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

The Brief

The most important stories for you to know today
  • We hear the reaction from Asian Americans
    An ornate red brick university building standing amid blue skies and white clouds.
    The Supreme Court ruled against Harvard in a case that claimed the university intentionally discriminated against Asian Americans.

    Topline:

    Asian Americans have figured prominently in the decades-long debate over affirmative action in higher education. The Supreme Court decision to reject race-based admissions drew a wide range of reactions from Asian Americans.

    The reactions: Some of the country’s largest Asian American advocacy organizations denounced the decision as harmful to all students of color, including Asian Americans who might have benefited from the policies. Other organizations that sought to end the consideration of race in admissions celebrated the Supreme Court ruling as confirmation that the U.S. is a meritocracy.

    The role of Asian Americans in court arguments: The Supreme Court ruled against Harvard and UNC in a case over whether the schools intentionally discriminate against Asian American applicants, not only by holding them to a higher academic standard but rating them unfavorably on personality traits.

    What's next: The decisions effectively stop the use of racial demographics as factors in selecting college students, forcing colleges and universities to find other methods to maintain campus diversity, which experts expect to fall at the most selective schools in the wake of the ruling.

    Go deeper: US Supreme Court Rules Against Affirmative Action. What That Means For California's Future College Students

    Whether they've liked it or not, Asian Americans have figured prominently in the decades-long debate over affirmative action in higher education. In fact, the Supreme Court decision to strike down race-conscious admissions on Thursday came partly in response to a lawsuit claiming Harvard was intentionally discriminating against Asian American applicants.

    Justices ruled 6-2 against Harvard, siding with Students for Fair Admissions which was founded by a white conservative activist named Edward Blum, the only plaintiff named in the suit.

    The group had accused the country’s oldest university of holding Asian Americans to a higher academic standard while rating them lower than other applicants when it comes to having a good personality.

    'Lack of diversity'

    The Supreme Court produced the Harvard decision in tandem with a related ruling that the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill had also illegally used race in college admissions.

    Together, the decisions effectively stop the use of racial demographics as a factor in selecting college students, forcing colleges and universities to find other methods to maintain campus diversity, which experts expect to fall at the most selective schools in the wake of the ruling.

    Among Asian Americans, reactions to the high court ruling ran the gamut. Leaders from some of the country’s largest Asian American advocacy organizations accused Students for Fair Admissions of using their communities to "advance a white supremacist agenda." They also denounced the decision as harmful to all students of color, including Asian Americans.

    An Asian American with a blue bow in her hair walks in front of a group of young adults different races holding signs that read "Asian Americans for Affirmative Action" and "Diversity, Opportunity, Justice."
    Last October, students rallied for affirmative action in higher education outside the U.S. Supreme Court before oral arguments.
    (
    Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
    /
    Getty Images North America
    )

    “For example, Southeast Asians and some Pacific Islander groups, who have been benefiting from affirmative action, we're going to see a loss of their opportunities,” said Connie Chung Joe, CEO of Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California.

    Joe said Asian American students’ education will suffer from the absence of affirmative action in higher education.

    “Affirmative action allows schools to have a diverse student body,” Joe said. “The lack of diversity that's going to come out of this decision has a really profound impact on all of us.”

    ‘What makes America great’

    By contrast, the ruling was celebrated by members of the Asian American Coalition for Education, which was founded to fight “discriminatory college admission practices against Asian American children" and has supported Students for Fair Admissions in its legal battles.

    “The Court upheld the greatness of the U.S. Constitution where everybody is created equal, everybody will be protected equally,” said Alex Chen, a coalition member from Irvine who described feeling emotional.

    A man of East Asian descent (far left) holds a piece of printed paper while standing next to two men of South Asian descent who are wearing eyeglasses and suits.
    Alex Chen of Irvine is a member of the Asian American Coalition for Education which sees affirmative action policies as discriminatory.
    (
    Courtesy of Alex Chen
    )

    Chen said he started organizing with other Chinese American parents through social media and alumni groups nearly 10 years ago. That's when there was an unsuccessful campaign to bring back affirmative action to California’s public universities after Prop. 209 banned the consideration of race in admissions in 1996. Another effort to undo Prop. 209 failed in the 2020 election.

