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

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • State wants more monitoring at 2 juvenile halls
    A sign reads on a dirty building reads: Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall. Street lights and wires are visible over the roof.
    Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall in Downey

    Topline:

    California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced Tuesday that his office has filed a joint motion with L.A. County in Superior Court, seeking additional monitoring of two local juvenile hall facilities.

    The joint motion calling for increased monitoring is subject to court approval.

    Bonta’s office cited “serious ongoing deficiencies in the treatment and conditions of youth” at Barry J. Nidorf Juvenile Secure Youth Treatment Facility and Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall, which house hundreds of teens and young adults who have come in contact with the criminal justice system.

    Why now: The move comes after “alarming” reports from an independent monitor revealed insufficient staffing and failure to keep drugs out or prevent fights among the youth held in custody, according to the Attorney General's Office.

    What would the motion do: According to Bonta's office, the motion would update a 2021 L.A. County Superior Court judgment and require the county to implement a revised plan to fix ongoing staffing shortages.

    If a judge approves the motion, it would require the county to carry out a revised plan to fix ongoing staffing shortages, produce monthly health and safety reports and review any use of force incidents.

    What’s next: According to the state, the L.A. County Probation Department has until Dec. 12 to comply with staffing and other requirements or move some 300 youths out of the facility.

    California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced Tuesday that his office has filed a joint motion with L.A. County in Superior Court, seeking additional monitoring of two local juvenile hall facilities.

    Bonta’s office cited “serious ongoing deficiencies in the treatment and conditions of youth” at Barry J. Nidorf Juvenile Secure Youth Treatment Facility in Sylmar and Los Padrinos Juvenile Hall in Downey, which together house hundreds of teens and young adults who have come in contact with the criminal justice system.

    Barry J. Nidorf houses about 50 youth. Los Padrinos houses nearly 300.

    The move comes after “alarming” reports from an independent monitor revealed insufficient staffing and failure to keep drugs out or prevent fights among the youth held in custody, according to the Attorney General's Office.

    A surveillance video that surfaced earlier this year appeared to show probation employees standing by as a group of incarcerated youths beats up on a 17-year-old.

    What does the motion seek to change? 

    According to Bonta's office, the motion would update a 2021 L.A. County Superior Court judgment and require the county to implement a revised plan to fix ongoing staffing shortages.

    If a judge approves the motion, it would require the county to carry out a revised plan to fix ongoing staffing shortages, produce monthly health and safety reports and review any use of force incidents.

    L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger said in a statement that she hopes the court will approve the stricter requirements.

    “I welcome the additional scrutiny and accountability,” Barger said. “The more eyes, the better.”

    In a news release, Bonta said he was hopeful the new agreement would address persistent problems at the two juvenile halls, but added that his office “will be watching closely and ready to take further action if needed.”

    Problems at both facilities

    Earlier this year, the Board of State and Community Corrections deemed Los Padrinos unsuitable to house hundreds of youths because of low staffing, failure to conduct safety checks at the proper times, and failure to comply with use-of-force training requirements.

    The county Probation Department avoided having to shut down Los Padrinos in April after the board determined minimum requirements on staffing levels and safety checks had been met.

    But in an Oct. 14 letter to Chief Probation Officer Guillermo Viera Rosa, the board said further inspections revealed Los Padrinos was out of compliance with staffing requirements yet again.

    Less information was immediately available about the Nidorf facility. However, 18-year-old Bryan Diaz died at Nidorf Secure Youth Treatment Facility last year. Authorities said the death was the result of an apparent drug overdose.

    What’s next? 

    According to the Board of State and Community Corrections, the Probation Department has until Dec. 12 to comply with staffing and other requirements or move all 300 youths out of the facility.

    In a statement, the department said it had no immediate comment while the motion is pending, “other than to underscore that our top priority remains the safety and well-being of the youth in our care.”

    “We are committed to transforming our juvenile facilities into secure, healthy, and rehabilitative environments and are determined to meet and surpass all required standards,” the department said.

  • Judge: federal government can't have voter data
    A voter registration display at the Orange County Registrar of Voters in Santa Ana.

