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
  • Sex abuse lawsuits create budget hit for schools
    Students seated in a first period class at Narbonne High School, an L.A. Unified School District campus in Carson. Students are seated at long tables, writing in notebooks and binders and viewing images on a Smartboard at the front of the classroom.
    Students seated in a first period class at Narbonne High School, an L.A. Unified School District campus in Carson.

    Topline:

    Since California made it easier for sexual abuse survivors to sue government agencies, victims have brought forth more than $3 billion in claims. But even agencies that haven’t been sued are facing financial hardship as a result of the law — through skyrocketing insurance premiums.

    The context: School districts, counties and other public agencies in every corner of California have seen their liability insurance premiums soar, in large part because of AB218, which passed in 2019. Some districts have seen their yearly insurance costs jump by $1 million or more.

    Why it matters: To pay the premiums, schools have had to leave teacher vacancies unfilled, scrap renovation projects and make other cuts that affect students. Counties have cut back on public safety, roads, health care and social services.

    Read on... for more on how schools are coping with soaring costs and how lawmakers are responding.

    Since California made it easier for sexual abuse survivors to sue government agencies, victims have brought forth more than $3 billion in claims. But even agencies that haven’t been sued are facing financial hardship as a result of the law — through skyrocketing insurance premiums.

    School districts, counties and other public agencies in every corner of California have seen their liability insurance premiums soar, in large part because of that law, which passed in 2019. Some districts have seen their yearly insurance costs jump by $1 million or more.

    To pay the premiums, schools have had to leave teacher vacancies unfilled, scrap renovation projects and make other cuts that affect students. Counties have cut back on public safety, roads, health care and social services.

    “It’s become unmanageable,” said Dorothy Johnson, a legislative advocate for the Association of California School Administrators. “We desperately need guardrails, or the situation will become very dire.”

    School districts and other public agencies are begging the Legislature to intervene by capping the settlements, similar to the way medical malpractice settlements are capped. That could also include capping attorney fees, which can top 40%.

    The agencies don’t have traditional private insurance. Some larger ones are self-insured, but most belong to risk pools made up of a few dozen other agencies. So when one agency faces a large settlement, premiums increase for everyone.

    At schools, the law has had a direct impact on student learning, according to research by the California Association of Joint Powers Authorities, which represents public agency risk pools.

    A year after the average school district paid a settlement of $1 million or more, the number of its students who met the state’s math standard fell by 3.7 percentage points, and the number of students meeting the reading standard dropped by 3.4 percentage points, according to the group’s research. The reason, the study states, is that those schools had to cut back on tutoring, after-school programs, field trips and other offerings aimed at helping students stay engaged in school.

    Those numbers are a contrast to statewide scores, which have been generally rising since the pandemic ended.

    “Classrooms are being impacted because there’s money being pulled out of the education system,” said Faith Borges, legislative advocate for the California Association of Joint Powers Authorities. “I don’t think that there’s an understanding that these really, truly are taxpayer dollars. We need to have an informed conversation about where this money is coming from.”

    There’s no end in sight. The law allows survivors to sue within five years of remembering they were abused, in perpetuity.

    Public agencies rarely contest plaintiffs’ claims. The main reason is the horrific nature of the incidents; agencies generally believe victims should be compensated. Another reason is the lack of evidence, particularly for cases more than 20 or 30 years old. In those cases, the perpetrator and other school staff are often long gone or even dead, and schools typically don’t have paperwork dating back that long. They often don’t even know who their insurance carrier was.

    Taxpayer-funded insurance

    For most public agencies, the size of the settlements is the primary problem. Many exceed $10 million. Los Angeles Unified, the state’s largest district, recently issued $500 million in bonds to settle cases. Los Angeles County agreed to pay $4 billion to settle more the 6,800 claims. The settlements are paid by taxpayers through a combination of the agency’s general fund dollars, reserves and insurance.