    “We’re proud to be part of this because we believe meritocracy is what makes America great,” Chen said.

    Asian American views on affirmative action

    While Chen described his Asian American social circles as overwhelmingly opposed to race-based admissions, Joe said foes of those policies are a "very loud minority."

    What do surveys say?

    One released by the Pew Research Center earlier this month, shows a majority of Asian Americans — 53% — support affirmative action However, just 21% thought colleges should use race or ethnicity in admissions, leading researchers to conclude respondents have "mixed views of affirmative action."

    Another survey that AAPI Data co-released last year showed much more robust support for affirmative action in higher ed. Asian Americans voters were asked their views on “affirmative action policies designed to help Black people, women, and other minorities gain better access to higher education.” Sixty-nine percent of respondents said they were in favor; 19% were against and 11% “didn’t know.”

    AAPI Data broke down responses by ethnicity and found that Korean respondents were the most supportive of affirmative action (82%) while Chinese respondents were the least (59%).

    What's next

    For both supporters and detractors of affirmative action, the Supreme Court decision does not spell the end of their work.

    Joe of Asian Americans Advancing Justice said that organizations like hers will strive to keep campuses diverse by increasing the pipeline of high schoolers of color entering college through tutoring programs and scholarships.

    "In California, we've done a lot of those things to try to make up for the loss of race-conscious admissions policies (at public institutions)," Joe said. "I think a lot of other states and are going to have to start doing that in their colleges and their K-12."

    Aerial view of the UCLA campus, which features brick buildings surrounded by trees.
    Affirmative action in admissions at public California universities was banned by Prop 209 in 1996
    (
    UCLA
    /
    Alan Nyiri
    )

    Joe said there are also strategies to retain these students once they're in college through affinity groups and diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

    Meanwhile, Chen said that groups like his will be keeping an eye on schools to make sure they are adhering to the Supreme Court decisions. He was hopeful that the rulings would stay in place for at least a couple decades if the conservative, relatively young majority on the court does not change — or maybe even generations.

    Chen said his own children are grown but "if I didn't do anything, I would not be able to face my grandkids."

  • How candidates say they would tackle homelessness
    Two women, one with light-brown skin tone and one with brown skin tone, speak into microphones side by side on a panel, both mid-gesture.
    L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and Councilmember Nithya Raman appear separately at a mayoral forum held Sept. 3, 2026, in downtown Los Angeles.

    Topline:

    Incumbent Karen Bass and challenger Nithya Raman laid out competing plans for fixing L.A.'s homelessness crisis at separate mayoral candidate forums this week ahead of the Nov. 3 election.

    Why it matters: More than 29,000 people sleep outside in the city, a nearly 8% jump from last year. The two candidates are both promising to solve L.A.'s homelessness crisis, but they have slightly different approaches. Voters decide between the two on Nov. 3.

    Breaking from LAHSA: Both candidates now support the city eventually leaving LAHSA, the joint city-county homelessness authority. Bass wants to move now, proposing an independent system within about two years. "The county filed for divorce. Now we file, too," Bass said.

    The Inside Safe fight: Bass's signature program, which moves people from encampments into motels, is the sharpest divide. Raman calls it too costly — and wants cheaper rental subsidies instead.

    More than 29,000 people sleep outside in L.A., according to official estimates — a nearly 8% increase over last year.

    Two candidates for mayor are promising to change that, but they have different ideas about how.

    Incumbent Mayor Karen Bass and Councilmember Nithya Raman appeared separately at homelessness forums hosted this week by Hope The Mission, a large homeless shelter operator.

    The events were held amid a national spotlight on L.A.’s homelessness crisis.

    This week, a congressional subcommittee held a hearing on allegations of fraud and mismanagement of homelessness funds — a hearing in which Bass declined to appear. The next day, federal authorities announced charges against three employees at L.A. homelessness nonprofits in a widening federal investigation of homeless services fraud.

    Bass cited L.A.’s homelessness crisis as the reason she sought the city’s top job in 2022.

    “I ran because I am always compelled to go toward a crisis,” she said Thursday.

    She has made clearing homeless encampments and moving people indoors a top priority as mayor, but fell far short of her pledge to end street homelessness by 2026.

