterns, and the impacts of recent wide-scale events, like the ongoing immigration raids, along with wildfires, and broader economic uncertainty.

    A group of people stand behind a woman in a floral blouse, speaking into a microphone on a podium.
    Small businesses struggling financially have another program they could qualify for to help pay the bills.

    Who is eligible?

    The program is open to independently owned businesses and street vendors located within District 1.

    To qualify, businesses must have a valid Los Angeles business license and have been operating in Council District 1 since December 2020, with some flexibility for street vendors. They also need to show they’ve been financially impacted by any largescale events, like the COVID pandemic, immigration enforcement, or the broader economy. Businesses that changed owners can also apply if they’re essentially running the same operation.

    How can the money be used?

    Grants can be used for daily operational expenses, including rent, payroll, utilities, overhead and other business costs. Roochnik said the funding could also help businesses cover missed rent payments.

    Who is running the program?

    The grants will be distributed in partnership with the PACE Business Development Center and New Economics for Women. The two organizations provide support to small and immigrant-owned businesses across Los Angeles.

    How will recipients be selected?

    Funding will be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis, with applications remaining open until funds run out, Roochnik said. 

    What’s the goal?

    Hernandez said the program is meant to help stabilize neighborhoods that have been affected by immigration enforcement and economic hardships.

    “These small businesses are the backbone of our neighborhoods,” she said, adding the funding is meant to help them “stay open, keep workers employed, and continue serving our communities.”

    Naomi Villagomez Roochnik, CD1 communications director, said the announcement was made during a press conference at Delicias Bakery and Some, a longtime Latina-owned business in Highland Park. The neighborhood has experienced significant rising rents due to gentrification and the location was meant to highlight the kinds of businesses the program is meant to support.

    How to apply:

    To apply, small businesses and vendors can complete the application at bit.ly/cd1smallbizsupport.

    Is this a one-time program or part of a larger effort?

    The grant is part of a pilot program, with the possibility of it expanding depending on demand and outcomes. The council office has launched similar aid efforts in the past, Roochnik said, such as food distribution and rental assistance. 

    Businesses that may not qualify for this specific grant can be connected to other resources, according to Roochnik, including the city’s legacy business program, which is for businesses operating for at least 20 years. 

    The post Small businesses, vendors struggling against ICE raids, economic uncertainty eligible for up to $10,000 in grants appeared first on LA Local.