    The law that lowered obstacles for sexual abuse survivors to sue, AB 218, was intended to bring a degree of justice to sexual abuse victims. In some cases, school staff had been abusing students for years, even after administrators learned it was happening. Incidents range from inappropriate comments to rape. A 2004 report by the U.S. Department of Education estimated that 1 in 10 students nationwide had endured misconduct by school staff.

    To bring further accountability to schools, California passed another bill in October that requires schools to train staff and students on preventing sexual misconduct. The law, SB 848, also mandates that the state create a database of school employees that have been credibly accused of abuse, in an effort to keep abusers from getting rehired elsewhere and continuing to harm children.

    ‘Doing the best we can’

    Sierra Sands Unified is a medium-sized district in Ridgecrest, in the high desert about two hours east of Bakersfield. It’s in a remote and harsh environment: Summer months exceed 100 degrees most days, and winter temperatures often drop below freezing. Rain is rare, and dust storms are frequent.

    Those conditions take a toll on school facilities. The relentless sun degrades anything outdoors, including ground cover and play equipment. Maintenance staff remove pieces of monkey bars and slides as they become damaged, leaving “ever-shrinking” play equipment on hard-packed dirt, said Superintendent April Moore.

    The district planned to replace its elementary school play structures last year, but had to cut back that plan because of soaring insurance premiums. In the past three years, the district’s yearly total insurance costs have gone up $500,000 a year, to nearly $1.2 million annually. The district’s annual budget is $80 million, nearly 90% of which goes toward salaries. That doesn’t leave much extra to pay for things like repairs.

    As a result, the district was only able to replace two of the seven elementary school play structures. It also had to limit raises for staff, which Moore fears will hamper the district’s ability to attract and retain teachers — already a tough proposition in such a remote area.

    The cuts have been hard on morale for the entire community, Moore said.

    “I don’t want our staff to feel like they’ve settled by staying here, or they’re stuck. I want them to feel valued and respected,” Moore said. “In our remote area, our students and staff and families are all one. For me, this is all one conversation. Everyone is affected.”

    Moore said she often worries about the future. The district’s insurance premiums are certain to continue increasing, which makes it hard to plan.

    “We’re having to budget for these unknowns. … Sometimes I feel helpless,” Moore said. “And it’s affecting the kids of today.”

    Striking a balance?

    Schools and other public agencies have pushed to reform the laws governing sexual abuse suits. So far, they haven’t gotten anywhere.

    A bill last year by Sen. John Laird, a Democrat from Santa Cruz, would have reined in the settlements by creating a statute of limitations, but the bill died amid vehement opposition from trial attorneys.

    Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, a Democrat, has asked several legislators to “explore solutions that strike the right balance on this critical issue: ensuring meaningful access to justice for all survivors, while safeguarding schools and cities from financial consequences that could lead to lost or reduced services,” according to Rivas’ spokesman, Nick Miller.

    “(Rivas) has a long history of defending and supporting survivors, and has consistently been a steadfast advocate for survivors of childhood sexual assault,” Miller said. “We will closely review any proposals brought forward this legislative year.”

    Trial attorneys have been aggressive in defending AB 218. Last year, when legislators were considering limits to the law, an Orange County law firm bought social media ads featuring a large photo of Rivas with the words, “STOP the Predator Protection Law. Stand with Child Victims.” The bill died.

    John Manly, a partner at the firm that purchased the ads, said he doesn’t plan to back down.

    “What kind of idiot politician is going to put up a bill that protects people like Epstein? It’s radioactive,” Manly said. “Any attempt to limit these lawsuits is a cynical, disgusting, wrong-headed attempt to keep the public from knowing the full extent of this problem.”

    Manly’s firm has represented thousands of victims who say they were abused in California public schools, he said. He believes schools’ claims of financial hardship are “a scam,” and politicians who seek to cap settlements are essentially enabling child predators.

    “Kids who’ve been abused take a hit for life. And we’re going to cap settlements? Any politician who tries to do that we’re going to chase to the ends of the earth,” Manly said.

