The Brief

Here's what NPR reported in July, when news first broke that there was a development in the investigation:

Las Vegas police executed a search warrant related to the fatal drive-by shooting of Tupac Shakur, the latest turn in decades of investigations into the rapper's mythic and unsolved death.

Shakur was one of the most popular artists in the world at the time of his death at age 25. His legacy only grew after he was shot while driving on the Las Vegas strip in September 1996 and has served as the subject of dozens of books, films, podcasts, documentaries and television shows.

On July 19, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department searched a home in the suburb of Henderson, Nev., about 15 miles from where the shooting occurred.

The department has not publicly released any additional details or a copy of the warrant that was served and declined NPR's request for comment on the investigation.

But the news of the search has already added a fresh layer to years of speculation about the rapper's death, igniting new questions about what the case means — and what a resolution might look like.

How did Tupac die?

Shakur was shot on the night of Sept. 7, 1996, while driving home from a boxing match at the MGM Grand. Before leaving the hotel, Shakur was seen fighting with Orlando "Baby Lane" Anderson, who'd had a previous run-in with a member of Shakur's entourage.

Shakur then departed the hotel as a passenger of a black BMW driven by Marion "Suge" Knight, who was the head of Death Row Records at the time.

While stopped at a red light, a white Cadillac pulled up next to the vehicle and opened fire, shooting Shakur several times. The rapper died from his injuries six days later.

After three decades and multiple investigations, no one has been arrested or charged in connection to the shooting.

Shakur's family filed a civil wrongful death suit against Anderson, who was also named by police as a suspect in the case. Anderson was killed in a gang-related shootout in 1998.

What do we know about the Las Vegas investigation this summer?

During the search in July, police emerged from patrol cars with their guns drawn, yelling for occupants to leave the house with their hands above their head, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, which cited a neighbor.

Residents in Henderson tell The Associated Press they saw officers detain two people as investigators searched the home.

"There were cruisers and SWAT vehicles. They had lights shining on the house," Don Sansouci, a resident in the neighborhood, told the AP. Sansouci said he had just gone to bed with his wife when a slew of police lights woke them up shortly after 9 p.m local time.

According to AP, public records link the home searched to the wife of Duane "Keefe D" Davis, the uncle of Orlando Anderson — one of the late rapper's known rivals.

Authorities have long suspected Anderson in Shakur's death, AP reported.

Anderson, who died in 1998 in an unrelated shooting, denied any involvement in Shakur's death at the time.

Nearly 30 years later, the new developments bring life to the unsolved case

The news of the search was a surprise to those tracking the investigations, such as Santi Elijah Holley, who authored the book An Amerikan Family: The Shakurs and the Nation They Created.

In an interview with NPR, Holley said the police didn't seem to take the initial investigations seriously, even when witnesses revealed, through the media, that they witnessed the shooting. Las Vegas police have said that the investigation was delayed because witnesses refused to cooperate.

"There hasn't been any momentum or movement for so many years," Holley said on Wednesday. "I think the police quietly had a vendetta against him throughout his life, throughout his career."

Shakur baked criticism of law enforcement into his lyrics and spoke out against police harassment in interviews.

In 1991, he sued the Oakland Police Department for slamming him to the ground after he was caught jaywalking. In 1993, he was charged with aggravated assault for shooting two off-duty police officers, but the charges were later dropped.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

California has taken steps the past few years to protect transgender young people on the playing field, in the classroom and in the doctor’s office. But a handful of federal court cases and new policies could threaten those protections.

A case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court could affect transgender students’ right to play on sports teams that align with their gender identity. Another case — possibly headed for the Supreme Court — could overturn California’s law banning school districts from requiring staff to “out” transgender students to their parents. And in December, the federal government said it would crack down on health care for transgender minors.

“We are witnessing a widespread, concerted, strategic attack on trans people existing in public spaces and in particular, trans young people,” said Dale Melchert, senior staff attorney for the Transgender Law Center, a nonprofit law firm based in Oakland. “The religious right is targeting trans people, and we know that these cases and policies are going to have a critical impact on trans young people, who are already such a vulnerable minority.”