    Raman has said founding a local homelessness nonprofit inspired her 2020 L.A. City Council run. For years, Raman was chair of the council committee focused on city homelessness policy.

    Both candidates have played major roles in shaping L.A.’s homelessness response in recent years, and they told forum moderators this week that the city’s approach has been dysfunctional.

    L.A.’s next mayor will face a barrage of challenges related to homelessness.

    Here’s how the candidates said they would handle some of the big ones:

    How will they deal with the Trump administration?

    The Trump administration has been cracking down on the L.A. region’s administration of homeless services to root out potential financial mismanagement, but also to challenge the local policy approach to homelessness and impose policies it prefers.

    Federal officials argue that approaches known as “housing first” and “harm reduction” are failing. They favor treatment and enforcement instead.

    Bass, a Democrat, skipped a House subcommittee hearing on federal homelessness spending Tuesday, dismissing it as politically motivated.

    “ I'm the mayor of the second-largest city in the country, and I don't have time for foolishness,” Bass said Thursday. “And remember, I know these people. It's a dog and pony show to see who's gonna get on Fox that night. I was not going to subject myself to that, and I was not going to subject our city to that.”

    Bass said her office is cooperating fully by supplying thousands of pages of documents.

    Raman said L.A. should be using the courts much more aggressively to challenge federal overreach and protect funding.

    “ We've done that less than I would've liked here in Los Angeles, but other cities have done that and actually kept their federal dollars in place despite the best efforts of the Trump administration.”

    She said the city also has to make sure that funding is spent effectively, arguing L.A. currently has no single person tracking every dollar coming in from the federal government, state government and other sources.

    “That is wrong,” Raman said at a forum on Wednesday. “If I am mayor — when I am mayor — I will ensure that every single dollar that is being given to us is being used to get as many people indoors into safety and to keep them there as effectively as possible.”

    What to do about LAHSA?

    Both candidates have said they support the city eventually breaking away from LAHSA, the joint city-county homelessness authority.

    "The county filed for divorce. Now we file, too," Bass said on Thursday.

    Last year, L.A. County officials voted to remove more than $300 million in annual homelessness funding from LAHSA’s control and to manage those funds itself with a new county department. Bass is now proposing the city create its own, independent “continuum of care,” a process she said could take “a couple of years.”

    Bass, who appointed herself to serve on LAHSA’s governing board before stepping down this month, said she’s learned in recent years “how profoundly dysfunctional” the regional homeless services system is.

    She argued that because L.A. represents 40% of the county's population and is the epicenter of the crisis, the city must have more control over the system.

    “You might remember that expression I started with: locked arms,” Bass said. “And we locked arms as long as we could.”

    Raman, in her mayoral platform, also called for the city to prepare to move hundreds of millions of dollars in homelessness contracts away from LAHSA, which she described as "plagued with scandal." But she said the city has to build the capacity to take on the job first.

    At Thursday's forum, Raman didn't mention LAHSA by name, instead describing coordination failures between agencies — citing permanent supportive housing units that sat empty for more than a year because departments weren't talking to each other.

    As chair of the council's Homelessness Committee, Raman said she created the city's Bureau of Homelessness Oversight to track spending and outcomes, but accused Bass of failing to staff it promptly.

    “The mayor did not hire people to staff up that oversight body quickly enough,” Raman said.

    LAHSA has served as the lead agency managing homelessness services for the region since 1993, including conducting a yearly homeless count, preparing regional applications for federal funds and managing key databases.

    This week, the agency announced it would soon forfeit those roles and allow other agencies or organizations to apply for them instead — including other county or city of L.A. agencies.

    What about encampments?

    The candidates are also somewhat split on their approach to homelessness encampments. Bass has criticized Raman for voting several times since 2022 against expanding the city’s anti-camping ordinance, which restricts camping in certain public spaces including schools and day cares.

    Raman has defended her votes. She argued the law, at best, “would have moved an encampment from one block to the next block.”

    “To me, that is not good enough," Raman said. "My imagination for how we address homelessness in L.A. goes beyond just thinking about which block an encampment should be on. It is about how we actually get encampments indoors."

    Asked about enforcement approaches, Bass pointed to physical barriers — like cement planters that replaced a major encampment on San Vicente Boulevard — as a more effective deterrent than ticketing or arrests.