    Topline:

    A federal judge ruled today that the Trump administration is not entitled to personal information belonging to California’s 23 million voters.

    The backstory: Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice sued California, along with 22 other states and D.C., for access to their full, unredacted voter files. That includes driver’s license, social security numbers and other sensitive data. California refused, citing state and federal privacy law.

    Why it matters: In Judge Carter’s ruling, he wrote that amassing sensitive information at the federal level would have a chilling effect on voter registration, which would lead to decreased turnout “as voters fear that their information is being used for some inappropriate or unlawful purpose.”

    What's next: The DOJ's lawsuits against other states are still making their way through the courts. The government could also decide to appeal Carter's decision.

    A federal judge ruled today that the Trump administration is not entitled to personal information belonging to California’s 23 million voters. Judge David O. Carter made the ruling.

    Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice sued California, along with 22 other states and Washington, D.C., for access to their full, unredacted voter files. That includes driver’s license, social security numbers and other sensitive data.

    DOJ officials said they needed the data to assess whether states were properly maintaining their voter rolls and ensuring "only American citizens are voting, only one time," as Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon said in a social media post in December.

    California refused, citing state and federal privacy law. Only a handful of states have complied with the government’s request for their full voter files, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, which has been tracking the issue nationwide.

    What did the judge say?

    In Judge Carter’s ruling, he wrote that amassing sensitive information at the federal level would have a chilling effect on voter registration, which would lead to decreased turnout “as voters fear that their information is being used for some inappropriate or unlawful purpose.”

    He added, “This risk threatens the right to vote which is the cornerstone of American democracy."

    LAist emailed a request for comment to a spokesperson for the Department of Justice but has not yet received a response.

    Reaction to the ruling

    Jenny Farrell, executive director of the League of Women Voters of California, applauded the decision. The group had joined California in opposing the government’s data request.

    “ We think that voters should never have to choose between their privacy interests and the right to participate in our democracy,” she said.

    Justin Levitt, a Loyola Law School professor and former Department of Justice employee said, “The court did what we thought the court should do.”

    Levitt and a group of other former DOJ employees had filed an amicus brief in the case, siding with California.

    In a news release, California Secretary of State Shirley Weber wrote: “I will continue to uphold my promise to Californians to protect our democracy, and I will continue to challenge this administration's disregard for the rule of law and our right to vote.”

    What's next?

    The DOJ's lawsuits against other states are still making their way through the courts.

    During a hearing in the case in December, Judge Carter said he anticipated his eventual ruling — whichever way it went — would be appealed, and that a final decision on the issue could rest with the U.S. Supreme Court.

  • Sponsored message
  • Judge: LA violated the law on homelessness issues
    A homeless encampment on first street across from city hall in downtown Los Angeles.
    A homeless encampment on First Street across from City Hall in downtown Los Angeles.

    Topline:

    A Superior Court judge has found that the city of Los Angeles violated public open records laws nearly two years ago by taking action on matters related to its homelessness response and failing to report it.

    Why it matters: The decision could be a factor in an ongoing hearing in federal court where a different judge is considering whether to hold the city in contempt of court.

    Why now: In a ruling last week, L.A County Superior Court Judge Curtis A. Kin found that the city violated the Brown Act on two occasions in January and May 2024 when it took action in closed session 

    The city's stance: The city argued its actions were allowed under the Brown Act because they stemmed from the ongoing settlement between the city and the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, a group of business owners and residents who sued the city over its response to the homelessness crisis.

    A Superior Court judge has found that the city of Los Angeles violated public open records laws nearly two years ago by taking action on matters related to its homelessness response and failing to report it.

    That decision could be a factor in an ongoing hearing in federal court where a different judge is considering whether to hold the city in contempt of court.

    In a ruling last week, L.A. County Superior Court Judge Curtis A. Kin found that the city violated the Brown Act on two occasions in January and May 2024 when it took action in closed session on the following:

    — approving an encampment reduction plan;

    — approving a memorandum of understanding with the county for support on interim housing beds and other issues.

    Afterward, the city did not report those approvals in open session.