The legal moves and policy shifts follow President Donald Trump’s vow to eliminate rights for transgender people, a topic he brought up frequently during his campaign and addressed in his inaugural speech. It was among his first executive orders.

Youth sports and transgender athletes

The case related to youth sports is based on a pair of lawsuits filed by transgender women in Idaho and West Virginia, states that prohibit athletes from playing on teams that don’t align with their gender at birth. California is one of about 23 states that allow transgender girls and women to play on school-sponsored women’s and girls’ teams.

The court heard arguments earlier in January and is likely to announce a ruling in June. Legal experts expect the court to uphold states’ rights to prohibit transgender women from playing on women’s teams, but it may leave the door open for states to set their own policies.

In that case, “California would be fine,” said Shannon Minter, legal director of the National Center for LGBTQ Rights.

But that doesn’t mean the case wouldn’t affect California in the future. It could strengthen future legal efforts and federal proposals to restrict states’ abilities to protect transgender athletes, Minter said. A year ago, Trump said he would withhold funding from any school that allows transgender females to play on girls’ and women’s teams; a Supreme Court ruling on the issue could make it easier for the federal government to follow through on the threat.

Parental notification policy in doubt

In a case directly affecting California, a pair of teachers from Escondido, near San Diego, sued the state over its recently enacted law prohibiting schools from requiring staff to notify parents if a child identifies as transgender. The teachers said the law “violates their faith and ethics,” according to the Thomas More Society, the nonprofit law firm that filed suit in U.S. District Court in Southern California on behalf of the teachers.

A federal district court judge agreed, and ruled in favor of the teachers in late December. The state immediately asked for and received a pause on the ruling allowing the law to remain in place while it prepares an appeal, but the plaintiffs asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reject the pause and implement the ruling immediately. The Supreme Court hasn’t yet issued a decision.

“Right now, California’s parental deception scheme is keeping families in the dark and causing irreparable harm. That’s why we’re asking the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene,” Paul Jonna, an attorney for Thomas More Society, said. “The state is inserting itself unconstitutionally between parents and children, forcing schools to deceive families, and punishing teachers who tell the truth.”

Attorney General Rob Bonta is hopeful the court will uphold California's law.

"We are committed to securing school environments that allow transgender students to safely participate as their authentic selves while recognizing the important role that parents play in students’ lives," said Jordan Blue, spokesman for the Attorney General's office. "We look forward to continuing to make our case in court."

California’s law stems from a policy adopted by a half-dozen school districts over the past few years that would have required teachers and other staff to inform parents if a child uses different pronouns, names or other signs that they identify as transgender. The districts said that parents have a right to know if their children are undergoing such a significant change.

State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, as well as many lawmakers and advocates, said the policy endangers transgender students because students might not be “out” at home, and their parents might not be supportive. Transgender students are far more likely than their peers to become homeless, often as a result of family rejection, according to the nonprofit advocacy group The Trevor Project. Advocates also said the policy places an undue burden on teachers, who must act as “gender police.”

The issue has propelled at least one school board member to statewide prominence. Sonja Shaw, president of the Chino Valley Unified school board, is running for state superintendent, largely on the issue of parents’ right to know if their child is transgender. Shaw is a Republican.

Access to health care

Meanwhile, in December the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said it would bar hospitals from performing gender procedures on children. California health officials pushed back, telling hospitals that they must comply with state laws and continue offering gender care to minors, regardless of what the federal government says.

“We will continue to stand with transgender youth, their families and health care providers, and we will continue to fight the federal administration’s cruel and inhumane policies,” they wrote on the state’s Health and Human Services website.

On the mental health front, the state in July said it would train its counselors on the 988 suicide-prevention hotline to address issues specific to LGBTQ youth. The move came after the Trump administration cut funding for such services.