    ‘No voice, no power’

    Nancy, a woman who sued Los Angeles Unified in 2020 after she said she was abused in middle and high school, said money was not her primary motivation for filing a claim. It was more about empowerment and seeking changes in the system, she said.

    “I felt I had no voice, no power,” said Nancy, who asked that her last name not be used to protect her privacy. “I want to see policies change. Unfortunately, money gets people’s attention.”

    Nancy was in middle school in the early 1990s when her math teacher began paying her compliments such as “You’re attractive, intellectually and physically,” and “I like you,” Nancy said. The attention made her feel special, and soon she had developed a friendship with him. By the end of the school year it had become physical, she said.

    In her junior year of high school, a music teacher took a similar interest in her. Because of her previous experience, she was especially vulnerable to his attention, she said.

    She told almost no one about either experience and put it out of her mind for years. In her 30s, she began talking about it with a therapist, and spent years trying to overcome the shame and guilt she felt, she said. Eventually, she felt confident enough to file a police report. A year later, she filed a civil lawsuit against the school district.

    In all, Los Angeles Unified has faced about 370 abuse claims since AB 218 passed. Nancy’s former math and music teachers are no longer employed by the district, she said.

    “I hope everyone knows that behind every payout is a person, someone who was harmed as a child,” said Nancy, who now works as a special education teacher. “There’s a soul behind every story.”

    Hardships for counties

    In Napa, insurance premiums are expected to climb to $20 million annually in the next few years, said the county’s chief executive officer, Ryan Alsop. Wildfires and other factors have also led to the increase, but abuse claims have also been a significant factor, Alsop said. The county will have to find room in its $400 million general fund to pay it, likely cutting more services.

    There’s an extra concern, he said, because President Donald Trump’s cuts to Medicaid and food assistance will soon put new demands on counties to cover the gaps. Statewide, counties will have to come up with an extra $9.5 billion a year to make up for federal funding shortfalls, according to the California State Association of Counties.

    “It’s a real problem, not just for Napa but for all counties,” Alsop said. “Obviously victims deserve justice, but the effects of AB 218 are real.”

  • Data shows staggering solitary confinement numbers
    A crowd of people march down a sidewalk holding signs that say "ICE OUT!" to the left is a sparse, grassy field and concrete divider in that field. In the left corner, there's a one-story white building and telephone poles in the distance.
    Demonstrators recently marched around the Adelanto ICE Processing Center to demand the release of people detained there.
    Topline:
    An LAist analysis shows that the Adelanto ICE Processing Center — the immigration detention center closest to Los Angeles — is among the top 10 facilities across the U.S. placing people in solitary confinement.

    Why it matters: About 1,800 people are held at Adelanto today. In court filings, detainees there have said that isolation is used to punish them for speaking out against inhumane and unsanitary conditions at the facility.

    Who’s responsible? The GEO Group Inc., a private company that operates the Adelanto ICE Processing Center, has not responded to requests for comment. In multiple statements to the media, ICE has said that the agency “is committed to ensuring that all those in custody reside in safe, secure, and humane environments.”

    The backstory: In May 2025, the Adelanto ICE Processing Center had 14 people in isolation. When the Trump administration’s mass deportation effort revved up last June, the number of detainees in solitary confinement there more than tripled and has climbed since.

    What's next: Earlier this year, a coalition of immigrant rights groups filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of detainees, calling for conditions at Adelanto to be improved. The coalition has since requested an emergency court order to prevent further harm. A hearing is scheduled for April 10.

    Go deeper: Lawsuit alleges inhumane conditions at Adelanto ICE facility

    Read on … for details about the use of solitary confinement at Adelanto.

    The immigration detention center closest to Los Angeles has placed dozens of people in solitary confinement each month since June, according to the most recent data from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    In May 2025, the Adelanto ICE Processing Center had 14 people in isolation. When the Trump administration’s mass deportation effort revved up in June 2025, the number of detainees in solitary confinement there more than tripled. By July, it was 73; by August, 105.

    The most recent data available shows that number went down slightly in January, to 74 people.