    “ So sometimes using physical barriers work, but what we have not done is just gone in and arrested homeless people,” Bass said. “That has never happened.”

    The sharpest divide between the candidates centers on Bass’ signature program, Inside Safe, which moves people from encampments into motels and interim housing.

    Raman said she agreed with the underlying concept — going out to encampments and offering shelter — but that the program is too costly and hasn't evolved since Bass launched it in 2022.

    “Her program has not changed or learned or adapted from the lessons that they should have had in place, and to me, that is a major, major issue,” Raman said.

    Raman put the cost at roughly $100,000 per person, per year — "not a fiscally sustainable approach to a crisis that is growing in our city," she said — and favors time-limited subsidies, short-term rental vouchers that cost a third as much.

    Bass called that framing "fundamentally dishonest," arguing the county reimburses the city for some of the up-front cost.

    Bass said she wants to bring costs down by building permanent structures on public land instead of renting motel rooms.

    She said she favors moving groups of unhoused people together and bringing services to them, which she said is harder to do with the housing vouchers Raman wants to rely on.

    "I would house 30 people at a time, not one by one,” Bass said. "I see it from a people's point of view. She sees it from a numbers point of view. Both are needed."

    The general election is Nov. 3.

  • Sponsored message
  • Hidden in plain sight in a business park
    A pair of light skinned hands with several tattoos spoons a brown liquid over a series of white plates which each hold a piece of beef.
    The Darkroom burger, dry-aged beef, and swimming in a light au poivre bath.

    Topline:

    Chef-owner Zach Scherer's Darkroom sits in an unmarked business park on the Costa Mesa/Santa Ana border — a deliberate choice that's turned the restaurant into a word-of-mouth destination rather than a drive-by discovery.

    Tell me more: The menu changes constantly, tracking real-time seasonal shifts — this visit caught the tail end of summer's Jimmy Nardello peppers giving way to fall's first honeynut squash. Scherer runs the kitchen with longtime partner Drew Adams, and the two also operate Chrysalis, a tasting-menu concept sharing the same space some nights.

    Why is it important? Most diners expect flashy fine dining to come with flashy real estate. Scherer, aiming to make Orange County "nationally competitive" with cities like San Francisco and Chicago, is proving serious technique doesn't need a serious address — or a serious attitude.

    Step into the darkness: Scherer's next concept, Three Eyed Tiger, is currently in development nearby.

    Just off the 405 freeway at the border of Costa Mesa and Santa Ana, a block down from IKEA and a couple of business parks over, you'll find Darkroom.

    It's the kind of address where you'd expect to find a dentist's office or a logistics company — instead, it's home to some of the most inventive food in Orange County, and arguably beyond, anchored by a formidable wine program featuring small producers.

    The location is a deliberate choice by Zach Scherer, Darkroom’s chef-owner, that has turned the restaurant into a growing word-of-mouth destination. For Scherer, hiding in plain sight was never a compromise. It was the plan.

    Inside Darkroom

    The interior of the restaurant is a completely different story. Its decor matches that of an angsty teenager who shops at Hot Topic, with an affinity for industrial and goth music, and a bit of new wave mixed in.

    Dimly lit restaurant interior with red-toned lighting, framed artwork including cherubs with graffiti text and a skull painting, and blurred diners at a table in the foreground.
    Darkroom's interior leans into its irreverent, gallery-meets-Hot Topic aesthetic.
    (
    Wales Communications
    /
    Courtesy Darkroom
    )

    Your eyes might take a minute to adjust to the low light before a friendly server wearing a tattered band T-shirt greets you and escorts you to your table.

    Scherer wears his nonconformist attitude with pride — and intention. "If you're a little too serious, Orange County won't love it," he said, and it shows: the room is built to feel like the opposite of a hushed tasting menu.

    Two chefs with tattooed arms plating food together at a restaurant counter — one light-skinned with short brown hair, a beard, glasses, and a purple graphic shirt; the other light-skinned with short bleached-blond hair and a mustache, plating a dish by hand.
    Chef Zach Scherer (right) and Drew Adams work the pass together — the same partnership they describe as "like a band."
    (
    Wales Communications
    /
    Courtesy DARKROOM
    )

    Scherer runs the kitchen with longtime partner Drew Adams — a lifelong Orange County resident — who also oversees the pastry program. The two think of Darkroom's identity "like a band," Scherer said: a shared core sound, no matter who's guesting on a given dish. (Their tasting-menu concept, Chrysalis, runs out of the same kitchen some nights — a five-course tasting menu happening in parallel.)