‘It’s heartbreaking’

Just over 3% of young people identify as transgender, according to the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law. They’re more likely to drop out of school, suffer from mental health challenges like anxiety and depression, and commit suicide, according to The Trevor Project. High-profile court cases and heated rhetoric only make matters worse, said Jorge Reyes Salinas, spokesperson for Equality California, which advocates for LGBTQ rights.

While California remains relatively safe for transgender youth, at least for now, Salinas expects right-leaning states and the federal government to continue to ramp up their anti-LGBTQ efforts. A proposed ballot initiative in Nevada, for example, would require any school that receives state funds to identify sports as male, female or co-ed.

“The trans community is being used as a scapegoat. The right is continuing to use trans people as a tool for igniting fear and hate, putting young people at risk in the process,” Salinas said. “It’s heartbreaking. Students feel trapped, like everyone is against you.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

In his first year back in the White House, President Donald Trump has presided over a sweeping expansion of executive power while eroding democratic norms.

Many scholars of democracy say that these moves are unprecedented in U.S. history and that Trump has pushed the United States toward authoritarianism.

The president and his supporters counter that the Constitution provides for precisely the type of muscular presidency he is exercising and that voters gave him a mandate to enact far-reaching changes to government.

Trump remains popular with his base, but most Americans disapprove of his job performance. The president's critics hope that waning popularity — as well as this year's midterm elections — will provide a stronger check on Trump.

So what has happened so far? From firing inspectors general, to sidelining Congress, to attacking the media to control information, Trump and his administration have moved at warp speed from the moment he was sworn in.

As Year 2 of his second term begins, we wanted to look at just some of the ways the president has expanded his authority beyond what his predecessors have done and how his administration has tested the constitutional foundations of the country.

Checks and balances

(

Jackie Lay

/

NPR

)

Aided by a pliant Republican-led Congress, Trump and his administration have numerous times stretched the power of the executive branch into areas of governance normally reserved for the legislative branch. His aides have pulled back funds appropriated by lawmakers, who constitutionally control federal purse strings. The president has implemented sweeping foreign tariffs, using existing sources of authority in new, expansive ways. And his administration has remade or demolished whole federal departments.

Other checks on a president's power, such as federal inspectors general and agency appointees who previously were insulated from White House influence, have also been sidelined.

Freedom of speech and expression

(

Jackie Lay

/

NPR

)

Trump has targeted freedom of speech, attempting to control and change information — often with misinformation and falsehoods — to push his views into the media, higher education, national museums and the arts. He has intimidated major news outlets, defunded public media and made it increasingly difficult for journalists to report on his government, even threatening to jail reporters who won't identify government sources. The Trump administration has sought to erase parts of American history in the nation's museums, and the State Department was instructed to reject visa applications due to some applicants' alleged roles in "censorship."

Rule of law

(

Jackie Lay

/

NPR

)

Trump has bulldozed through a norm separating the White House and the Department of Justice, openly using the DOJ to pursue an agenda of retribution by seeking investigations and prosecutions of his political foes. He has liberally used the pardon power to the benefit of allies, including those who were convicted of violent crimes during the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol. Federal judges have accused the Trump administration of defying their orders and rebuked the administration for aggressive immigration tactics and attempts to consolidate Americans' sensitive data. And while Trump says he is overseeing a return of law and order, he frequently uses inciting language himself.

Trump, family business and power

(

Jackie Lay

/

NPR

)

Trump has taken other steps to consolidate power and demonstrate that he alone is in charge. His name and face seem to be everywhere. He receives fawning foreign visitors bearing gifts for him in a newly gold-adorned Oval Office.

And Trump continues to flex his power by mixing policy with the business interests of his family and allies, casting aside any ethical concerns.