    Ranked by percentage of the detainee population in “segregation,” as it is called at immigrant detention centers, Adelanto is among the U.S.’s top 10 facilities as of January, according to an LAist analysis of the most recent ICE data.

    The data shows that of 229 ICE facilities that reported holding people since October 2024, between 50 and 60 usually reported putting at least one person in segregation in a given month. Out of the facilities that did place people in solitary confinement, Adelanto tended to do so less often than others until June 2025. (The facility held just a few people from October 2024 into January 2025.) When ICE’s presence increased in L.A. in June, the number of people sent to isolation in the facility also shot up — three to five times as many people have been isolated in Adelanto compared to the average facility that used any solitary confinement.

    Since June, only two facilities have sent people to solitary confinement more times than Adelanto: one southwest of San Antonio, the other in central Pennsylvania.

    Both of those facilities held twice the number of detainees as Adelanto on average from October 2024 through September 2025; but the number of people held in Adelanto since then has tripled, growing larger than either of the other facilities to hold an average of 1,800 people a day since October.

    How we reported this

    LAist used official, publicly available data from ICE about its detentions nationwide and at specific facilities.

    To calculate percentages of people held in isolation as of January 2026, LAist also used official ICE data as recorded by both TRAC Immigration and the Internet Archive that was no longer available on ICE's public website.

    Records of “special and vulnerable populations” for the fourth quarter of the 2025 fiscal year and records of monthly segregation placements by facility from September 2025 were missing from ICE's data and are not reflected in LAist's analysis.

    More on solitary confinement  

    According to ICE, detainees may be placed in segregation for “disciplinary reasons,” or because of:

    • “Serious mental or medical illness.”
    • Conducting a hunger strike.
    • Suicide watch.

    The agency also says it might place detainees “who may be susceptible to harm [if left among the] general population due in part to how others interpret or assume their sexual orientation, or sexual presentation or expression.”

    Not only is ICE holding more people in solitary confinement, but the agency's data also shows that detainees across the country are being isolated for longer periods of time. Detainees ICE considers part of the "vulnerable & special population" spent an average of about two weeks in solitary confinement each time they were isolated in 2022, when ICE first made the data available. By the end of 2025, the average stay in isolation had risen to more than seven weeks straight.

    The GEO Group Inc., a private company that operates the Adelanto ICE Processing Center, has not responded to requests for comment.

    How isolation can affect immigrant detainees  

    UN human rights experts consider solitary confinement placements that last 15 days or more to be torture, though the U.S. Supreme Court has held that isolation doesn’t violate the Constitution.

    The UN also maintains that solitary confinement should be prohibited for people “with mental or physical disabilities when their conditions would be exacerbated by such measures.”

    In January, a coalition of immigrant rights groups filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of current detainees, calling for conditions at Adelanto to be improved. In addition to an unsanitary environment and a lack of healthy food and clean drinking water, detainees say solitary confinement is frequently used to punish those who speak out about conditions at the facility.

    People held in immigrant detention centers are technically in “civil detention,” meaning that they are being detained to ensure their presence at hearings and compliance with immigration orders — not to serve criminal sentences.

    According to the immigrant rights groups’ complaint, one detainee was placed in solitary confinement after complaining about the showers being broken. Another detainee said that, after asking a guard to “use more respectful language toward him, he was ridiculed, written up and given the middle finger by a guard who shouted, ‘Who the f--- do you think you are?’” Then, the detainee was placed in solitary confinement for 25 days.

    Alvaro Huerta, the director of litigation and advocacy at the Immigrant Defenders Law Center who is representing detainees at Adelanto, told LAist that when people are placed in isolation at the facility, they’re typically in the same cell for 23 hours per day, unable to receive visits from their families.

    For clients who are experiencing mental health challenges — especially those with suicidal thoughts — being placed in solitary confinement “can really exacerbate their condition,” he added.