    The menu

    Start off with the Scotch olives, fried Castelvetrano olives with anchovy and lamb merguez, served over spiced sumac yogurt. Meanwhile, a couple of slices of their zucchini bread with koji butter, topped with silky jamón serrano, provide some comforting bites.

    Charred red Jimmy Nardello peppers topped with dukkah and chives, resting on whipped labneh in a dark oval dish against a teal background.
    Grilled and marinated Jimmy Nardello peppers — a short-season ingredient the kitchen deliberately doesn't overwork.
    (
    Wales Communications
    /
    Courtesy Darkroom
    )

    From there, seasonal produce takes center stage, with grilled, marinated Jimmy Nardello peppers served with fennel-pollen labneh and sprinkled with walnut dukkah, hitting equal notes of sweet, spicy, nutty, and fresh. Followed by honeynut squash from Weiser Farms — poached in a light broth known as nage, made with bits of country ham and horseradish, topped with rainbow chard, a dish that reads Southern-meets-European.

    A dry-aged beef burger sliced in half, served in a light broth on a white plate with a rainbow light reflection across a dark marble table.
    The Darkroom burger, cut in two — only 10 are made a night.
    (
    Wales Communications
    /
    Courtesy Darkroom
    )

    Cap things off with The Darkroom burger, cut in half, made with dry-aged beef, molten Comté cheese, and gooey caramelized onions, served between soft, glossy brioche-style buns, swimming in a light au poivre bath. It's a dish that, like the others, exhibits strong technique but still wears its fun on its sleeve — all the makings of a truly memorable meal.

    The philosophy

    Scherer's goal is to make the Orange County food scene nationally competitive with San Francisco, New York, and Chicago — and the seasonal fluency on display that night, from summer's last Jimmy Nardellos to fall's first honeynut squash, is the technical proof behind that claim.

    Seven golden fried olives arranged in a circle atop a swirl of white sauce, garnished with herbs and spice, on a white plate.
    The fried Scotch olives — Castelvetranos stuffed with anchovy and lamb merguez, set over sumac yogurt.
    (
    Wales Communications
    /
    Courtesy Darkroom
    )

    The menu's dynamic approach — its ability to oscillate between cuisines — reflects that same nonconformist identity, reinforcing the idea that the food doesn't take itself too seriously, just like the space around it.

    Scherer's ambitions don't stop at Darkroom's walls; he's also developing Three Eyed Tiger, a cocktail-forward concept nearby.

    "The food we're making now is the food that I'm the most proud of, because it really shows our identity," said Scherer.

  • Driver who rammed into bus was under the influence
    A heavily damaged SUV sits crushed against the side of an orange Metro bus at night.
    Police and LA Metro investigate the scene of a crash between an SUV and an LA Metro Bus that left two people dead on Tuesday in Chatsworth.

    Topline:

    The driver connected to the tragic bus crash in Chatsworth on Tuesday night is facing two second-degree murder charges, as well as charges for driving under the influence and reckless driving. Bailee Lynn Rios is expected to be arraigned Friday, according to L.A. District Attorney Nathan Hochman.

    What possible punishment is she facing? Hochman announced Thursday that his office was seeking the maximum sentence of life in prison for the 36-year-old driver.

    What else is there? Drugs were found in her system at the time of the crash, Hochman said. His office did not share what kind of drugs.

    Adding to the tragedy, an NBC4 helicopter covering the incident also crashed nearby, killing pilot George Marciniw and reporter Eliana Moreno, as well as a pedestrian, Edy Gutierrez Mejia.

    Rios, who is in custody, could not be immediately reached for comment.

    Background: Rios sped through a red light and plowed her SUV into a Metro bus, killing two passengers, Daniel Castillo and Gage Weida. Five other passengers were injured, according to prosecutors.