    The city argued its actions were allowed under the Brown Act because they stemmed from the ongoing settlement between the city and the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, a group of business owners and residents who sued the city over its response to the homelessness crisis.

    But Kin disagreed with that argument, saying what the city had done in closed session did not fall within the Brown Act exemptions because they were policy decisions, not litigation decisions concerning the L.A. Alliance settlement.

    In federal court, U.S. District Judge David O. Carter has been overseeing the city’s compliance with the settlement. Carter has said he’s concerned “the city has demonstrated a continuous pattern of delay” in meeting its obligations.

    Carter has been hearing testimony since November from city officials and others in an ongoing contempt-of-court hearing. This week, the judge said in court documents that he would consider Kin’s ruling as the contempt hearing proceeds.

    The parties were last in federal court earlier this week. It’s not yet clear when that hearing will resume.

  • LACO offering 280 free code-compliant food carts
    FF-STREET-VENDOR
    Marlo Ortiz places the menu display in front of the food stand.

    Topline:

    Sidewalk vendors can now apply to receive a free, health-code-compliant food vending cart through a new program launched in a partnership between the county and the city of Los Angeles.

    Who can apply: To receive a cart, applicants must be at least 18 years old, live in L.A. County, be self-employed as a sidewalk vendor, and earn less than $75,000 annually from vending. Applicants must operate within unincorporated L.A. County or the city of L.A., and commit to full compliance with public health and safety regulations.

    Why it matters: Los Angeles County Board Chair Hilda Solis said the program can help ensure a “permitted pathway” toward entrepreneurship. “Many vendors are navigating increasingly difficult and uncertain times due to cruel federal immigration actions, and we know vendors play an essential role in the economic and cultural vitality of Los Angeles County,” Solis said in a statement.

    Sidewalk vendors can now apply to receive a free, health-code-compliant food vending cart through a new program launched in a partnership between the county and the city of Los Angeles.

    Who can apply

    To receive a cart, applicants must be at least 18 years old, live in LA County, be self-employed as a sidewalk vendor, and earn less than $75,000 annually from vending, according to a news release. Applicants must operate within unincorporated LA County or the city of LA, and commit to full compliance with public health and safety regulations.

    You can find the application here.

    Permits to secure

    Vendors who are awarded carts will have to secure required permits in order to begin operating as fully permitted businesses. This includes obtaining the Compact Mobile Food Operation (CMFO) certificate from the LA County Department of Public Health and any Sidewalk Vending Registration Certifications or permits required to comply with the county and city sidewalk vending programs.

    Applications will be selected by lottery, will be reviewed on a monthly basis, and will be prioritized based on “compliance readiness.” Priority will also be given to those who are based in the county’s “highest-need areas,” as according to the county equity explorer map.

    Eligible applicants will be connected to partner organizations like Inclusive Action for the City to help navigate the permitting process and to provide business business support and language assistance.

    What kind of carts?

    Carts offered through the program include:

    • Integrated grill carts for precooked meat for tacos, hot dogs, and hamburgers that are assembled on a cart
    • Hot-holding carts for pre-portioned cooked tamales, corn, quesadillas, gyros, pupusas
    • Cut fruit carts for fruits, bionicos, and acai bowls
    • Cold-hold ice cream carts that store prepackaged ice cream items

    Currently, the county and city have 50 hot-holding and 30 cold-holding carts for the first round of awards with 40 integrated grill carts underway.

    More about the program

    The launch of the Sidewalk Vending Cart Program – which invests $2.8 million in more than 280 carts – follows the passage of state legislation that decriminalized street vendors and that streamlined the permitting process.

    “The program aims to help vendors meet new legal requirements, overcome financial barriers to formalization, and operate safely and legally in their communities,” according to the news release.

    Los Angeles County Board Chair Hilda Solis said the program can help ensure a “permitted pathway” toward entrepreneurship.
    “Many vendors are navigating increasingly difficult and uncertain times due to cruel federal immigration actions, and we know vendors play an essential role in the economic and cultural vitality of Los Angeles County,” Solis said in a statement. “This is more than a program — this is a chance to support small business growth, economic stability, and even generational wealth.”