    In multiple statements to the media, ICE has said that the agency “is committed to ensuring that all those in custody reside in safe, secure and humane environments.” The agency has also said that detainees receive “comprehensive medical care” and that all detainees “receive medical, dental, and mental health intake screenings within 12 hours of arriving at each detention facility.”

    Huerta called that “laughable.”

    “We have countless examples of people who have said that this is not true, that they're not getting the medication that they're requesting, that they're not being seen for chronic conditions and emergency conditions,” he added. “And we know it's not true because 14 people have died in ICE custody this year alone.”

  • Sponsored message
  • Service fees are raising eyebrows for fans
    A view of an outdoor cement skate park near a beach, with a giant white logo that says "LA28" on it.
    Tickets to the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles went on sale Thursday.

    Topline:

    As the locals-only sale kicks off and Southern Californians have their first chance to buy tickets to the Olympic Games, some fans are wide-eyed at the high fees on all tickets and the prices in general, which start at $28 but go up to more than $5,500 a pop.

    Sticker shock: Lori Rovner of Manhattan Beach told LAist that one $2,100 ticket had a $505 service fee, bringing the total cost to $2,604.63.

    Other prices: Some people LAist spoke with opted for only $28 or similarly priced tickets, even if it meant missing some of the biggest Olympic events. One user on Reddit said they purchased 18 tickets for around $550.

    Read on … about how much fans are spending on tickets.

    Lori Rovner of Manhattan Beach is a big sports fan, so there was no question that when tickets for the Olympic Games went on sale, she'd be signing up.

    She scored a slot in the first ticket drop, which launched Thursday, and logged on right at 10 a.m., hoping to score tickets to the Opening Ceremonies and some finals too. After battling her computer to get through "access denied" screens and a lost shopping cart due to a 30-minute time limit, she bought 16 tickets.

    It was only when she was about to purchase that she noticed the service fees, which were around 24% of each ticket. One $2,100 ticket had a $505 service fee, bringing the total cost to $2,604.63.

    "It's insane," she said of the fee. "I don't understand what the service is."

    As the locals-only sale kicks off and Southern Californians have their first chance to buy tickets to the Olympic Games, some fans are wide-eyed at the high fees on all tickets and the prices in general, which start at $28 but go up to more than $5,500 a pop. Opening Ceremony tickets start at $328.68

    The service fees aren't a surprise add-on. The price fans see when browsing the site is the total cost, including the fee. Still, some who bought in the first phase of sales were surprised when they saw the fees add up.

    One user on Reddit of shared their cart of 10 tickets, which added up to $11,264. That included $1,038 in fees alone. Commenters responded in shock and awe.

    Service fees are standard in ticket sales, but the percentage they charge can vary widely. High fees have been a source of ire for music and sports fans for years. A 2018 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that the average fees on a primary ticket market were 27%.

    LA28 did not respond to LAist's requests for details on the service fee, like what it pays for or why it's a percentage rather than a flat rate.

    Not everyone seemed bothered by the prices. Some people LAist spoke with opted for only $28 or similarly priced tickets, even if it meant missing some of the biggest Olympic events. One user on Reddit said they purchased 18 tickets for around $550.

    "I went with all $28 tickets," they wrote in the online forum about the Olympics. "I got women’s soccer, gymnastics, beach and regular volleyball, track and field, baseball and a few others."

    For some, the ticket process, the prices and the dense web of events to choose from made it too hard to pull the trigger.

    Jeff Bartow of Sierra Madre made a spreadsheet with some competitions he was interested in seeing before he logged on to buy tickets Friday.

    "So many times, so many schedules, so many events," Bartow said. "I think I initially thought I was going to go to a bunch, but thinking about how crazy it's going to be … I might be a little more limited."

    This is just the first ticket drop. There will be more opportunities to buy tickets in the months to come — and on a resale market that launches in 2027.

    Some ticket-buyers told LAist they already were contemplating which tickets they'd keep and which ones they'd re-sell, just minutes after buying them.

  • Why have there been so few arrests?