Public health and science

The Trump administration has upended the institutions charged with protecting public health and conducting scientific research. Initiatives that once enjoyed bipartisan support and are the shared responsibility of the states and the federal government saw their funding slashed. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. led the overhaul of the children's vaccine schedule, sidelining expert advisers and slashing the number of recommended immunizations. There have been disruptions and turmoil for federally funded research, including at the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The administration abruptly halted USAID's global health work, which had saved millions of lives from scourges like AIDS, malaria and malnutrition over the course of six decades.

Ben Swasey, Yvonne Dennis, Kristian Monroe, Preeti Aroon, Pam Webster, Gerry Holmes, Pallavi Gogoi, Scott Horsley, Emily Kopp, David Folkenflik, Ciera Crawford, Matteen Mokalla, Jim Kane, Didrik Schanche, Elissa Nadworny, Steve Drummond, Diane Webber, Scott Hensley, and Sarah Knight contributed to this story. Design and development by Rahul Mukherjee and Alyson Hurt. Art direction by Danielle Scruggs and Emily Bogle.
Copyright 2026 NPR

Gov. Gavin Newsom took his spat with President Donald Trump to the world stage Thursday, when he criticized the administration and corporate leaders he accused of “selling out” to the White House at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Newsom traded broadsides with U.S. officials throughout his three-day swing through the global confab in the Swiss Alps.

For Newsom, who is widely expected to mount his own campaign for the presidency in 2028, the event provided a new audience for his signature brand of Trump-bashing.

“We’re deeply in their head,” Newsom told news site Semafor’s co-founder Ben Smith in an on-stage conversation Thursday. “I think the affordability agenda appears to be — I’m living rent-free in the Trump administration’s head.”

The Davos drama between the White House and governor’s office escalated Wednesday after Newsom accused the Trump administration of working to block a speaking engagement the governor had planned on the sidelines of the conference.

“They made sure it was canceled,” Newsom said. “And that’s what is happening in the United States of America — freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of speech — it’s America in reverse.”

The Trump administration did not respond directly to questions about Newsom’s claim and referred to the governor using a misspelling of his name frequently used by Trump.

“No one in Davos knows who third-rate governor Newscum is or why he is frolicking around Switzerland instead of fixing the many problems he created in California,” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said.

The governor was in the room with business titans and world leaders Wednesday when Trump delivered a speech in which he called Newsom “a good guy” and appeared to offer to send National Guard troops to fight crime in California.

As Trump took credit for declining crime and criticized cities with sanctuary immigration laws, cameras panned to Newsom, who laughed and shook his head.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent responded Wednesday, accusing Newsom of “hobnobbing with the global elite while his California citizens are still homeless,” and deriding the governor as “too smug, too self-absorbed and too economically illiterate to know anything.”

Bessent spoke at USA House, a privately funded venue holding events with American officials and executives, which was scheduled to host a “fireside chat” later that day between Newsom and media outlet Fortune.

The governor’s office accused the Trump administration of pressuring the venue’s organizers to cancel the event.

“I was going to speak last night … a simple conversation, discussion after Trump’s speech,” Newsom said. “They made sure that I didn’t.”

In his conversation with Smith, Newsom discussed his transformation to becoming one of America’s leading Trump critics — a strategy of “fighting fire with fire” with memes and online jabbing that has won admiration from Democrats across the country.

Though Newsom has attended the World Economic Forum previously, he credited his pugilistic approach for capturing attention in a fractured media environment.

“I was doing my 10-point plans before, and I don’t think any of you would have been here this morning had I done that,” Newsom said.

Asked whether California — where a majority of residents still believe the state is heading in the wrong direction — can be held up as a model of effective governance, Newsom responded that he is “proud of my state.”

“We have more Fortune 500 companies than any state in America, more scientists, more engineers, more Nobel laureates in my state than any state in America,” he said.

While Newsom criticized the business executives he said have failed to stand up to Trump, he also continued his public campaign against a proposed tax on billionaires that could appear on California’s November ballot.

The proposal, a one-time 5% tax on assets excluding real estate, was proposed by a health care union to raise money for safety-net programs in the wake of federal cuts.