  • Judge upholds injunction blocking notification
    A modern gray office building with the Chino Valley Unified School District logo and name displayed above the entrance, featuring a stylized sunrise graphic. An American flag and California state flag fly from a flagpole in front of the building.
    Exterior of Chino Valley Unified School District building

    Topline:

    A San Bernardino County Superior Court judge on Tuesday rejected Chino Valley Unified School District’s request to dissolve an injunction blocking its policy requiring employees to notify parents when students identify as transgender or use different names or pronouns at school.

    More details: Judge Michael Sachs upheld his 2024 injunction blocking Chino Valley Unified from enforcing a policy the school board adopted in 2023. The policy required district employees to notify parents within three days if their student asked to go by a name or pronoun different from official school records or join a sex-segregated program, such as athletics, that did not correspond to those records.

    Why now: The school district had asked Sachs to overturn a permanent injunction after the U.S. Supreme Court issued an emergency docket ruling in a separate case, Mirabelli v. Bonta. The district argued that the ruling affirmed parents’ constitutional right to be informed about information critical to their children’s health and well-being.

    A San Bernardino County Superior Court judge on Tuesday rejected Chino Valley Unified School District’s request to dissolve an injunction blocking its policy requiring employees to notify parents when students identify as transgender or use different names or pronouns at school.

    Judge Michael Sachs upheld his 2024 injunction blocking Chino Valley Unified from enforcing a policy the school board adopted in 2023. The policy required district employees to notify parents within three days if their student asked to go by a name or pronoun different from official school records or join a sex-segregated program, such as athletics, that did not correspond to those records.

    The school district had asked Sachs to overturn a permanent injunction after the U.S. Supreme Court issued an emergency docket ruling in a separate case, Mirabelli v. Bonta. The district argued that the ruling affirmed parents’ constitutional right to be informed about information critical to their children’s health and well-being.

    Sachs rejected the request, saying his injunction does not conflict with the Supreme Court’s ruling. During Tuesday’s hearing, he distinguished between the two cases, saying the school policy at issue in the Mirabelli case required school employees to withhold information from parents when asked.

    “The school’s policy essentially mandated that staff lie to the parent about their child, and the court did not accept that,” Sachs said of Mirabelli v. Bonta.

    The Chino case involves a different question: whether school employees can be required to disclose a child’s gender identity to their parents.

    “There is no mandatory duty for the school district to voluntarily release information about the student,” Sachs said in court.

    Chino Valley Unified was disappointed by the ruling, said Emily Rae, the district’s attorney and president of the California Justice Center, a conservative legal nonprofit focused on protecting individual liberty.

    “The main problem is that it puts the burden on parents to know whether they’re having a secret kept from them,” Rae said.

    Rae said Sachs’ ruling misinterpreted the Mirabelli opinion, which she said made clear that schools should not withhold information from parents. She said it was too soon to say whether the district would appeal the ruling or make changes to any of its policies.

    Sonja Shaw, president of the Chino Valley Unified school board and a candidate for state superintendent of public instruction, also criticized the ruling. In an interview with EdSource, she called the proceedings a “kangaroo court” that has caused “so much confusion.”

    Shaw said she planned to ask the superintendent whether the district could ask all parents to check a box: “Do you want secrets to be held from you?”

    “They shouldn’t have to do that,” she said. “At the end of the day, it’s insane we have to go through all these hoops to uphold a parent’s right to know.”

    Christine Parker, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, said the ruling was consistent with the Supreme Court’s order in Mirabelli v. Bonta and other applicable law.

    “The court got it right: Blanket policies like Chino Valley USD’s, in which school employees must — in all circumstances — disclose a student’s gender identity to their parents, remain unlawful in California,” Parker said in a statement to EdSource.

    Another pending case referenced in Tuesday’s proceedings was the City of Huntington Beach v. Newsom, which hinged on a dispute over AB 1955, known as the SAFETY Act. The law, signed by Newsom in 2024, bars school districts from requiring staff to disclose a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity to parents. It went into effect before the injunction in the Chino Valley Unified case.

    In the wake of the Mirabelli v. Bonta case, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a preliminary injunction for parents in the City of Huntington Beach v. Newsom who sued to block enforcement of the SAFETY Act.

    This story was originally published by EdSource. Sign up for their daily newsletter.