    Topline:

    In the more than two months since the Department of Justice released its latest batch of files on the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, prosecutors have not brought any new charges based on the documents, despite federal lawmakers on both sides of the aisle continuing to demand accountability.


    The backstory: Since the release of the files in 2025 and 2026, there have been no related arrests in the U.S. However, the disclosures have led to some resignations and other reputational repercussions for some high-ranking Americans. The lack of arrests in the U.S. contrasts to the fallout in the U.K., where investigators have pursued charges related to corruption, not sexual abuse, in their dealings with Epstein. Two former government officials — former Prince Andrew and ex-ambassador Peter Mandelson — were arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office.


    Lack of evidence: In the U.S., top Justice Department officials have said that they found no evidence compelling enough to pursue further charges related to Epstein, and that the public can make their own assessments based on the disclosed documents. In a statement to NPR, Justice Department spokesperson Katie Kenlein said that "there have not been additional prosecutions beyond Epstein and Maxwell because there has not been credible evidence that their activities extended to Epstein's network."

    In the more than two months since the Department of Justice released its latest batch of files on the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, prosecutors have not brought any new charges based on the documents, despite federal lawmakers on both sides of the aisle continuing to demand accountability.

    The more than 3 million pages of documents include accusations by alleged victims of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's abuse and thousands of emails and photos showing Epstein associated with prominent figures. The files indicate that many of these people maintained contact with the disgraced financier long after he pleaded guilty in 2008 to sex crimes that involved minors. Appearing in the files is not necessarily an indication of criminal wrongdoing.

    The release of the Epstein files came after Congress passed the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which forced the Justice Department to make public all documents it held related to Epstein.

    Epstein died in prison about a month after a 2019 arrest on sex-trafficking charges. Maxwell was convicted on sex-trafficking charges in 2021 and is serving a 20-year sentence. Since the release of the files in 2025 and 2026, there have been no related arrests in the U.S. However, the disclosures have led to some resignations and other reputational repercussions for some high-ranking Americans.

    The lack of arrests in the U.S. contrasts to the fallout in the U.K., where investigators have pursued charges related to corruption, not sexual abuse, in their dealings with Epstein. Two former government officials — former Prince Andrew and ex-ambassador Peter Mandelson — were arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, as he is now known, has denied wrongdoing and has not been formally charged. Mandelson has also not been charged, and lawyers for Mandelson have said that the arrest was prompted by a "baseless suggestion."

    In the U.S., top Justice Department officials have said that they found no evidence compelling enough to pursue further charges related to Epstein, and that the public can make their own assessments based on the disclosed documents.

    In a statement to NPR, Justice Department spokesperson Katie Kenlein said that "there have not been additional prosecutions beyond Epstein and Maxwell because there has not been credible evidence that their activities extended to Epstein's network. However, if prosecutable evidence comes forward, the Department of Justice will of course act on it as we do every day in sexual trafficking and assault cases across the count[r]y."


    On Thursday, President Trump announced that Attorney General Pam Bondi is out of the top job at the Justice Department, following bipartisan criticism over her handling of the Epstein files.

    NPR asked four former prosecutors and one former law enforcement officer why there may not have been enough evidence to levy additional charges. Here's what they said.

    Prosecutors must prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt"

    Prosecutors must prove to a jury that a person committed a crime "beyond a reasonable doubt," according to Barbara McQuade, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School.

    "One of the biggest misconceptions people have is how difficult it is to charge and convict somebody for a criminal case," said McQuade, who served as the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan.

    A prosecutor's ethical responsibility is to charge cases only if they believe there is enough evidence for a conviction, McQuade said. Documents, including emails, jokes, and even plane itineraries, can be a place to start, but, alone, they are not enough to prove guilt, McQuade said.

    "What you would need [is] rock solid evidence," McQuade said. "You can't charge someone for a crime without sufficient evidence, and I have yet to see evidence of a crime involving an Epstein associate that has gone uncharged."