While proponents of the measure are still collecting signatures to place the idea on the ballot, Newsom said high-income earners are already leaving the state in response. And he argued that the initiative’s focus on health care programs would leave less money for California schools.

“It’s a badly drafted initiative … that literally takes teachers and takes our educational system out of any consideration of support,” Newsom said.

The Trump administration has abandoned the legal defense of its campaign to strip federal funding from schools and colleges that promote diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

The administration formally dropped its appeal Wednesday in a filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, leaving in place an August ruling from U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher in Maryland.

A coalition of groups, including the American Federation of Teachers, challenged a “Dear Colleague” letter sent by the U.S. Department of Education in February, which targeted practices the administration said “toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon ‘systemic and structural racism.’”

Gallagher said the federal government ran afoul of procedural requirements and violated the First Amendment with its letter, online portal to report discrimination, and other federal guidance.

“The government did not merely remind educators that discrimination is illegal,” Gallagher wrote in her August order, “it initiated a sea change in how the Department of Education regulates educational practices and classroom conduct, causing millions of educators to reasonably fear that their lawful, and even beneficial, speech might cause them or their schools to be punished.”

The latest legal development is “a victory for California students and families,” said Christopher Nellum, executive director of EdTrust-West, a nonprofit advocacy group that aims to dismantle racial and economic barriers in California’s education systems.

“The evidence is clear: diversity, equity, and inclusion strategies expand access and help close opportunity gaps,” Nellum said in a statement to EdSource. “Federal funding threats aimed at dismantling these efforts undermine public education and harm the students who need support most.”

Educators and advocates said that over the last year, the Trump administration’s campaign against diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives had a major effect on the landscape of both TK-12 schools and higher education, even in California.

“The damage has already been done across the nation and even in California, where people think we’re impervious to the conservative backlash or right-wing movement,” said Royel Johnson, who leads the Race and Equity Center’s National Assessment of Collegiate Campus Climates at USC.

Back in February, Johnson and other advocates for DEI policies said the federal government’s guidance was not law and warned institutions from overreacting to the February 2025 “Dear Colleague” letter. Johnson has seen schools cut funding or staff to departments and programs focused on underserved groups. Some institutions have also scrubbed references to race, ethnicity, the LGBTQ community, diversity or equity in favor of something more general like community, Johnson noted, including his own employer, USC.

Some educational institutions in California made subtle changes over the last year. EdSource found that California State University institutions scrubbed some diversity buzzwords from their programs and websites. At Stanislaus State, for instance, “diversity” was dropped from events once called the Presidential Diversity Celebration Series. At CSU Monterey Bay, the Office of Inclusive Excellence became the Office of Community and Belonging.

Johnson says something is lost when schools drop “identity safety clues” from spaces and organizations that serve as a beacon to students who “have a tough time seeing themselves on campus.”

Some institutions were undeterred by federal and political pressure. Johnson points to Sacramento State as an institution that “doubled down” on its commitment to Black students and was among three colleges designated a California Black-Serving Institution. The Los Angeles Unified School District put more money into its Black Student Achievement Plan, despite being sued by a conservative group that called the program discriminatory.

The latest development is a legal victory that establishes support for the values of equity and inclusion, said John Rogers, a professor at UCLA’s School of Education and Information Studies. But he says the Trump administration’s tactics were successful in disrupting education over the last year.

“One of my concerns is that the strategy of the Trump administration is to disrupt and instigate a sense of conflict within local communities,” Rogers said.

He points to other actions taken by the Trump administration that have also been disruptive, such as canceling protections for schools against immigration enforcement or targeting policies that are aimed at supporting LGBTQ students, especially transgender students.

Johnson said that he hopes that schools and colleges can capitalize on this legal victory and stop self-censoring work under the banner of DEI that supports students and addresses the harms of the past. But he warns there will be more fights ahead.

“I hope folks can feel more emboldened today,” said Johnson. “It doesn’t mean more isn’t coming.”