  • Here's what we know

    Topline:

    The biggest mobile network in the United States, Verizon, experienced a huge outage on Wednesday, leaving at least tens of thousands of customers without cell service for much of the day.


    What happened?: Users had no connectivity for much of the day and were only able to access "SOS" mode during the outage. Verizon has not posted details nor an explanation of the cause of the outage on its website. In an email to NPR, a company spokesperson wrote that the problem stemmed from "a software issue" and that Verizon is conducting a full review. And while Verizon hasn't released a figure for how many customers were affected, the staff at the Downdetector website — where users go to report service outages — posted on Facebook that they received 2.3 million outage reports for Verizon throughout the day. (That doesn't necessarily translate to 2.3 million affected customers.)

    Could it happen again?: Yep — to Verizon or any of its competitors. "Modern telecom networks are cloud networks. 5G networks are mainly, like, hundreds of different cloud services," Lee McKnight, an associate professor in the School of Information Studies at Syracuse University said. "The telecom companies haven't yet adjusted their training to that reality, that their staff have to be expert not just in cell towers and wireless, like we think about, but about cloud services, like AWS, or Microsoft, or Google."

    The biggest mobile network in the United States, Verizon, experienced a huge outage on Wednesday, leaving at least tens of thousands of customers without cell service for much of the day.

    An update on Verizon's website today said the outage had been resolved. "We are sorry for what you experienced and will continue to work hard day and night to provide the outstanding network and service that people expect from Verizon," it said.

    What happened?

    It's still unclear. Verizon has not posted details nor an explanation of the cause of the outage on its website. In an email to NPR, a company spokesperson wrote that the problem stemmed from "a software issue" and that Verizon is conducting a full review.And while Verizon hasn't released a figure for how many customers were affected, the staff at the Downdetector website — where users go to report service outages — posted on Facebook that they received 2.3 million outage reports for Verizon throughout the day. (That doesn't necessarily translate to 2.3 million affected customers.)

    Cell networks experience small outages fairly regularly, though, and sizable ones are not uncommon. Verizon had a disruption across several major cities in September 2024, and competitor AT&T was hit by a large outage in February 2024, affecting more than 125 million registered devices and customers in all 50 states.

    Sanjoy Paul, a wireless network expert at Rice University, says telecommunications systems have become more complex over the past decade and a half as they've moved from physical infrastructure — wires and cables — and into the cloud.

    "What used to be a completely hardware-dependent network transformed into a complete software-dependent network," he said. That shift has given operators more flexibility to add services or tweak products but, he said, it has come at the expense of reliability.

    With a cloud and software-based networks, there are more opportunities for glitches and attacks, he said. Small issues with computer code buried inside these systems can have big consequences.

    What have been some consequences of the outage?

    Users had no connectivity for much of the day and were only able to access "SOS" mode during the outage.

    Verizon, which has styled itself as America's best and most reliable network, has been in damage control mode. The company has issued instructions for customers to restart their devices to reconnect to the network if they are still having problems. It also pledged $20 credits as "a way of acknowledging your time and showing that this matters to us," according to their website.

    The Federal Communications Commission said in a statement it was "continuing to actively investigate and monitor the situation to determine next steps."

    Could it happen again?

    Yep — to Verizon or any of its competitors.

    Since the cause of this latest outage remains unclear, it's too early to say whether or not this exact thing could happen again. But Lee McKnight, an associate professor in the School of Information Studies at Syracuse University, told NPR's Morning Edition outages are "a fact of life these days for major telecommunications firms."

    "Modern telecom networks are cloud networks. 5G networks are mainly, like, hundreds of different cloud services," he said. "The telecom companies haven't yet adjusted their training to that reality, that their staff have to be expert not just in cell towers and wireless, like we think about, but about cloud services, like AWS, or Microsoft, or Google."

    At the end of the day, experts say, consumers should consider having a "Plan B" for connectivity. That may mean a land line for your house or getting a second phone on a different cell network.
    Copyright 2026 NPR