    Based on his understanding of the case, Paul Butler, a professor at Georgetown Law, said he agreed that prosecutors who investigated Epstein's alleged associates "may have believed that they couldn't persuade a jury beyond a reasonable doubt." He said problems with witness credibility or certain forensic evidence can prevent a case from moving forward.

    The U.K. cases are focused on corruption 

    In the U.K., the two people arrested are being investigated on suspicion of "misconduct in public office." McQuade said the U.S. does not have a single equivalent federal law. Instead, the U.S. prosecutes public corruption through statutes that focus specifically on crimes such as bribery and extortion.

    After the release of the latest files, British police began investigating Andrew's correspondence with Epstein when Andrew was a U.K. trade envoy. At that time, Andrew allegedly shared government itineraries, investment plans and notes from official foreign trips with Epstein. The information may have been covered by the United Kingdom's Official Secrets Act.

    Similarly, Mandelson has been accused of passing confidential government information to the late sex offender when Mandelson was a U.K. Cabinet minister.

    Meeting the burden of proof is especially challenging for sex crime cases

    Victim statements are essential for establishing basic elements, such as the timeframe of events, required to build sexual assault cases, said Diane Goldstein, a retired police lieutenant from California and the executive director of the Law Enforcement Action Partnership. But a victim may be reluctant to come forward because of a fear of retaliation, not believing the police can help, believing it is a personal matter, or not wanting to get the perpetrator in trouble.

    McQuade noted that in some sex trafficking cases, especially those in which a perpetrator is in a position of power, victims may experience intimidation or threats that prevent them from speaking out.

    Victims also may be hesitant to move forward with allegations because they fear having to testify at trials where defense attorneys may attempt to poke holes in their allegations, McQuade said.

    Goldstein said that for sex crime cases to advance, investigators need to follow certain policies and procedures. "If you don't have a legitimate police investigation to start, you're not going to get any type of criminal filing," Goldstein said.

    Other potential charges are also a difficult path

    Prosecutors may have considered pursuing charges of criminal conspiracy related to sex trafficking against people associated with Epstein, said Jessica Roth, a professor at Cardozo School of Law. FBI documents in the files relating to its investigation into Epstein's crimes identify certain people as "co-conspirators."

    But Ankush Khardori, a senior writer and columnist at Politico magazine who worked as a federal prosecutor on financial fraud cases, told NPR those identifiers are not "formal accusation[s]" and are simply part of "interim documents."

    "The FBI does not determine who is a co-conspirator," Khardori said. "That is a legal judgment that prosecutors make."

    But for those conspiracy cases, "criminal intent," in particular, is difficult to establish, said Roth, who worked as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of New York for seven years. Criminal conspiracy charges "would require knowledge and intent on the part of each individual who was charged," Roth said. If a person who communicated with Epstein had some suspicion that he was engaged in illegal activity, that alone would not be sufficient evidence to press charges, she said.

    Investigators may have considered charges related to criminal tax violations, McQuade said. But the statute of limitations has likely ended on those cases, she said, meaning that prosecutors can no longer bring charges.

    The current evidence lacks context

    Legal experts say the haphazard way the documents were released and redacted makes it difficult for the public to understand why no additional charges have been filed.

    Roth, the Cardozo law professor, said the information is in "isolation," without the appropriate context. "We'll see an individual photograph that looks perhaps incriminating. We'll see an email that looks incriminating, but we don't necessarily have everything that was said before and after that email and that exchange," Roth said.

    One document that could explain why no charges were pursued, according to Butler, is a heavily redacted DOJ memo naming "potential co-conspirators" of Epstein. "The parts that should indicate why the department declined prosecution on any alleged co-conspirators other than Ghislaine Maxwell [are] redacted," said Butler, the Georgetown law professor and a former federal prosecutor.

    Butler said those redactions are "unusual" because they do not appear to follow the permissible reasons for redactions in the Epstein documents. Those reasons include confidentiality for Epstein's alleged victims, or anything that would compromise an ongoing investigation, Butler said.

    "When the Justice Department grudgingly releases information when pressed by politics or forced by Congress, it also creates the impression that they have something to hide," Butler said. "That there is some cover-up going on."
    Copyright 2026 NPR

  • New report shows sharp rise in LA County
    Empty playground swings

    Topline:

    Nearly 30% more students in Los Angeles County experienced homelessness from 2022-23 to 2023-24, making it the county’s highest rate in the past five years and far outpacing the rate of homelessness across the state in the same timeframe, as the resources to identify and support this student population have decreased.

    Norwalk-La Mirada Unified: Researchers found that Norwalk-La Mirada Elementary Unified School District had the highest rate of student homelessness in the county — 1 in 3 students, meaning that over 4,700 students were identified as experiencing homelessness during the 2023-24 school year out of a total cumulative enrollment of about 15,600.

    Underidentifed students: Researchers also found that the Transformation of Schools focuses on the lack of dedicated funding for school staff to identify and support homeless students. Students and families facing homelessness do not always self-identify, whether due to fear, shame or being unaware that their housing situation is considered homelessness

    Nearly 30% more students in Los Angeles County experienced homelessness from 2022-23 to 2023-24, making it the county’s highest rate in the past five years and far outpacing the rate of homelessness across the state in the same timeframe, as the resources to identify and support this student population have decreased.

    The UCLA Center for the Transformation of Schools published two reports on Wednesday on the state of student homelessness in the county: “Rising Numbers, Fading Resources: Students Experiencing Homelessness in Los Angeles County” and “Hidden in Plain Sight: Fear, Underidentification, and Funding Gaps for Housing-Insecure Students in Los Angeles County.”

    Researchers found that Norwalk-La Mirada Elementary Unified School District had the highest rate of student homelessness in the county — 1 in 3 students, meaning that over 4,700 students were identified as experiencing homelessness during the 2023-24 school year out of a total cumulative enrollment of about 15,600.

    The city of Norwalk, where the district is located in the eastern region of the county, was sued by the state in 2024 for banning emergency shelters and other support services for people experiencing homelessness. Last year, the state reached a settlement with the city, which was forced to overturn the ban and put $250,000 toward building affordable housing.

    Student homelessness is defined differently under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, a federal law that requires every public school to count the number of students who are living on the street, in shelters, in motels, in cars, doubled up with other families, or moving between friends’ and relatives’ homes.

    As a result of this expanded definition, McKinney-Vento includes doubled-up students in the count of homelessness. Doubled-up is a term used to describe children and youth ages 21 and under living in shared housing, such as with another family or friends, due to various crises.

    There were a few other patterns seen in the L.A. County data analyzed by the UCLA researchers:

    • Latino students were disproportionately more likely to experience homelessness: they represent 65% of the county’s student population, but 75.5% of student homelessness
    • A third of homeless students were in high school
    • Many districts with the highest rates of homelessness had higher school instability but lower dropout rates

    While McKinney-Vento has an expanded definition that includes more types of homelessness than several other definitions, identifying students remains difficult.

    The second report from the UCLA Center for the Transformation of Schools focuses on the lack of dedicated funding for school staff to identify and support homeless students. Students and families facing homelessness do not always self-identify, whether due to fear, shame or being unaware that their housing situation is considered homelessness under McKinney-Vento.

    “A lot of these young people are dealing with a lot of trauma, so they don’t want to be identified. They don’t want to be pointed out; sometimes it’s scary for them, because they think we’re going to report them to the Department of Children and Family Services,” said L.A. County Office of Education staff interviewed for this report.

    School staff, known as homeless liaisons, who work with homeless students received a historic influx of federal funds during the Covid-19 pandemic — $98.76 million for California, out of $800 million nationwide, from the American Rescue Plan-Homeless Children and Youth.

    That funding has since ended, and there is no other dedicated, ongoing state funding set aside solely for the rising number of homeless students. This has led districts in California to “heavily depend on highly competitive and unstable federal streams,” the UCLA researchers wrote. Those federal streams have become increasingly precarious as the federal administration last year sought policy changes that would shift how they are structured.